The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1911-02-24

replications and there had been inter-
posed thirty-four pleas to the first
count and fifteen pleas, to the second,
nearly every pleading had been de-
INJURED to, yet here again except for
a construction put upon the statute OF
Limitations, and ruling that a ten
ant could not deny his landlords title.
practically every question In the case
after all this lapse OF time and any
amount OF argument, was reserved for
settlement at the trial and the court
had settled fnnumerable questions that
at the trial never would have arisen.
This sort OF thing the English prac-
tice seems to have entirely gotten rid
of. Good radiance to 1t.
Commenting on the fact that from
1890 to 1900 less than Ia per cent Of
the cases corning before the English
appellate courts for review were sent
back for new trials, while Is per cent
Of those in America were, he called at
tention to the fact that the supreme
court of Florida has the same DOW
ers the English court had, and said:
Under our statute, section 1707,
General Statutes, the duty Of the su-
preme court upon writ of error as up
judgment sentence or decree Of tho
court below, or to give such Judgment,
sentence, or decree, as the court below
ought to have given, or as it may ap-
pear according to law.
In England, special verdicts are
taken in doubtful cases, and the YER
dict ascertains the facts for all time,
and on that verdict the appellate
~ s,,I
it may seem just, if necessary direct
ing a special verdict to be taken upon
the existence or nom existence Of some
specific fact omitted to be found by
the verdict at the first trial.
He added :s-.zs.s.~ - !. *, 3. =.--.s - :
Instances are not wanting in which
the court has discharged the full
measure OF its duty under the reform
ed procedure.
I'm Hopkins vs. State So Fla. 40, the
court speaking by Justice Hooker
said: The evidence leaves no room for
reasonable doubt of Hopkins's guilt.
The Jury could not have acquitted the
defendant without disregarding their
oaths. The testimony we have refer
red to was all legal and proper. I'm
der these circumstances alleged errors
in giving or refusing charges or in
structions and in the admission or
rejection of testimony which do not
weaken the effect Of the admitted tes-
timony or which do not reach the
legality of the trial itself should not
be considered as grounds for revers-
all
A widespread knowledge of that
rule OF decision among the faity would
do more to discourage 1ynchings than
any other amount Of deprecatory ad-
dresses
'It has been said that during seven
ty-five years nowhere in the British
Empire has a man been snatched from
the custody Of the law and sacrificed
to mob violence. An explanation may
be found in the prevalent method of
dispatch recently illustrated in the
Crippen trial Confidence in the courts
grows just in proportion with conf
dence that causes are disposed of on
their merits The court fails in it's
duty whenever it neglects an oppor-
tunity to dispose of a case In that
way.
Much Of legal reform in the past
has been accomplished by legislative
enactment. A change in the practice
Of the federal courts is almost sure
to come in that way within a few
years and probably we shall ere long
see a statutory extension OF proce-
dure reform in Florida
Tn the meantime let US not forget
that the beginning and the end of all
legal reform Is to be found in the
concept of that great citizen of no