Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1912-07-16
Some Needed Changes in Georgias
System of Enforcing Criminal LauUS

friends and allies of the defendant and
knows nothing of the conditions sur
rounding the case and which he will
have to counteract and defeat to secure
a conviction. No lawyer, however able,
can, in that short space of time, with
those other matters to handle, meet
upon equal ground lawyers who have
been diligently working on a case for
five months. The solicitor general
makes an honest, though futile effort to
prepare his case, the grand jury sum-
mons witnesses but their combined eff
forts are powerless to overcome the re-
suit of five months work by the at
torneys for the defense
What is the result? An indictment is
returned, trial had; the evidence In the
case adduced upon the trial is not In ac-
cord with the general reports circulated
at the time of the commission or the
crime; the jury renders a verdict OF not
guilty, and Immediately sharp criticisms
are directed at the jury; the courts are
condemned and sought to be discredited,
because the interests Of the state and
the enforcement OF the laws have been
set at naught.
What is the trouble? 1t is simply
plain, matter-of-fact proposition in Its
analysis. Let any litigant in our courts,
after his cause of action accrues, sit still
and do nothing toward looking after his
interests for a period of five months, and
then when court convenes bring non
resident attorney whose time is taken up
with other matters, as is that OF the
solicitor general, and endeavor to win his
suit, however just 1t may be, and he
will find all his efforts in vain. The
rule of diligence applies in the conduct
of litigation as we'll as 1t does in the
commercial world. If not more so. 1t
applies to the state as well as to lnol-
yiduals The maxim that the viStlant
are aided and not those who slumber over
their rights is as applicable IN the con-
duct of criminal cases as in equity. And
when the state whether through It's
officers or its system, is guilty of laches
Is should receive the same reward for its
negligence that any other litigant re-
ceives-
Let us change our system in the fol-
lowing RESPECTS:
Mac all circuits small enough to
permit the judge to hold quarterly ses-
sions of the superior court and give him
the power, in his discretion, to convene
a grand jury at each session; abolish the
office of solicitor general and in its stead
create the office Of county solicitor. one
for each county; put the county solicitor
upon a salary, make it incumbent upon
him to represent the interests of the
state at all times in criminal matters
give him the power subject to the APP
prevail of the county commissioners to
appoint as many special bailiffs as he
may need In the conduct of the business
of his office, and let those bailiffs be paid
from the county funds. In that way the
state will not go unrepresented for any
period of time, but, on the contrary, 1t
shall be his duty, when. a crime Is COM
mitted, to Immediately take all action
necessary to bring the wrongdoer to
Justice, secure evidence for the state to
be used in the trial, and to render to
the state the same degree of diligent
service which ne would render to any
other client, or which he would render
to the accused If he were counsel for
him.
Tho above outlined scheme Is thor
oughly practicable and is demanded by
common sense. 1t should appeal even to
the solicitors general of the state, If
they have the enforcement Of the laws,
the dignity OF the courts and the good
of the state at heart Respectfully. >,
z. A.. JONES.
LAGRANGE, Ca. July II, 1912.