The Lancaster news. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1905-current, 1921-09-23
LAW ENFORCEMENT. CAMoU-
FLAGE, ETC.

many definitions offered and the
best one. in our opinion, was "mak-
ing something look like what it
amt" At any rate, this applies to
suspended sentences" in the courts
For instance, a man Is convicted of
selling liquor; he is sentenced to
three months in Jail and to pay q
fine OF 500. the Jail sentence to be
suspended" when the fine is paid.
That's camoufiage.
| Law enforcement Is q big problem.
1t is problem that requires thought
and very necessary thing to in
sure law enforcement is public senti-
ment. There are varied opinions as
to what the courts ought to do. and
The News has always followed re-
ligiously a policy OF never Offering
criticism unless it could offer also a
remedy. Many men think the jury
| system is all wrong, but we are vet
to find the man who has something
better to offer. We have never un-
| derstood how conscientious lawyer
can go into court and defend a man
he knows to be guilty. Why is he
not guilty of perjury or contempt of
court when he does so?
Some of the judges in South Caro-
lima have been blaming the Jurors
for the present crime-wave through
the fact that they too often render
verdicts OF not guilty. Other peo-
pie are blaming the judges for the
light sentences which they infiict.
The Pee Dee Advocate, Of BENEFITS
vile, says:
Not only do judges allow lawyers
to railroad cases through and get
their clients off with nominal fines.
sometimes without submitting the
facts to jury, but after the juries
have convicted. the judges often i'm
pose ridiculously small penalties.
Sometimes the sentence is suspend
ed altogether.
Numbers of times we have heard
judges pronounce sentence. Then
the lawyers would commence to
plead for a reduction. giving various
and sundry frivolous excuses. The
judge often yields to the pleas, and
reduces the sentence, or suspends
part OF it. In one case last year we
saw sentence reduced twice by this
process.
Suppose that. after a jury has rem
dered Its verdict, the lawyers should
gather around the Jury and beg and
plead with them to change the SEN
tence; and it should be changed by
this method? What would the Judge
on the bench say to that jury; and
what would the public think of them?
Judge ought to regard it as an |
insult. punishable by contempt OF !
court. for lawyer to try to persuade |
him to change his sentence. after |
AN AeAo hSaiu thS CNlutHCe anu InS |
arguments and deliberately made ND |
his mind as to what the punishment
should be-
We cannot speak for other coun-
ties. but we believe that here in
Marlboro judges are far more re-
sponsible than juries for the failure
to enforce the law. Juries usually |
do their duty and convict when there ,
is sufficient evidence presented. But |
juries. police officers. and law-abid-
ing people generally are disappointed
and discouraged when the Judge pro-
nounces sentence that Is no punish |
ment at all. For instance; when a |
liquor seller who makes thousands |
of dollars q year out OF his business, |
is fined 800 or $500 and sent on
his way rejoicing at the smallness
OF the tax.
Judges have been criticising juries
from time immemorial. A judge
once told jury that they had violat-
ed their oaths and sworn themselves
unfit to be Jurors because they failed
to agree on a verdict. II the jury
was conscienttously divided. what the
judge said Of them would have been
true OF part of them II they had
agreed upon a verdict.
1t is getting time for juries to have
something to say on questions OF law
enforcement, and who fs responsible
for its failure. Especially the grand
juries can have something to say,
for they are privileged to say tho
truth about anything and anybody