New-York tribune., 1869-03-30
THE COURTS.
REAL, THE MURDERER.
ARGUMENT FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

ARGUMENT FOR A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS.
-, The argument for stay of proceedings in
e ease @ OF Shn Jon Real WHO d ca t Dc hpgeG $ on
was heard yesterday in the supreme Court Chambers
before Judge Sutherland, Judge Peckham, and Judge
Bedford The Court Ghat usually occupied by the
Court Of General Sessons) denseY crowded among
officials, and distinguished citizens
Judge Stewart opened the case for the appellant sub
which had ended in the sentence of his client death
The officer had cruelty and brutay beaten Real and had
prehenson Of another assault the time the fatal shots
were fired; that there was On afray between the
prisoner and the officer at the time OF the tragedy
and that the deed the result Of insanity produced
by intoIcaton delirium tremens These points had
been overruled at the trial. with the exception OF the
latter which was allowed to be partially proven.
Another point OF importance was the manner In which
had been controverted. When asked whether he had
ever been in the Penitentary, he had replied In the
Illegal, because the proof OF his Incarceration should
have come from the records. and not from himself
There was variance between the charge In the ndict
ment and the actual facts attending the death OF smedek
which, in ITSELF an error sufficient TO justify the
attending the trial. which, although honoraby conducted
ad done hS me En S S
The Hon. Samuel b. Garyin, DstrictAttorney replled
to Judge Stewart opposing the motion He reeapuated
many Of the circumstances attending the murder OF
Smedck and asserted that one witness for the defense
Che whose testimony had been ruled ouD had testified
that smedck and Real fighting at the time and his
testimony had been completely disproved by the test
mony OF all the other This bore the same
the prisoner He denied. therefore, that the re-
lection Of the testimony Of this who excon
Wet, was any ground OF error; M MT Garvln ,ha
prisoner proofs OF insanity, since the
actions Of man wOuld be judged differently by different
witnesses. He could no reason in all the alleged er
produced by the prisoners counsel why the stay OF
proceedings should he granted, and denied that any
Judge other the before whom the was org
inay tried had the right TO adudcate on he wl OF err
ror John Graham, esd, In reply, said that lie deemed
the execution OF human being Tor murueruohe OH
another repetition OF the crime In TINS case
proper testimony had not been admitted at the trial. ana
whether testimony which would have tended 10 reduce
the Nervousness OF the crime had not been rejected
A witness had been introduced by the defense
TO prove that Smedck had frequently Threatened the
prisoner, and that one occasion, when he tine PITS
Oner) had just been released from JAN had sad!
cned receive Here the rare spectacle OF Judge
charging jury to convict man OF murder when ne had
allowed TO introduce evidence showing hat te
decd committed IN self defense; Ihe detehse mao
been prepared prove that Smedick had acted toward
the prisoner bully and ruhan, rather
than as cOnservator OF the peace, and yet
been offered e&tenuating plea, ana a
witness prepared that Real the night OF the
murder, showed palpable signs o1 usouhdhess oI miu;
was in court 1t sought 10 examine this witness ana
in this case also the Court refused to hear nm Ihese
things amply sufficient TO justify the stay OF pro
ceedings The prisoner had been u1ustly dealt Win.
He was condemned FOR what he did, but for what he
said afterward The expression which lie nsed on
being arrested raceabe To insanity IL was the raw,
ing OF maGmah' hot inc p%aS'inE - ~ tronsftrtcd
murderer. The case had been uahsIeIitu
from the Court OF General SESSIONS to the
Court of Oyer and Terminer, so that writ
right Of an application. What was asked was that the
supreme Court and aferward the Court Of Appeals,
should pass their Judgment upon the case, ana ~ to
a fair and impartial trial. In conclusion the learned
counsel asked that the writ OF error be allowed IN order
that opportunity might be gwen the prisoner 10 prove
that the deed committed IN self fdefense Declsioh