Tuesday's Election Was Characterized

by the usual faHing off in the Republican vote in the first conte9t succeeding a presidential campaign. As a result Detroit remalns in the control of the Demooracy and Ohio came very near beins lost. Tammany also secured an unusually large majority in Greater New York. It is a well known fact that Demócrata vote at every opportunity while many Republicans vote only when especially important questlons are at issue. The Times takes exception to an editorial note in last week's Register referring to the Richard's murder trial. It says that we struck a man when he was down. Dld we? The Times would not havo made such a statement had it reflected for a moment before making it. The note in question was written an hour after the last witness was examined and before a single one of the four pleas was made. The paper was printed and malled twenty-four Uours before the jury rendered a verdict. We had no means of knowing which side would win. We simply ventured an opinión ou the conduct of the case uu to the time when the testimouy was all in. The fact that the jury acquitted the defendants with reasonable promptitude indicates that our position at least pointed in the right direction. In auo;her column we print a Btatement of the expenses of the Richards murder trial. Some of the items may be a little below what they should be but in the main they are exact. A number of items which we have been unable to obtain will probably increase the total some three hundred dollars. The large majority of people will be greatly surprised at the size of the total amount shown. Murder trials are indeed expensive affairs. The people ehould not, however, hesitate about meeting such expenditures when by so doing crimináis may be brought to justice, and criminally disposed people may be restrained from wronging law abiding citizens. Society must be protected at any cost. That is the prime purpose of all government. The great necessity of such protection does not, however, give unlimited authority to a public prosecutor. He should not prosecute a person unless he has the very best of reasons for believing that he can convict the person or persons w hom he accuses. The mere fact that he may be satisüed in his own mind that a certain person ie guilty of some specific crime, or that one or all in the community may feel perfectlv satisfled that a suspected person is guilty does not warrant theexpenditure of such large sums of money. The only question that should be taken into consideration is whether or not there is ampie evicknce to convict those suspected. It is a sheer and an inexcusable waste of the people's money to attempt to convict a person suspected of a crime unless there ís at least some show of success. We cannot comprehend how the Prosecuting Attorney could have thèught ior a moment that he could convict the suspects in the Richards case upoa the evidence he presented. We believe that at least half the jury would bave voted for acquittal had the defense ieclined to present a witness or make a plea. We do not wish to be understood, however, that we believe the defendants are oither guilty or innoceut. We do not pretend to know. What we desire to state is that the evidence was insufficient to convict. Either the Prosecuting Attorney was valling to try a case ia which he had no hope of success and thus wantonly waste the people's money or else he nhowed very poor judgment as to what eridence was necessary to convince A jury, beyond a reasonable doubt. The belief that a great many people held that the prosecutor placed more hope of conviction in Mr. Sawyer's plea than he did in tbe evidencehe was able to present searcely seems possible. To believe that he would be willing to send three people to prison for life through the inluence of an eloquent plea rather than upon the evidence would accuse him of nhumanity which certainly is unjust. The whole dlfflculty in our opinión ies in the prosecutor's poor judgment, It ia unfortunate that such a state of affaire should be possible. It should not be aliowed to continue a day longer than is absolutely necessary. We beieve that when the people of this coun;y come to elect another prosecutor and remember the great waste of money in thls case, a change will be made. Such an affair as the Kichard's murder .rial is too expensive a luxury whou letter judgment would have precluded all hope of conviction and saved the ;ax payers thouaands of dollars that lave been wasted.