Fitzgerald leader enterprise and press. (Fitzgerald, Ben Hill County, Ga.) 1921-1964, 1921-08-05
WHAT! A
CITY COURT?

Editor Fitzgerald Leader nterprise,
Dear Sir
Sidney Clare's inconsistency re-
garding public affairs cannot be ig-
nored by the good women of Fitz-
gerald and Ben Hill County.
The call for bond election in our
city for the sum of $4,000 for the
purpose of charging our schools and
better taking care of and educating
our Children brought forth from Mr..
Clare a. howl for mercy and plea
against burdensome tax, but above
all, that objectionable accusation d.
rected against the good ladies of the
town regarding the colored women
voting in the bond election The d.
agnosis of his article giving his reas-
ons for another City Court shows t.,
ne is in desperate straits in the upper
portion of his human makeup. and
that he has no regard whatever for
what he says. Mr.. Clare went to the
lowest ebb in denouncing the bond
issue, which was for educating our
children that they be informed and
guarded against the pitfalls in life
Mr.. Clare's inconsistency is evidence
sufficient to prove that it would take
the entire bond issue of $4,000 to en-
tighten him and get him out of the
frame up for City Court in which
he has been caught and is willing to
be taxed to support the graft, but not
willing to stand by the good women
who favored bonds for the education
OF the rising generation.
20, Consistency, thou art a jewell"
., Politics, thou art rotten!
Mr. Clare is densely ignorant or
else he must think the women voters
nothing more than a bunch of num-
skulls: The Court that Mr. Walker
abolished was entirely under the fee
system To know how ignorant
Mr.. Clare really is about the City
Court that was abolished, the act
creating the court should be read
Every officer that will be on a sal
airy by the proposed new City Court
was on a salary under the Court that
was abolished. The judge drew ST.
zoo and the Solicitor $1,000 per an
mum under the old City Court bill,
and the same salary is provided for
the Judge and Solicitor under the
proposed new bill, and every officer
that drew fees under the old city
court will draw fees under the new.
Therefore, the same motive for
graft would exist under the new bill
as existed under the old The new
court bill, the way it is drawn, will
be more expensive than the old city
court bill, for the reason that they
only used panel of IS jurors as pro-
vided for in the Superior Court. I'm
der the new city court bill the same
procedure is rovided for asp is provid-
ed for the Superior Court; the same
rule for continuance, the same rule
for lawyers sickness, the same man
ner Of selecting and impaneling
jury and the same number of jurors.
Under the old city court bill the
same provisions with reference to the
surplus going to the schools was
provided for, as under the new city
court bill Did the schools get a
penny? No. The difference in ex-
pense is the city court only tries the
misdemeanor cases and the Superior
Court has jurisdiction in all cases.
Important. Read carefully and see if
you want to be railroaded. In the
Superior Court there must be an in
dictment returned by the Grand Jury
against person, and in the City
Court you can draw an acquisition
against any person based upon an
affidavit and put him on trial, and
you are forced to hire a lawyer or
be railroaded. In the Superior Court
the Grand Jury must first investigate
evidence to authorize the defendant
to be tride before a Petit Jury.n In
the Superior Court the Judge costs
the county nothing, so the Judges