The Brunswick news. [volume] (Brunswick, Ga.) 1906-2016, 1913-06-04
coneREssaAN EpwARD's BAD
BREAK.

enabling judge 81 the united States
court to secure an impartial Jury Is
Injurious and is suggestive q very
] careful and earnest thought ON the
part Of the congressman who must
| enact or defeat it, IT seems 10 us
very plainly a part Of the insidious
plan to pa the control Of all judicial
matters in the Southern district OF
Georgia, aye, and a large part Of
slrrida and Alabama also. under the
control, not Of Savannah, but of GER
ain corporate lawyers there. We
may begin anywhere and lead the
fair and honest mind to demonstra-
items Of this proposition. Edwards,
II is true, was elected by the country
counties, but he is moro than any
Thing else a Savannah lawyer, which
ls demonstrated by the. fact that he
fears jurors Of that class who have
elected him TO congressl UnhaDpily
at this time one or more Of his
btothers-inlaw are The defendants il
a notable case pending in the United
states court. That they have de
mantied a jury trlal is widely known.
Mr. Edwards bill, If successful must
have direct operation on this case, in
witch his kinsman are parties and in
Which he himself hes appeared be,
fore Judge Speer. What IS the act of
which he complains. II is that pass
ed by the first congress of which
many Of the founders of our govern
ment were members. 1t is signed by
George Washington, and provides
that whenever essential to an impair
tial jury the judge can select the jury
from any portion of his district. This
is not done furtively, but by open or
der spread upon the minutes This
hess probably been the greatest cause
Of complaint against Judge Spcer by
attorneys for certain indicted per
sens in Savannah. In the Greene and
iaynor ease where the defendants
iatcf tho exRenditiro of money to be
by the hundred thou
inds. were convicted of embezzle- |
nent of appropriations to be counted |
~ the millions, Judge Speer was
! lised 10 80 To a portion OF his dis
i let other than Savannah TO get an |
ht0aJTial jury. Had he not done this,
II know that the trial would have
,sen q mpo.ckerS In the case of the
United States Y. Merchants and |
Miners Transportation Company,
,harged with giving rebates to
'aNorGd ,shlpper, and against Miller
the shippers, who by these
'cbates were enabled. to dominate the |
grain trade of South Georgia and |
Florida, the judge was compelled to |
10 the same thing. Again there was |
. verdict of guilty. Let 1t be OBJ
served that in the two first cases
mentioned the action OF the court |
received the most searching scrutiny |
By the circuit court, Of appeals and
by the supreme court of the United
States, This Very question was
l2fried up, and was considered by |
HE appellate court. The yerdicts |
we're sustained. and in the latter case
here was also verdict of guilty, In
he case Of the United States vi
American Naval Stores Company the |
SINE method vas pursued, not only |
With the jury but with the grand jury
The result was the same and again
the verdict received the appreciation |
Of the appellate courts What then |
do the rich yiolators of The laws per /
eoRe? Simply this that with al
clear and conscientious Judge and
With juries possessing the immoyable 4
honesty which marks the class of /
mvn from whom tho iuries in the 4
United States court in this district 4
airy taken, when the case, is taken
away from local influence the laws
CT the United States are enforced and
the rights Of the people are protected
We dare declare that no cases
more than these mentioned and
many others like them have startled
tlle laMless aggregauons of capital
throughout the United States who.
hhve determined TO- prey upon the
people. In the Southern District of
Georgia. and by methods which the
appellate courts under the present
condition of the lerSs approve. such
men are surely and certainly con
A. 4