IN AN AMERICAN COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 24 June 1926, Page 4

IN AN AMERICAN COURT

UNCONVENTIONAL IRISH JUDGE.

Nowhere is the distinction between the educated Anglo-Saxon and the uneducated person of foreign stock more marked that in the law courts (writes P. P. Slioll, an Australian student now touring the United States). Study any report of a criminal case, and you will immediately remark that the names of the prisoners are principally foreign, and these of the judges, barristers and solicitors predominantly Anglo-Saxon. The solicitous care of professors has familiarised more law students with the dictum of Professor Dicey, to the effect that federalism by this criterion, is entirely successful, for “every court is thronged with suitors.” and the legal machine works always at high pressure.

A unique opportunity of studying the procedure of an American criminal trial was afforded us in Baltimore. Visiting the State Courts there, under the guidance of a leading barrister, another law student and 1 were invited by a genial Irish judge to come up and sit with him on the bench—a mark of judicial informality for which not even the absence of robes, and counsel’s habit of sitting down while crossexamining, had entirely prepared us. Fruift an extremely advantageous but somewhat, self-conscious position, the extreme informality and the intense human interest of the proceedings were alike obvious.

PRELIMINARIES. A negro was being tried for attempted shooting. In many States a person charged with any criminal offence may as lie nmy not do under the English system, elect between trial by jury and trial by a judge alone. The negro had chosen to he tried by the judge. Leaning casually, with elbows on the judge’s deslc, counsel discussed preliminaries with the judge, all three referring to the accused as “Spike” Johnson. Then the court decided to get on with the case, and a trembling “darkey” described how “Spike” owed him 25 cents. On his requesting payment. “Spike” had announced his intention of cancelling the debt by the simple expedient of exterminating his creditor : subsequently he had called at the house, expressing complete indifference whether lie shot, the witness or the witness’s wife. Thereupon he had retired, and unsuccessfully shot through the door. As the witness’s evidence was uncorroborated, and the accused declared with extreme volubility that ho was somewhere else at the time, the verdict was “ not guilty.” Leaning over and addressing us in an undertone, the judge remarked : “ The beggar is probably guilty all the same, but there’s not enough evidence.” MAKE IT TWO YEARS.’’

Then two convicts remanded for sentence came before the court to learn their fate, and a strange debate ensued. On one. an old offender, a .sentence of two years’ imprisonment in the State penitentiary was imposed.

“ Please, your Honour, will you make it two years in a house of correction demanded the prisoner. “Veil,” was the unexpected reply, “ 1 was sending you to the penitentiary because they say tlie food’s better and there’s more chance of escape there, hut I’ll make it the house of correction it you like.” On the second prisoner sentence of a year’s imprisonment was imposed, whereupon he (not his counsel) promptly asked the judge whether lie could deduct the six week-- he had already spent in prison. I lie judge assenting, ihe first convict at mice sought the sail*,:.' privilege—a request reluxed by the judicial pronouncement that, as

one man had hud his choice of residence and the other had been granted his request ns to time, they should “ hot h he satisfied.”