The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1921-12-07

him Immediately. The court ap-
pointed public defender as his coun-
sci, and we urged him to tell the
court all the circumstances Of his
life in the belief that he had a good
record and that probation would
probably result At our earnest en-
treaty he told US his story, giving
the names CT. his parents in an
Eastern city. We wrote to the par
ents and learned that he was the
eldest of several children, that he
had left home two or three years
earlier in the desire for adventure
and that the parents had advertised
for their boy throughout the United
States. The father. sent railroad
ticket to his old home and the price
of the ham to reimburse the butch
er. He wrote US tilat he would meet
his son at the train with a new SUIT
of clothes ready for him and that
warm welcome was waiting II the
court would see fit to grant proba-
ton. The boys previous record
had been good and the court upon
learning these facts promptly sent
hirn to his parents.
An important part Of the work OF
the Public Defender is the securing
of employment for prisoners upon
their release from the jail. The
judges are loath to release men on
probation who are without means
of securing a livelihood and who,
very probably, would become
charges on the community or again
resort to crime. Our office has en-
deavored with considerable success
to reclaim men who have fallen
and to make them useful citizens.
Often the judges order that prison.
ers be released as soon as the Pub
lie Defender secures employment
for them.
A Saving, Not an Expense.
An unexpected result from the
blishment Of the office Of Pub
lie Defender is the reduction in
expense to the taxpayers. 1t was
conceded that the new office would,
Of course, add some expense; but
that was considered only fair to
the accused and to the attorneys
who had been formerly called up
on to donate their services. A care
full calculation has been made Of
the time actually consumed in
handling the cases conducted by
the Public Defenders office dur
ing the first three years Of it's ex-
istence, and those conducted by at
torneys in private practise during
the same period. The figures
show that the cases tried by the
Public Defender occupied an aver
age Of seventy-nine hundredths Of
a day for each trial, while the
cases tried by attorneys in private
practise occupied an average Of
one and sixty-four hundredths days.
Pleas Of guilty were entered in 69.8
per cent. of the cases handled by
the Public Defender, and in only
46.1 per cent. handled by private
counsel.
Z The saving of the courts time
in these two items alone has more
than Offset the expense incurred
in maintaining the criminal de-
partment of the Public Defenders
office.
To this should be added the saw
ings in the time Of the courts in
passing upon demurrers, motions
for new trials, and similar matters.
Although the Public Defender ap-
peared in approximately one-third
Of all the criminal cases handled by
the Superior Court, .demurrers
were held filed in only four cases,
while attorneys in private practise
filed one hundred and eleven de-
murrers. The Public Defender ap-
pealed in four cases, while at
torneys in private practise appealed
in fifty-four cases. A higher per-
centage of acquittals resulted in
cases tried by the Public Defender
than in cases tried by private coun-
| sci.
After the Public Defenders Of
flee had been in operation in the
county courts in Los Angeles near
ly two years, the chief Of police
was elected mayor. In his first
message to the city council ne
recommended that an ordinance be
passed providing for defender IN
the police courts. Acting upon this
recommendation the city council
created the office Of City Police
Court Defender. Both offices have
received the hearty cooperation
and support Of all officials of the
county and the city. The office of
Public Defender is no longer an
experiment.
THE SUPERIOR COURT
-, A,oa1oc California