Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 22, Number 69, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 May 1901 — Our Laws and Courts Responsible For Lynching. [ARTICLE]

Our Laws and Courts Responsible For Lynching.

Over in England Jacob Keith would have had his trial, been convicted and bung within 60 days of the time his crime was discovered. In Indiaua after months andmontbs have dragged along before he was tried, and other long months in jail and prison waiting for execution, the Supreme Court reprieves him for six months longer to hear an appeal. Very likely he will then get a new trial on some technical point, and by the time he is tried again so much of the evidence will have been forgotten or lost, or witnesses moved away that h 6 will not again be convicted. In the inefficiency of our laws and the complications and trivialities and dilatoriness of our rules of court practice is to be found tbe explanation and, we might almost say, the justification of the prevalence of lynching in this country.

In comparison with this Keith case or most any other murder case that comes before our courts read the following description of a trial in the “Old Bailey” criminal court at London, as given by a correspondent of the Indianapolis News. The crime was commit ed on Jan6th, the trial was on Feb. 15th. Here is what the correspondent says:

“The trial had not lasted an hour. The jury had rendered its verdict of guilty, with the usual recommendation to mercy, which all British juries seem to regard as inseparable from all verdicts. The judge was just putting on his black cap as I entered the room. “You will be hanged by the neck until you are dead.” He told the , trembling wretch at the dock. “The jury have seen fit to add to their verdict a recommendation for mercy. It is not in my power to give this but I shall forward their wishes to proper quarters. Do not delude yourself with false hopes, but prepare for death.” And as sure as night follows day that man will be dead, hanged by the neck, a fortnight from now. .He will not see his friends again, if he has any; he will not be allowed to see any one bqt his spiritual advisers and his jailers. Maudlin sentiment will have no play in the few last gray days of his rough life. Women will not be allowed to hand him flowers and scented notes, or ask for autographs. He is already dead to the world. And so it should be, if the laws of a country aTe to be obeyed. I have often notioed how condemned murderers here meet their death swiftly, without waste of time.” The above is an example of British justice; swift and sure. The treatment of the prisoner seems harsh in some respects to us but it must be remembered at the same time that the people of England are liberty loving and law abiding. We often think that if some of our surplus sentimentalism in this country were dispensed with along with the quibbles and delays of the courts that the law would be more universally respected.