This natural presumption of guilt from the mere fact of the charge is rendered all the more likely by reason of the uncharitable readiness with which we believe evil of our fellows.  How unctuously we repeat some hearsay bit of scandal.  “I suppose you have heard the report that Deacon Smith has stolen the church funds?” we say to our friends with a sententious sigh—­the outward sign of an invisible satisfaction.  Deacon Smith after the money-bag?  Ha! ha!  Of course, he’s guilty!  These deacons are always guilty!  And in a few minutes Deacon Smith is ruined forever, although the fact of the matter may well have been that he was but counting the money in the collection-plate.  This willingness to believe the worst of others is a matter of common knowledge and of historical and literary record.  “The evil that men do lives after them—­” It might well have been put, “The evil men are said to have done lives forever.”  However unfair, this is a psychologic condition which plays an important part in rendering the presumption of innocence a gross absurdity.

But let us press the history of Jones and Robinson a step further.  The next event in the latter’s criminal history is his appearance in court before a magistrate.  Jones produces his evidence and calls his witnesses.  Robinson, through his learned counsel, cross-examines them and then summons his own witnesses to prove his innocence.  The proceeding may take several days or perhaps weeks.  Briefs are submitted.  The magistrate considers the testimony and finally decides that he believes Robinson guilty and must hold him for the action of the grand jury.  You might now, it would perhaps seem, have some reason for suspecting that Robinson was not all that he should be.  But no!  He is still presumed in the eyes of the law, and theoretically in the eyes of his fellows, to be as innocent as a babe unborn.  And now the grand jury take up and sift the evidence that has already been gone over by the police judge.  They, too, call witnesses and take additional testimony.  They likewise are convinced of Robinson’s guilt and straightway hand down an indictment accusing him of the crime.  A bench warrant issues.  The defendant is run to earth and ignominiously haled to court.  But he is still presumed to be innocent!  Does not the law say so?  And is not this a “government of laws”?  Finally, the district attorney, who is not looking for any more work than is absolutely necessary, investigates the case, decides that it must be tried and begins to prepare it for trial.  As the facts develop themselves Robinson’s guilt becomes more and more clear.  The unfortunate defendant is given any opportunity he may desire to explain away the charge, but to no purpose.