South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1914-10-22
MONTGOMERY AND
THE FLOYD FTFER CASE.

PROSECUTOR MONTGOMERY AND
THE FLOYD FIFER CASE.
Prosecutor Chester r. Montgomery
has added another to the long list Of
important convictions obtained 10y him
during his administration of the pros
ecutor's office. When the jury in the
Elkhart superior court found Floyd
Fifer guilty Of manslaughter. incident
TO the killing Of Emanuel Fink. the
Michigan av. druggist, it was as much
as could have been expected. True
Fifer had previously entered a plea
Of salty Of murder and had made "a
written confession of his crime, bat
this he repudiated at the trial, insist
ing that the police had wrung it from
him by third degree methods, and
that his plea OF guilty had been
entered under the same influence.
such circumstances involved in the
defense of "a case capable Of leading to
capital punishment. OF imprisonment
for long term of years. are about the
most exasperating and critical that a
prosecuting officer can go up against
Laymen in large numbers, by novel
and stage. have been poisoned against
third degree" methods until as a
rule. a mere hint at them is readily
believed, and the belief hard 10 upset
And il is laymen that serve as our
jurors.
We believe that the verdict reached
approximates the proper one. perhaps
more so than verdict of first degree
murder would have been. II is with
in the pale of reason that .Fifer en-
tered the Fink drug store. not with
tin intent to kill, but TO rob, and while
though incident to that act he did kill
ard might have been held guilty Of
murder. there was an impuIsiveness
back OF the deed, born on the spur
of the moment and of unexpected cir
.umstances. changing the culP~ ility
at least to an extent. Besides ifer
is mere lad, not yet out OF his teens,
and with no previous bad record save
association with bad company, which
was bound TO mitigate in his favor.
less experienced prosecuting at
iorney might have been unable. under
all these circumstances, TO have Sc
cured even a verdict of manslaughter.
I'm this office. as in al others, expe-
rience make for efficiency In the
handling of state cases, Prosecutor
Montgomery has always shown
marked ability. and scarcely a meri-
torious case has escaped successful
contamination of Justice for the peo-
pie AS a candidate for reelection
this fail. he can point 10 "a record that
might well be cherished by any law
yer. and for faithful and Jealous per-
Torrance OF duty he has established
reputation that any official might
with propriety covet.
To dismiss Prosecutor Montgomery
at the polls IN November and institute
in his stead a prosecuting officer with
no experience whatever in this ca
pacity and even comparatively
meager experience at the bar. would
be a mistake beyond question. Not
that his opponents are bad men. If
the democratic nominee We're like
them a new man for the office. and
limited as they are in professional
and official experience. the choice be-
tween them would be less marked.
Then an appeal 20 partisan interest
would be about as far as one could
so, but as il is IL is different
The office OF prosecuting attorney
is at least semi-judicial To requires
skill and Judgment in the Institution
Of cases as well as in the trial OF
them. II is proverbial that prose
cutting attorney new TO the office
spends the better part Of his first
term getting acquainted with the
functions Of his office and how TO
perform them Meanwhile the public
suffers. justice is cheated. and at times
fnnumerable the public morality has
come well nigh running amuCk. There
can be no reason under the sun why
the county should not employ its
prosecuting officer very much as a
private corporation engages its law
ycrs-on the basis OF experience and
acquaintance With his work.
F1fer we repeat might today be
an bsolutely free man. had a less
experienced prosecutor been IN charge
II the case-a case unusually full OF
ramihcations and infested with nu-