hypocrites.

But for an overwhelming majority of the community something
more practical than either religion, ethics, or philosophy is
necessary to keep them in order. They must be convinced that
the transgressor will surely be punished,--not some time, not
next year or the year after, but now. Not, moreover, that his
way will be merely hard; but that he will be put in stripes
and made to break stones.

Hence the necessity for a vigorous and adequate criminal law
and procedure which shall command the respect and loyalty of
the community, administered by a fearless judiciary who will
hold jurors to a rigid and conscientious obedience to their
oath.

There is nothing sacred about an archaic criminal procedure
which in some respects is less devised for the protection of
the community than for the exculpation of the guilty. The
portals of liberty would not fall down or the framers of the
constitution turn in their graves if the peremptory challenges
allowed to both sides in the selection of a jury were reduced
to a reasonable number, or if persons found guilty of crime
after due process of law were compelled to stay in jail until
their appeals were decided, instead of walking the streets
free as air under a certificate of "reasonable doubt" issued
by some judge who personally knew nothing of the actual trial
of the case. As things stand to-day, a thief caught in the
very act of picking a pocket in the night-time may challenge
arbitrarily the twenty most intelligent talesmen called to sit