Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1919-09-05


ferent things, wherever you can find
evidence of this having been done, |
want you to indict. Now it may be
that you wouldn't ndict because these
people stand high and are members of
prominent families; but they win
stand higher when they cease violat-
ing the law, even if it takes an indict-
ment to stop them, If we simply in
dict men who are poor and without IN
fuence, and let it be shown that the
courts punish only the weak and lowly
and can not punish the rich and strong
this destroys confidence in courts and
promotes Bolshevism and anarchy.
Anybody can punish the weak; that's
no trouble at all. The question is to
punish the strong, the powerful, the
rich and the influential, when they are
found to be guilty of a violation of
law.
In regard to any defense that these
people may have to make to the of
fenses with which they may be charg-
ed; you have nothing whatever to do
with that; that is a question solely for
the petit jury, and can be settled only
by that jury. The grand jury is only
an accusing jury and is never empan-
elod to try cases; you are to hear only
one side of the case and if the proof
is sufficient to accuse a person, then
1t is your duty to indict. After indict-
ment, defendants viii be given a fair
trial before an impartial petit jury.
Instead of you being called a grand"
jury and the petit jury patti jury, |
have long thought that the grand jury
ought to be called "the accusing jury"
an dthe petit jury "the trial jury"
Now, gentlemen, | do not want you
to take up the smaller offenses at the
beginning of the term. You should
take up the heavier matters first and
try to get your indictments in here
just as soon as possible.
In cases Of Importance we have to
give parties time in which to get
ready for trial and sometimes it may
be four or five days or a week before
q man can be tried for murder. SO
ask you to take those cases up first.
and if you are going to return indict-
ments return them as soon as possible.
People are a good deal alike every
where; it is public opinion that decides
whether your court will be a power
for good, or whether it will be merely
formal and useless A criminal can
not live comfortably in a community
where public opinion is against him.
He knows, he will be punished by its
public opinion. A condition might ex-
list in one county when it could not
possibly do SO in another. But think
YOU people here in Noxubee county are
Just like the people in Lowndes, and |
Oftibbeha, and you want the law en-
forced and are going to do it.
Now, as to stealing, whether You |
call it larceny or embezzlement, it is |
stealing just the SAME. When a .rffan
is degraded enough to steal sheep or
a hog he will be punished, not only in
the courts Of the country, but in the
public's opinion, he will be condemned;
but when a man wears fine clothes,
belongs to prominent family and is
well connected generally and happens
to steal twelve or fifteen thousand
dollars, what will we do with him?
Shall we say he is a gentleman still
and not criminal and that he is a
good fellow and his people are fine
people and prominent and we will lust
let the thing 20 at that? If he stole
a hog, we would send him to the peni-
tentary certain, but what will you do
with a ma nWho steals twelve thous
and dollars? 1t has been said that the
higher and the bigger a steal a man
pulls off, the less danger there is Of
him being punished. Now, gentlemen l.
Of the grand jury all the people Of
the country ought to understand chat
when the law is violated it doesn't
make any difference who the man is
who violates it, how well connected 1
he is, who he is kin to. how fine the
clothes he may wear, how stiff his
shirt may be or how white his collar,
or how big the sWag he has pulled ]
down, he ought to be indicted. and
II he is guilty of stealing somebody
else's money he ought to be punished. /
Well, you say Eyes, a man stole twelve
thousand dollars, but he paid it back.
and he ought no ito be punished be-
cause, although he took some other
mans money, he paid it back or his
folks did for him, and therefore he
ought not to be punished" That is
the poorest and worst reasoning in the
world, II 1t is reasoning at all, 1t is
but the merest sophistry. If man
sticks knife in your ribs while he is
angry with you and later gets sorry
and pays your doctors bill and hires
your crop worked out for you while
you are disabled and tells you he is
sorry and does all he can for YOU after
ne has injured you, that is matter
OF mitigation, but it is not a defense.
1t might mitigate the punishment !,
your assailant is to justly receive, but
1t Is no defense, because so far as the
offense he is charged with is con-
cerned, he was guilty when he thurst
the knife into you; right at the time
he thurst the knife between your ribs
he was then and there guilty of some
crime, and he should be indicted, tried,
convicted and punished, and then if he
wants a pardon he can set out all
these matters Of mitigation and take
the matter up with the governor, who
has the exclusive right to pardon. We
can't get away from the fact that a
crime has been committed and some
body owes the State a debt for its
commission that ought ODE paid.
1t may also be said that when a
man steals as much as twelve thous-
and dollars that he stole it from some
body who had plenty and was there
fore able TO lose it and the thing is
done now and it won't do anybody any /