The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-03-10
THE CAR HOOK MURDER.

Another Effort save Foster from Hang.
ing-MOtiOn for n Stay of Proceedings
Before Judge Barrett OF the Supreme
COurt-DecisiOn Reserved.
motion was made yesterday before Judge Bar.
rett in the Supreme Court Chambers for stay Of
proceedings in the case OF william Foster, SO as to
allow the same to 60 to the Court Of Appeals. In
May last, as Will pc remembered, Foster was con-
vicled of murder in the first degree for tho
killing OF Avery D. Putnam with q car
hook as the latter was leaving q Broad.
way car at the corner OF Twenty-sixth street.
Judge Cardozo before whom he was tried, sentenced
MN TO be hanged on the 10th Of July. Application
was Immediately made to all the Judges OF this dis
trct for stay OF proceedings to enable an appeal
to the General Term, which Application was re-
fused. Judge Pratt, of Brooklyn, however, granted
the stay, and an argument on the appeal TO the
General Term heard before Judges Ingraham,
Barnard and Brady. The Court refused TO grant u
new trial, and Foster was re-sentenced to be
named as the DAY Of execution. Mr.. Nj. q. Bartlett
and ex-Judge John X. Porter appeared Tor the
motion and DISTRICT Attorney Garvin In opposition.
Foster was not present, but the court room was
cr0wded, and the argument OF the various counsel,
lasting some two hours was listened 10 with deep
interest. Pretty much the same line OF argument
was followed as at the hearing before the General
MIR. Bartlett made the opening argument. AFTER
recltlng the acts Of the homicide he insisted That
Foster was brought to trial with inconsidera,e
there was any vital difference the intent with
which the blow was struck: Judge Cardozo. ne
commended, by his rulings, deprived Foster Of his
constitutional right Of trial by jury, and he insisted
that he was still entitled to trial. He enlarged
the statutes regarding felony and the difference
between murder III the first anu second degrees
III Foster was hung 1t would be- In his view, nothing
more nor less Than judicial murder. He concluded
with reviewing the written opinions OF Judges
lngranam and Brady In the case.
District Attorney Garvln recited the facts Of the
homicide put with Inherent Interpretation from
that OF the prisoners counsel. He cited various
similar cases, very many OF them to be found the
English law reports, and claimed that upon the
facts Judge Card0zo was legally bound to charge
the jury he did and the jury to find the verdict
they did. 1t was very natural Fosters counsel
shOuld make every effort that lay In their power TO
save his llie but palmer case 0f deliberate muir
der, he urged, was not on record. He defended
the Judgment OF the General Term, and insisted
That the should nal, and that the MAJESTY OF
the law should now be fully vindicated In the nang
Ing " Foster In accordance with the magnitude OF
has crime and MS deserts
Judge Porter concluded the argument. lie char
acterzed Judge Cardoz0's charge as monstrous
Fosters act, he Claimed, was only felony. He re-
viewed some OF the cases cited by the District At
torney, giving them widely different interpreta-
ton from the latter gentleman. he also re-
ferred to the statutes regarding deadly
weapons and their applicability to Fosters
case He urged that the General Term judges mad
erred In their Judgment and expressed It as his
convection that n an opportunity was granted them
To take the 10 the Court OF Appeals the latter
Court would. without nesltancy, grant new trial.
The Court took the papers, reserving its decision.