Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1925-05-02
BACKGROUND OF EVENTS
BY PAUL y. COLLINS.

ent attorney for each case, who CO.
operates with the prosecuting police
in handling the law involved. One at
torney may represent the prosecution
in one case and the defense in the
next.
In the United States there is no
uniformity, Of the machinery of jus
tice, some States requiring grand
juries of only 10 and others recurring
% members. Equal Emergencies of
legal standards of evidence exist be
tween States. Above all, the COM
mittee protests against the looseness
| of procedure in gubernatorial pardon
| ing or paroling of convicts and urges
that the same public and formal
hearings should be held in cases of
| pardonS as in the original trials and
pardons should be granted only on the
merits of evidence and not on mere
emotional appeal-a recommendation
which met with vigorous applause
from the members of the institute.
In no feature do the differences be-
tween American and English pro-
cedure in criminal cases appear more
| striking than in the adherence OF
American courts to the ancient prec-
edents of technicalities and the
simplifying of the methous in Eng
land. In the old country there is
no such thing as getting a retrial of
a case on the ground of an error in
the language of the indictment. All
objections TO the phraseology of the
| indictment, including the exact crime
charged, or the initial or name Of the
| accused. must be presented to the
court before jury is sworn, and, in
| most cases, the court then and there
corrects the Indictment and proceeds
with the case. If a man be indicted
| for burglary" and 1t is alleged that
! the act was committed in daytime,
and, therefore, must be "housebreak-
| ing" instead of burglary" the court
makes the correction in England; the
next grand jury in America. In one
case the error is corrected in as many
minutes as the other case requires
months.
In America an indictment for muir
| der is filled with ancient verbiage-
"as aforesaid and in the entagle-
ment of words exist innumberable
In England, an indictment for murder
consists of less than so words, di-
rectly making a charge with not a
single aforesaid" for what is said
| once is not reiterated ''as aforesaid.
x 4
A bill was introduced in Parlia-
ment, some years ago, providing
right of appeal in case of conviction
against the weight Of evidence" The
bill also provided for new trial, but
objection was raised that a new
trial amounted to twice putting the
accused in jeopardy for the same of
Tense, and therefore "a second trial
would be oppression" So the bill was
defeated.
American rules regarding indict-
ments are SO punctilious that if an
indictment fails to state the time the
offense was committed, 1t must be
quashed, though the time stated need
not be the correct time to make the
document hold. If theft of cattle be
charged, the true indictment must
describe each animal; it will not do
to allege that the cattle thief ran
off with certain cattle" Were the
animals shorthorns, years old, or
Jerseys years old? Were they white
or red? Bulls or COWS? If the in
dictment alleges that bay" horse
was stolen, and the horse is proved
to be black, the prisoner must be
freed. though a dozen witnesses saw
him ride that horse out of the pasture
and caught him still astride of it
If the indictment be against John F. ;
Smith and the prisoner is John T.
Smith, in England the pen of the
judge would change the OF" to a
'T," and the court would proceed
with the case; in America, the pris-
oner at the bar would be released.
and might sue the arresting officers
for false arrest.
X X
The committee recommended that
the American Law Institute under
take a restatement of the substantive
law of crimes. but that while a model
code of criminal procedure is practic,
able and desirable, its preparation
should not be undertaken by the in
stitute under present conditions, be
cause that is Il legislative function.
Copyright, 1928, by Paul Y. poliins.A