Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1926-04-27
A New Tribunal

No adverse criticism can fairly be
offered of the action of the Cover
nor and Council in their finding
that Sheriff Cummings of Kennebec
County has been remiss in his duties
Any citizen has the right to his per-
Sonal opinion as to whether the
evidence was sufficient cause for
removal and may legitimately give
expression to such opinion. But
responsibility was with the Governor
and Council and they were compelled
to decide upon the evidence as il
appealed to them. =.
The opinion of the court that the
Governor and Council constitute a
legal tribunal to try charges against
sheriffs, to decide whether or nos
they are sustained makes that the
law, and 1t will be accepted as such
by all good citizens.
Whether the law, as 1t has been
the line OF sound public policy, Is
another question, and one which it
is proper and legitimate to discuss.
1t is hardly to be denied that the
people who ratified the law did not
know that they were voting for the
creation of any such tribunal. 1t is
also doubtful whether the Legisla-
lures which proposed the resolution
and afterwards framed the statutes
to conform to 1t. were cogniZant OF
the fact that they were participa-
ting in so radical a change in the
fundamental law of the State or
one so completely at odds with the
commonest principles of procedure
against those charged with Offend
ing against the law.
The Council was created to be
an advisory board to the Governor,
who is the chief executive. The law
for trying sheriffs departs from this
theory of the functions of the two
executives and gives the Governor
coordinate powers with the members
of the Council. They are jury, with
the Governor one of the panel.
1t is also true in practice, IL not
in theory that the complainant
under this law acts also as both
judge and jury. 1t would be much
the same, as we see it, If a county
attorney were permitted to so on
the bench and charge the jury and
then retire with it to participate
in its deliberations. We don't say
that this is the theory of the law,
but it is the way it worked out in
this particular Kennebec County
case, and would Of necessity work
out in any similar case. In other
words a sheriff accused under the
existing statute has far less of a
chance of exculpation than a per-
son accused of murder or any other
heinous offense. 1t requires unan-
imous verNiict of jury to convict
a respondent of murder. A sheriff
can be convicted by majority vote
and the prosecutor Is empowered
to be one of those voting. The law
NAV not assume that sheriff is
guilty until proven innocent, but it
comes dangerously close to such an
assumption.
It will be asserted that the Gov
ernor Is not the prosecutor in the
trial of sheriffs. Nevertheless in the
in practice 1t was Governor Mill
ken who made the charges against
the sheriffs tried in his administra-
ton, and it, was Governor Baxter
who instituted proceedings against
Sheriff Wescott. 1t was within their
province to do so and they were
right in the action they took. But
if it Is their right to act also as a
juror in such cases. then we ara
making it easier for murderers and
burglars than we are for sheriffs.