New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-11-02
LEGAL COMPLICATIONS.

Howeyerthe case may be in Virginia, here in New
York il is one thing 10 convict man of murder,
ard quite another to hang him. This is curiously
illustrated in the case of Quimbo Apo, the China
man. This Quimbo Apo, sometime IN March last,
killed by sudden blow with dagger, woman
who had interiered in q matrimonial quarrel be-
tween himself and his wife. lie was forthwith ar
rested, duly indicted, and in April last was put
On trial in the Court of Oyer and Terminer, Judge
Davies presiding. He was defended by ex-Judge
Stuart ard after the hearing of the witnesses and the
summing up of the case, was found by the Jury
guilty Of murder, but was recommended by them
to the mercy of the Court In passing sentence at
the close of the Term, the Judge referred to this
recommendation TO mercy, but stated that the
Court was not the tribunal TO which the prisoner
could appeal for any alienation OF his punishment,
referring him to the Executive the proper source
to which to apply, after which sentence of death
was passed upon him.
The newspapers in commenting at the time on
this trial. noticed one remarkable fact about it. 1t
was finished in a single day-a degree of dispatch
quite unprecedented Of late years in capital trials
in this city. However, the ease was not 10 end
there. A postponement of the execution was OBJ
tanned and meanw bile an application was made to
the Court of Oyer and Terminor, Judge Roosevelt
presiding, for a new trial
The grounds of this application were something
novel in criminal jurisprudence. They were, in
substance. that so good a defense had not been
made for the prisoner as the case admitted OF.
Certain afiidays were put in, going to show that
the prisoner was acting in seli-decnse against an
attack made on him BY number Of women, and
that il was in this melee that the homicide was
committed The District-Attorney denied in the
first place that this Court of Oyer and Terminer
had any power to grant new trials at all; and
secondly. if it had that this was fit occasion
for exercising it. 1t insisted, and with great
urgency that this was precisely one of those cases
| which the prerogatse OF pardon given to the
Governor was intended to meet, that, if there were
mitigating circumstances in this case, and If it
| could be shown that, owing TO the ignorance and
poverty of the prisoner. as was alleged these mti
eating circumstances had failed to be brought fully
before the Jury that matter to be laid before
| the Executive. Judge Roosevelt, however, did
| not yield TO these arguments. According to the
| practice said to be common TO all Judges, OF am
pting their jurisdiction, and particularly in use
here in New-York, he held that he had full power
to grant Il new trial; and further, that this was
proper case for granting one
When, however, that new trial is to BE- had, If
had at ALL is yet, very uncertain. The District
Attorney, not pleased with the prospect OF being
obliged after every verdict of guilty to meet SINH
lar application for new trial, still insists that the
Judge is wrong in claiming the power to grant one
To bring that question to the test he has resorted
10 the expcdient Of obtaining wit of prohibition
from the Supreme Court, forbidding either Judge
Roosevelt, OF Quubo Apo himself, to proceed
any further in this matter of new trial TIL this
point of the right of the Court of Oyer and Term-
ner 10 grant il has first been settled. AS this writ
of prohibition is very unusual process il is prob
able that many doubtful questions Will arise as TO
The proper method of proceeding under it. From
the Supreme Court these questions may go UP 10
the Court of Appeals, and Apo stands fair
chance 10 die of old age before his case is finally
I lof