Some Limitations in the Administration of Criminal Law [excerpt]

     Technicalities have paved the way to freedom for too many criminals, and bench and bar might well hang the head in shame at the many flagrant miscarriages of justice. There is only one justification of jurisprudence, and that is, the punishment or reformation of the guilty and the award of justice to the deserving. When it fails in these ends, it has fallen short of its purpose and breeds the first murmurings of the mob spirit. Society is sensitive to all wrongs inflicted upon it, but it is usually slow to anger. It often expresses itself, however, through incensed public sentiment that brushes aside hair-splitting technicalities and demands quick, positive justice. If Czolgosz had been tried for murdering an ordinary citizen, instead of assassinating President McKinley, the chances are many to one that he would have entered a plea of insanity and missed the gallows. So with Guiteau, who shot President Garfield. Public sentiment was strong on the side of society. The movements of the legal machinery were unerring and prompt. The execution of the court findings was certain and without delay. It was not savagery in the saddle. It was public conscience aroused to the needs of sane administration of criminal law. The courts met the needs.