, 1873-06-14
THE STOKES CAgE,

Tho announcement that tho Now York Court
OF Appeals finally granted Stokes now trial has
occasloncd worry general surprise. Tho conduct
and evidence In tho caso passed mustor before
tho 6upreme Court. and it was thought that thero
had beon no technical flaws which would Justify
tile Court of last resort In ordering now trial.
Two opinions wore submitted, one by Justice
which conourrod in reversing tho Judgment Of
tho Court below. There syore three points on
which this decision was based: l. Tho Court be-
low had admitted evidence showing that Fisk had
made threats against Stokes lfo whoro tho pur-
pose Of tho ovidonce was to prove that theso
threats had come to Stokes ears, but 1t had OK
cluacd evidence Of threats Of which stokeH had
had 10 information. Tho appellate Court hold
tho exclusion to DO IN orror, because
tho evidence OF threats waa material. not only In
Justification Of Stokes, il he know at thon, but
as calculated to throw additional light on tho
question whether or not risk had made an At-
tempt to take Btokes' life. Threats On tho part
Of Fisk would DO equally important is evidence
threats or not. 2. Jennie Turner WAS witness
for tho accused. and gave important evidence.
In the croas-exam!nation, tho prosecution drow
out testimony in regard to the witness rola-
tions with her employers. Having drawn out
this evidence, tho prosecution was permitted to
put witness on tho stand to provo that Jennie
T,1nor'a auswors were untrue. :-hs was
held to be an orror, aa tho prosecution
must abide by the evidence elicitod from itH
oss-e1aminntion, instituted for the purpose Of
impairing the csedibility Of Witness. s. Tho
Court below charged that, "tho fact Of killing
in this case being substantially conceded, it be-
comes tho duty Of the prisoner horo to satisfy
you that 1t WAS not murder, which tho law would
imply from tho fact Of tho killing under tho cir
cumstances in the abEonce Of explanation that
it was manslaughter in tho third degree or jus
tidablo homicide" Tho Court Of Appeals hold
that this WAS throwing tho burden Of proof upon
definition OF murder in tho first degree in New
York renders intont nB essential to the crime aa
tho killing, and tho intont, therefore, must be
proved as well as tho not Of killing. These wore
tue grounds On which new trial wan ordered.
1T is possible TINT tho Court Of Appeals would
have ordered now trial on tho single error
found in tho charge to tho Jury, but judge
Growers opinion reversed tho Judgment of tho
Court below "for errors In rejecting competent
evidence offered by tho prisoner, and in rccoiy-
fnfy fnnc inn
Ia tho usual cause for tho royorsal Of judgments
| in criminal cases. The law Of evidence In this
| country Is 10 complicated and technical that o
| criminal trial never occurs which doaa not oGer
opportunities for exceptions to the ruling Of tue
| Judges and 1t is rarely TINT Homo ono or more
Of these exceptions concerning the improper ad-
mission or exclusion of oyldonco docs not Accure
| d reversal from tho higher court, and IN ordcl
for new trial. There ia mood OF Il
thorough revision and simplitlcation Of thoao
rulos Of evidence. As they arc now they aro
| constantly impeding tho course OF Justice. II
| thoy shal multiply within tho next fow yoars na
rapidly as they Lsve increased within the past
fow years, 1t will become simply impossible 10
| sccuro conviction in murder trial. no matter
| how plain case may be made out agninst tho
accused. The history Of tho Stokes oaHe Ia an
illustration OF tho danger. THAT THU WAS coa,
caso Of deliberate murtor scarcely admits OF q
doubt. Yet legal techuloalities have ologgoa tue
progress OF this trial ut every stop. First came
much wrangllng, was sustained. Then long
aud careful trial took place, in which 1ega
acumon WAS employed to confuse tho mindl
OF tho turors, aud tho rouult m.
disagreement. second trial occurred
With tho experie4ce Of tho first on both s!des ant