The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-07-02
d. III. Riddle Issues State
ment Regarding the
New Rules
ASKS LEGISLATURE
TO ABOLISH RULE 45
Claims There Have Been Fewer Re-
yersals in Criminal Cases on
Technical Errors Than
in Civil


tember /, the supreme court las been put
Upon the srldde
D. H. Riddle. we'll known attorney
Of Talladega has not only formally criti-
cised the new rules, especially one of
them, No. 40, but he has called upon the
legislature in it's next session, to abolish
that rule,
Mr.. Riddle claims that at the present
time there have been and are fewer re
versals in criminal cases on technical err
rors than in civil cases. He charged that
rule 40, which he quotes, will put too
much arbitrary power III the hands of the
judges, and will result in one defendant
losing today, and another winning tomor-
row. whereas in the suits of each, iden-
teal trial errors have occurred.
The statement of Mr.. Riddle which will
prove of statewide interest, follows:
The Formal Interview
"From the press, the pulpit, the politi-
clan and the stump. we have heard for
the past several years in Alabama that
court procedure needed reforming and
that 'technicalities needed to be abolished
to prevent reversals in criminal causes
before the supreme court. Ono would
| think, from reading those articles and
bearing the reports from the pulpit and
the stump that there is no such thing as
technicalties' in civil causes and that the
great burden of the public is to get rid
of 'technicalities' in criminal causes.
81 have taken pains to examine for
myself the fourth and fifth reports OF
the Alabama court of appeals, the two
| last books published containing the de-
| cisions of that court, and the ia Alabama,
| the last book published of the decisions
of the supreme court of Alabama, with
the view of furnishing the facts, and
| found the following to be the facts in
| reference to reversals: In the fourth Ala
bama court of appeals reports, there are
| 6S criminal cases decided, IS affirmed
and 20 reversed, which is 7G-5S-100 per cent
affirmed and 29-42-100 per cent reversed.
In this same report there are 81 civil
causes decided SO affirmed and "a re-
versed or 40 per cent affirmed and 81 per
cent reversed In the fifth Alabama
court of appeals reports there are 81
criminal cases decided, Al affirmed, three
dismissed and is reversed. In other words.
| the state won Il per cent and the defend
ant won % per cent. In the same volume
there are 40 civil causes decided with %
| affirmed and 26 reversed. In other words.
| 49 per cent were affirmed and 81 per cent
reversed. In the ia Alabama there are
| eight criminal cases decided. six were
| affirmed and two reversed, 70 per cent af-
| frmed and rs per cent reversed In the
same volume there are IS civil causes
decided, AZ affirmed and 26 reversed; in
other words 81 per cent affirmed and 80
per cent reversed in civil causes.
More Civil Cases Reversed
| $50, it appears from these figures that
a very much larger per cent OF civil
causes are being reversed in the supreme
court, on account of the so-called tech
| Mica lities than there are criminal cases
being reversed. The so-called technicali-
| ties about which so much has been said
and written, are simply rules of law pre-
scribed some time by the legislature, but
most generally by the courts. by which
| causes, both civil and criminal are to be
tried and justice meted out between the
state and citizens or between respective
| citizens of the state OF course, the wis
| dom of those rules of law which have
been established and are sail being es-
| tablished daily by the courts, depends
on the wisdom, ability and patriotism of
the courts establishing the rules.
| THE difference between a mob and a
court, when reduced to its last analysis.
| is the fact that the courts have with the
| sanction of society established rules and
regulations by which a partys rights are
| to be determined; whereas, mob has
no rules except to execute lis personal
will
Discussion of Rule 45
Rule 40 adopted by the supreme court
which goes into effect September |, is
tepcrted by the newspapers as follows;
| thereafter no judgment will be re-
yersed or set aside, nor new trial
granted by this court or by any other
| court of this state in any civil or GRIM
| inal case on the ground of misdirection
| of the jury, the giving or refusal of
special charges or the improper admis-
sion or rejection of evidence, nor for
error as to any matter of pleading or
procedure, unless in the opinion of the
court to which the appeal is taken, or
application is made, after an eXamina-
| ton of the entire cause, 1T should ap-
| pear that the error complained OF has
i probably injuriously affected substan-
tial rights of the parties.
| ITO understand this rule, you must
understand what the law was before
the rule. Before this rule was adopted
the rule prevailed In the supreme court
| that wherever a cause had not been
tried as prescribed by law, the court
would presume that the party complain
| ing was injured when he was deprived
| of trying his case according to the
rules and procedure as provided by law,
unless it appeared from the record that
| he had not been injured in his trial on
| account of any error committed against
! him, and the effect of this rule now is
| that the supreme court will hold that
even though party has not been per-
mitted to introduce evidence which the
law says he was entitled to, and even
though he has not been permitted to
plead what the law says he was en-
| titled to plead and even though the
opposite side has plead things against
him that the law says the opposite side
should not have plead, and even though
the opposite side has produced testi-
mony which the law says was incompe-
tent and should not have been allowed,
and even though the court charged the
jury in favor of the opposite party
things that are not the law, and
charged other things against him which
are not the law; still, the supreme court
or the judge trying the case will not
reverse the cause unless it appear that
injuriously affected the substantial
rights of the parties. meaning the party
against whom the ruling was made.
His Charge of Folly
"To my mind the folly of this rule
lies in the fact that the court will have
no way of knowing that the error COM
planned of has probably injuriously af-