The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1922-12-06
THE SUGGESTION OF
JUDGE FEATHERSToNE

Court of Greenwood county, that a
convention of judges be called to
consider the matter of melting out
uniform punishment for those con-
yicted of certain crimes, while on its
face offering good results, as a prac-
teal matter, it seems to US, is with
out real merit.
In the first place the judges would
not likely agree on proper punish
ment for certain crimes. Some judges
would be inclined to visit heavy pun
ishment on offenders against n
law, while for other ofenses milder
punishment would seem to be in or
der, others would take a different
view. With reference to violations
of the prohibition statute, there is
now a wide diversity Of opinion.
Some of the judges of u courts, if
we consider the punishment award
ed yiolators of the law, look upon in
fractions of the statute as matters
Of minor consideration, while other
Judges regard the manufacture and
sale of Intoxicating liquors as one
of the most debasing crimes on the
statute books. Some good might come
from discussion, but we rather fear
that those judges who are inclined to
enforce the law in such manner as
to make it command the respect OF
even the criminal class would by
Joint action have their hands more
or less tied by the opinions and views
of those who treat criminals too
tenderly.
The practical objection to the
plan, however, lies in the fact that
for the same offense there are all
degrees of guilt. 1t is unlawful for
a man to have Intoxicating liquors
in his possession for personal use,
unless the same has been obtained
in certain ways. 1t is unlawful like
wise for him to have Intoxicating
liquors in his possession for sale.
The degree of guilt, and the punish
ment which should be meted. out in
the event Of conviction in the latter
case should be more severe than in
the former case. Then too there are
circumstances in almost every case
which make Of it a case Of its own,
demanding at the hands Of the judge
consideration of the peculiar facts
surrounding it. For this reason the
Just judge in one case rietes out one
Punishment for a given ofense and
in another case another punishment,
according to the degree of guilt as
he sees It. No convention of judges
can fix rules to govern in these mat
ters.
Then again the judges are not a.
lone responsible for the administra-
ton Of the law. Before violators OF
the law can be sentenced they must
first be convicted. And the conviction
Of criminals depends on the prepar-
alton of the evidence by the solicit
tors and the proper presentation of
Of the evidence to the jury. The So
licitor can often defeat the ends of
Justice in criminal cases if he is not
disposed to present cases to the court
and jury at certain terms of the
court at which certain judges pre-
side who are known to handle GRIM
inals with a little more severity than
other judges.
Justice: should be tempered with
mercy always, as Judge Feather
stone says, but there is little rea-
son to believe that we have erred
hereabout by violating this whole
some doctrine. Our trouble has been
and will be for a long time that we
let U ideas of mercy defeat the
demands of justice. Mercy is for the
penitent, but the habitual violator
of the law, who wants to get out
with a fine or short term OF imprls'
onment in order that he may ply his
trade again, deserves not mercy but
that severity of sentence which max
es him feel that the way of the trans
gressor is hard.
fO