The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-12-04
COURTS GETTING ACTIVE.

Apparently in response to the pup
lie Judgment adverse to tardy court
procedure in criminal cases, and tue
ineffcctivcucys of the courts to deal
with crime, we have at times spo'
radio evidences that the courts could
do better If they would. On Wednes-
DAY morning. for example, we had the
story from Chicago of tho CONVICTION
of six men who had killed farmer
near that city, maltreated HIM shamc-
fully, and in the most pitiless. savage
manner, killing him and mutllating MS
body. This occurred only about
month ago. and yet on Tuesday ot TINS
week the six fiendish rascals engaged
in the crime were found guilty, four
of them were sentenced to be hanged,
aud two. on account of their youth,
were sentenced to life terms IN the ILL
nois penitentiary. That is certainty
both good work and quick work.
An encouraging case is also report
ed from Butte county, California u
r. Kellogg, San Francisco business
man, was held up and robbed IN Oro'
Vile. In about an hour the marshal
of the CITY arrested suspect for the
crime. Some of Mr. Kellogg s prop
ertv was found in his possession, and
he was identified by kellogg as one
of the robbers Two days later TINS
suspect was convicted IN the Butte
county court, and was at once sem
fenced 10 life imprisonment in the peni-
tentiarv. He admitted that he had
already served two terms III the San
Quentin prison; so that IN this case
but two days elapsed after the crime
until the criminal was safely disposed
Of by the court
1t cannot be contended that other
courts are so paralyZed that they are
unable to follow these good examples.
It is true that courts labor under pc
culiar difficulties in Utah, because or
the right of appeal granted IN the con
stitution and the liberal construction
Given bv the courts to that right 1t
is true that we have built mp here a
system of checks and obstacles III the
wav of court procedure and practice
that work against the prosecution or
criminals. Still, il would seem as
though there ought TO be some way OF
getting nj convictions and meeting the
reouirements of the law. We have IN
the Utah penitentary a considerable
list of murderers whose crimes are ex-
amples of wanton. ruthless, unproYoked
murder. There is no question whatever
of the guilt Of the convicted PERSONS;
there is no doubt whatever but that
the application of the law would quick
" end their days; but. ou one preteXt
or another, they are. kept alive, pro-
tccted by bubbles of the law, sup
ported by the community, when the due
regard for law and community right
would have seen them all hanged long
ago.
In this connection VIC wish 10 raise
a question that may be of considerable
importance practically, as IT certainly
is theoretically, and that rs the duty OF
LAWYERS to adhere TO the law. There
have been some interviews with law
yers published in The Telegram recent.
", which showed a surprising condi'
ton of affairs II seems that lawyers
who arc officers Of the court, and sworn
AS such TO conform to the law, and 80
far AS in them lies. TO see that the
statutes are duly and properly Gu
forced. openly repudiatc the terms and
requirements. Of the statute. That is
whereas the statute provides hanging
for capital offcnses, these lawyers arc
quoted as saying that they do not he
lieve in hanging. that they are senti
mentally, or IN somc other way, OF
posed To IL, and would by no mcanE
countenaucc the execution Of the deatl
sentence upon any criminal according
to the statute. The question we wsl
To raise, therefore, is. should not tho
courts inquire into such cases, and j.
an attorney who openly declares HI:
opinion to be contrary 10 the statute
and who saws that he would not coun
ute. u fit person 10 practice at the bar
We do not wish in any sense TO b,
understood AS having amy personal ain
in this matter. but simply TO raise th'
question of principle. II ii IS tru'
that a lawyer is properly within hi'
rights when he says that he is opposed
10 the enforcement Of a statute which
is plainly written in tho law Of tho
State. how far is it possible for a law
vcr TO 90 in that direction' May law
yer who may be himself. let us say
an anarchist and opposed TO the enforce
mcnt of any law whatever, be Il fl
practitioner at the bar If he is, il
what sense is he 10 be accepted as such
Surely not as one who. being Il sworI
officer OF the court, is Zealously II
| favor Of the enforcement Of the law
since ne may openly say that he re
iccts law altogether. Or. IT law
yer is AT liberty tn reject n portion o
the law. how much may he repudiat
aud stjll retain his standing at the la
aud his rights as practitioner in tn
4 .nnr.e' 80 that fbie