The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-05-11
The Trial of winnemore.

The TRIAL Ol
TuR trial of George w. Winnemore for the
murder of Mrs. Magilton, was concluded yes
terday by the jury's bringing in verdict of
entity of murder in the first degree We
have no comments to make on this verdict,
but in the interests of justice we feel that
some comments ought to be made upon the
manner in which this trial has been con-
duoted. We think that no unprejudiced OBJ
server who has carefully watched the pro-
ceedings in this case, has failed to be i'm
nressed with the conviction that Winnemore
has not had such trial as every person
charged with great crime, and whose life is
in jeopardy, ought to have.
In the first place, there has been an undue
and almost unprecedented haste in the trial ot
this man. Mrs. Magilton was murdered on
the 25th of April and on the same day Winnie
more was arrested as the perpetrator. The
next day he was held for trial. Two days
afterwards, on the 29th, the matter went
before the Grand Jury. On the Sd of May the
prisoner was brought into Court, and as he
had no counsel the Court assigned two gentle
men to conduct the defense. In despite of the
repeated protestations of the counsel of the
prisoner, he was hurried to trial. Sufficient
time was not allowed to the prisoner to pre-
pare defense, if he had any. His counsel
were evidently embarrassed and crippled by
want of time, and the defense was only such
as could be made upon the spur of the
moment
Now, the question arises, why all this haste
Why could not reasonable time have been
given this man and his counsel to prepare his
case? Even if guilty, he was safely confined
in prison, where he could do no harm. Sup
pose his case had gone over to the next term
of Court, where would have been the harm
Some months ago man was shot dead in
open Court in this city, in the presence of the
Court and of hundreds of witnesses. The man
who did that deed has not get been tried.
Yet his guilt was open, and beyond all ques-
tiOn.
Here is man rushed to trial, and convicted
on circumstantial evidence alone, within two
weeks after the alleged commission of the
offense for which he was tried. If justice did
murdered man in open Court, how did it of
WinnemOre, who was only suspected of muir
derH Perhaps new leaf is to be turned over
in our criminal jurisprudence; but if so, we
would suggest that the docket be first cleared
of some of its old cases. Did the District At
torney intend to make Winnemore sacrifice
to popular impatience with delays in the
past Perhaps the cue to his course
In this case may be found in his
remark 'that if Gottlieb Williams had
been hung at once this murder would not
have been committed, and that the surest way
OF preventing future crimes was the speedy
execution of the guilty" But the interests
OF justice will never be promoted by trials
which do not command the confidence of the
community. The speedy conviction and pun
shment of criminals is doubtless desirable.
but the enjoyment by the accused of all neces-
sary facilities for fair trial is of infinitely
greater Importance. We most sincerely
regret that in this case the eonUic-
ion does not carry with it that
moral weight in the community which is so
desirable and so essential to anv healthy
public influence. Winnemore may be guilty
we do not express any opinion on that point
but the feeling of large portion of the com.
munity is that he did not have fair chance
to make his defense.
1t seemed to be assumed from the start that
he was to be held guilty until he proved him.
self innocent, instead of the good old rule
that he was to be deemed innocent unit
proved to be guilty.