The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-07-09

From the Louisville Herald
 The reports in American papers of the trial of the Camorrists at Viterbo have made many people wonder if there is any system at all about criminal trials. and, if there be. what the system Is like. There is a system. and very simple one it Is. though utterly differ ent from that which governs procedure in American or Eglish courts.
 The trial takes place before three Judges and jury to which are added a certain number of extra jurors who are sworn and are present In court 10 hear the testimony, and are held ready to take the place in the jury box of any juror who may In the course of the trial be tncapacitated from further service. The depositions of all the witnesses have been taken in writing and signed before the trial begins. Each of the judges has copy of these before him. The prosecutor and the counsel for the accused furnish to the court list of the witnesses they desire called, and these are all summoned by the court, which has power to punish n-atten- dance.
 The first thing that happens when the trial begins is the questioning of the accused by the presiding justice. In Italy, as in most of continental Europe, a man accused of crime is considered by the law to be the very best witness to his own guilt or innoncence. In England and America the accused need not testify unless he chooses. In Italy he is the first and most important wit ness.
 The accused is allowed the widest scope in defending himself He has a right to tell his own story fin his own way, to offer anything he can in the way Of justification or palliation; even hearsay evidence is admissible. The judge has absolute discretion as to what testimony may be received and what excluded, and any judge who exercised this discretion unfairly would be an object of execra- tion Bias on the part of one judge is possible, but there are always the other two judges on the bench with him. and they are a perfect check against unfair ness.
 When the accused has given his tes- t timony he Is confronted personally witt his accuser. The accuser Is necessarily the principal witness against him. Strict ly speaking, the prisoner has no right tC interrupt his accuser while the latter i. telling history, but in practice the judge: permit it and the conformation sometimes becomes a three-cornered debate betweer accuser, accused and judge, the lattei giving the accused the widest leeway tC demonstrate his innocence.
 Then the witnesses are called. one after another. Every point is threshed out as far as possible at the moment 1t arises Thus the assertion by witness that he saw the accused at a certain place at a certain hour, is, if denied by the accused, settled before another point is taken ED that is to say, several witnesses may be called to decide that one point before another phase of the testimony is entered upon-
 The judge in an Italian court has far more power than the judge in an Amer ican court, as he is not bound by any precedents or any statutory definitions of what evidence is material and what is not; on such points he rules, after con- sultation with his colleagues on his own Judgment; and to his decision no excep- ton can be taken. As a matter of fact he accepts all evidence that can throw