The New York herald., 1872-11-19
A NEW TRIAL GRANTED R0sEN
ZWEIG.

Hearing Upon the Appeal to the General
Term OF the Snpreme COurt-The Con-
victiOn and Sentence i'm the Court OF
General Sessions Set Aside and New
Trial Ordered.
On the morning OF the 23d Of August, 1871, Alice
Augusta Bowlsby left her aunt's house, in Newark,
N. j.. TO visit this city. From that time she was
never seen alive by any OF her friends or relatives
The story, published a few days later in the
HERALD, OF the finding OF q trunk at the Hudson
River Railroad, left there to be sent to Chicago,
but which. owing to the sckenng smell emanat-
ing from 1t, was opened and found to contain the
mutated remains OF young woman. thrilled the
public with horror. The rest OF the story and all
its horribly atrocious details are still fresh in the
public memory. There was supposed distinct
TRACING OF THE CRIME
to Rosenzweig the alleged aoOrtionist. Upon hts
arrest he at once employed Mr.. William +. Howe as
his counsel, vino used his utmost legal ingenuity to
save him from the penalty of his alleged crime
After two months OF motions and counter
motions in the various Courts he was
al length placed on trial in the Court of
General Sessions. The indictment against him
was murder. The trial lasted six days. MI. Howe
fought zealously Tor his client but the chain OF evil
dencc fastened itself about the accused with such
| frmness that lie could not wholly escape its bind
ing letters. He was found guilty OF
| MANSLAuGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE
in the case of Dutch Heinrcts so in this. MI. Howe
| did not rest content with the judgment OF the
Court. He appealed to the Supreme Court Cen
| eral Term, and upon this appeal the case came up
| yesterday in this court for hearing, Judges In
graham, Leonard and Larned being on the bench.
| The
| was opened by Mr.. Ira Shaer, and made wholly
on the exceptions taken to the rulings at the trial
! by Mr.. Howe The first point was that there was
| no evidence that Miss Bowlsby was with child ;
| the second, that the Court erred In charging the
Il itryf fhat thau mt inf nr 1aCd nfav,
than that charged in the indictment, and the third,
that it was error on the part of the Court in de-
| Gliding that the Onus was upon the defendant to
/ SHOW that the abortion was necessary to preserve
| the life of the mother The point set forth as
the strongest point had reference to the testimony
| OF Nellie Willis, tnat Roscnweig had two years be-
fore the trial produced an abortion on her. 1t was
urged that the evidence was improperly received
/ first, because the denias Of the defendant were
/ conclusive upon the prosecution; second, because
the people could not contradict the defendants de-
| mails, as they related to collateral matters; third,
because the evidence tended TO the multiplication
OF issues and fourth, because the evidence was
highly prejudcial to the accused, and no doubt in
cured his conviction on the main charge. Numer-
GUS authorities were cited on all the points.
ARGUMENT IN RESPONSE.
The District Attorney took up the exceptions
seriatim. As to the evidence Of Nellie Willis, it
was insisted that the character OF the defendant
had been made an issue in the case and any evil
dence affecting that question was material. and
not collateral or irrelevant. II was urged further
that the question thus presented by the defence to
the jury was this:-"Is this defendant person
likely to have committed this crime? Would he
be likely to 40 tY IL is probable that good doctor,
reputable physician, graduate OF Warsaw Uni
yersity, Il man who has been in frequent consulta-
tlon with Or. Willard Parker and other eminent and
respectable physicians this man who has borne
an unhlemiShed character lOr six years IN this
community would be guilty OF this crime? II ii is
1 not probable, why, here in case where the evi-
4 dence against him is circumstantial, you should
/ acquit.r And this Court was called upon to say,
that in case where this issue is raised by the de-
4 fence; where, on crosse examination OF the wit
| ness prisoner, this defence is sought to be dis
| proved and rebutted by showing out OF his own
mouth that he had been for years the associate IN
business with divers proiessed abortionists, the
be allowed to show the true state OF the case by
| Contradicting him. IL Is only he further urged,
! where new matter is brought out on crosse Xami-
nation, and where that matter is collateral and
irrelevant, that the cross-eNamining party is
concluded. 1t was also competent to contradict
these material matters, with a view to at
tack and iilpeach his credibility as q witness.
prisoner, when he becomes q witness in the case,
wholly dyests himself OF his character and position
as prisoner, ana as iar as his testimony Is con-
cerned Is q witness merely. He can claim no privi-
evidence admitted under objection was otherwise
competent IL cannot be excluded on the ground
that ii attempts to show, does show, that the de-
endant has been guilty OF other and distinct el-
ONES. On the part OF the District Attorney there
were likewise abundant citations OF authorities.
DECISION or THE COURT.
! When the District Attorney had finished his
argument Mr. Sfaier to reply but Judge
Ingraham told him lie thought It was unnecessary
for him to speak any further, as he had no doubt
the Court had already made up its mind as TO the
disposition TO be made OF the case. The judges
talked in whispers for a few minutes aud then
Judge lngraham said that the application for q
new trial was granted.