The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-04-01
THE WIFE POISONING CASES.
THE STEPHENS CASE IN NEW YORK.
JAMES STEPHENS SENTENCED TO BE HANGED ON THE
10Th OF NAY FOR POISONING HIS WIFE.


OYER AND rERNIyKR.
MARCH 3l.-7he People James Sephens-At an early
hour the court thronged by persons
witness This important In the wife poisoning tragedy
Amongst the spectators some eighteen or twenty
females; but Of the Bell family Mr. Cardwe ap
peared in the court Shortly before 1l O'Clock Sheriff
John Kelly entered, with the prisoner James Stephens,
linked his arm, and followed by his deputies Murray
and Gray. There large attendance Of policemen in
and around the court and immense concourse Of peo
pie lined the streets from the prison TO the Park.
Stephens looked somewhat paler, yet was firm and
moved. His sister, Mrs Hanna, and her daughter Mrs
Isabella Bennett, seated by his side, but his child
Bella was, very properly not present at the awful
that was TO be enacted and which was TO make her
wholly orphaned Just the City Hall bell ceased tolng
twelve o'clock Judge Roosevelt, (P J took his scat upon
the bench, accompanied by his associate Justices Cere,
Davies and IDgraham.
Mr. Ashmead informed the Court that the bill of excep
tons would be ready in few mnut1s; II is unusually
long and necessarily buried. His clerks tying 1t
toeether and he asked for few moments delay In the
Meantime he would submit his for arrest Of
Judgment and his for q trial. He then pro
ceeded 70 submit them. One Of the for new
trial that the jury allowed separate during
trial. which contrary TO law; another s that Robert
Ogden Doremus Of the witnesses for the prosecution
convesed with some Of the jurors and stated to Of
The District Attorney interrupted the counsel as ir-
regular.
The Court said that the adavts on which the motion
was TO be made should first be read.
Mr. Ashmead excepted to the Court preventing him from
reading his reasons at that time.
Judge Roosevelt-You cannot take such exception.
Mr.. Ashmead then read an affidavit made by Deputy
Sheriff Murray whohas had the prisoner in charge and
which is in answer to the following letter.
Ny DEAR srRA gentleman mentioned to me that you had
overheard DR. Dorenus nversng with Of the Jurors in
Gushing had nsSsd his Argument and before oommsncsd
my M cumming II the e. be g. must & ask you 70 state
hat you should certify o what know on this subject IN
on pending cas aS @ any wo
render Mnns the vsrdstinvAd Yours truly y1N .srAn
The affidavit of Mr. Murray sets forth that Dr. Doremus
had said 70 of the jurors (Mr Marsh), leaving
Court, after the summing up Of Mr. Cushing one OF the
counsel for the defendant that Mr. Cushing had misrepre
sented him Dr Doremus in regard 70 the analysis and
that another juror (Mr Gonk) conversed with Dr. Dore
him that Dr. poremus analysis was the most complete he
had witnessed. Mr.. Ashmead then read the affidavit
of the prisoner James Stephens, TO the effect that the
absence Of Richard Stephens witness a material
injury 10 him. and the refusal OF the Judge 10 grant
attachment for bis compulsory attendance was preudcia
to his defence.
The District Attorney then read the affidavit Of Robert
Ogden Doremus, in which he Indignantly denies that he,
either in the court room or anywhere ese said that Mr.
Cushing had msrepresented him; he also states that he
does not rccolect believe that Mr.. Gonk, another
juror had told him that physician had said that his (Dr
ID. the most complete he had
The District Attorney next read the affidavit of Mr.
Marsh deny that he had ever had such conversation
with Dr. Doremus as that referred to in the affidavit Of
Mr. Murray.
Mr. Gonk's affidavit denies that he had ever said
to DR.. Doremus that physician had told him that Dr.
D. analysis was the most complete he had seen,
and adds that he does not beeve that had
The District Attorney asked Mr.. Ashmead IL the jury
not permitted 10 separate at his Mr. A) request
MIR. Ashmead repiied-No, cir.
The District Attorney then put in his affidavit TO the
thatM H. AShxn
being kept together and that he he District Attorney
did not at any time move that they should be allowed to
separate .u, +,
which am COUNSEL but will say the facts are not a.
stated in the affidavit Just read Mr. A. then said that in
reference 70 the affidavit Of Dr. Doremus, II s not posi-
tive affidavit, but evasve one and such the Court in
the case of the People Douglas, COwan refused 10
entertain Dr. Doremus does not state that he did not
verse with juror but says that he did not say certain
things 10 him. He DR. d. does not pretend 70 say that
he did not with the jurors but sweas to the best
his recollection and belief that Mr. Gonck did not 10
him that physician told him that his (Dr d. s analysis
was the complete he r d. contents himself with
general declaration that he did not attempt To amper
with the Jury Mr. Ashmead continued TO contend that
any with Juror In reference to the case
pending before them was sufficient 70 invadate the yer
to influence the jury he submitted that the defendant was
entitled TO new trial.
The Court did not desire TO have argument in reply
Mr.. Gushing was about to address the Court, when
Judge Roosevelt said that the Court had decided To hear
but counsel each eide Mr. Gushing excepted 10 the
ruling.
The Court said that the counsel could not except.
Mr.. Ashmead said they could make their exception.
whether II entertained by this Court or not They
might have the benefit Of it elsewhere. Mr. A. then read
their reasons why motion for a new trial should be
granted, some Of which TO the folio wing effect
That the Judge erred in permitting letter TO be referred
to which had nothing to do with this trial, but which
mad reference to the marriage Of Sophia Bell
that the Judge erred in admitting the anonymous letter
evidence and in introducing into the charge Of the Court
and commenting on IT, telling the jury that IL was of Soon
ltnn tvnnnv hat nj
erred not taking notes Of the evidence, thus deprvng
the prisoner Of right TO them in a motion for trial.
that the Court erred in introducing and commenting
the evidence for the prosecution and omng TO Introduce
his charge the principal evidence for the prisoner that
the Court erred in refusing attachment for Richard
Stephens who important witness for the defence.
Judge Roosevelt having consulted with his assocates)
said-I good reason for changing the opinion
tertained the trial. and the motion is overruled.
The District Atttorney-I understand that the Court
thinks is not necessary for the prosecution TO reply
Mr. Ashmead then proceeded to submit his reasons for
Mr. Cushing again asked the Court to grant new trial
on the exceptions TO be found in the minutes.
The Court had already ruled not TO hear more than
counsel on each side NJ. Cushing eycerted
Mr.. Ashmead then made the same motion.
Judge Roosevelt said that the whole matter could be
taken 70 the general term and argued before the period
settled for execution II the general term see thai the
verdict is against the weight Of evidence they will
doubtedly overrule IT, This Court denies the motion
stating that there s ground for new trial Exception
The bill Of exceptions TO be settled by the Court and
counsel hereaer) were then banded up a
davt on which an attachment against Richard stephens
was asked for and denied.
The District Attorney then moved for the Judgment of
the Court.
The Clerk in the usual FORM told the prisoner to rise
and asked him what he had say why sentence Of death
should not be pronounced against him according TO aw
The prisoner said-I have very little TO say am be-
fore three or four judges and what might say would
not alter it, The only thing sayI very soon to go
before higher Judge, who knows the Of hearts
and hope that may go there.
IHE SENTENCE DKAnI.
The Judge then sood up, and proceeded to pass tho
following sentence
xJames StcphensYou have been indicted for the crnc
Of murde,-the highest crime known to the law. You
have had laborious, careful and impartial trial Your
Defence in all its aspects, has been listened to with un-
examped patience and forbearance. The greatest pains
and expense have been taken and incurred to deveopc
the truth asity Of the charge against you Even the
dead body Of the VICTIM twelve months after it's inter
ment has been raised from the grave and made speak
It's language. although TO the multitude an unknown
ngue was rendered clear and intelligent by the aid OF
most sklful ntcrpreter-one whom your own counsel
Justly denominated ''thc chemist well of the prisoner
as Of the people," It's speech, thus interpreted was
death by arsenous poison" II could answer no further
Who administered the fatal drug question TO be sov.
cd only by the more ordinary testimony living witnesses