The New York herald., 1879-02-26
GRAHAM'S CASE.

THE NEW JERSEY ATTORNEY GENERAL ASKS
THE SUPREME COURT 10 ORDER HIS RELEASE
IN CONSIDERATION OF HIS TESTIMONY, UPON
WHICH HUNTER WAS CONVICTED OF THE ARM
STRONG MURDER.
TRENTON, N. j., Feb. 25. 1879.
In the Supreme Court to-day the of Graham.
the accompce of benjamin Hunter in the murder
of John NJ. Armstrong ut Camden. called. At
torney General stockton appeared in behalf of the
State. He stated that Graham had turned States
evidence and used witness against Hunter
his being the main evidence upon which Hunter was
convicted. The State having used such evidence it
contrary to all proceedings in law both in Eng
land and this country to prosecute the witness. He
argued that although the Prosecuting Attorney of
Camden county did not promise Graham any
immunity. yet. by accepting his evidence. and
State bound to be lcnient TO the prisoner by all
its customs, usages and known applications of the
law. lie quoted the decision Of Lord Mansfield in
1915, in which he decided that where the testi-
mony Of an accomplicc was taken and used
the witness ought not to be prosecuted.
Io tthc Attorney General had addressed note 70 tho
Prosecuting Attorney of Camden county, asking
under what circumstances he accepted the evidence
of Graham. and tho reply was that he deemed
his evidence necessary for the conviction of
Hunter. and he induced Graham to make
confession, such confession being made
an implied promise that the lenicncy OF
the law should be invoked in his bchalf although
before before this Court is Was GraLams testimony used
and was it given In good faith lie claimed
that az promises were held out to Graham.
and that as his testimony was necessary
to convict IL would be act of great
injustice II the State did not act lcnently toward
him. lie also argued that IL was against tho policy
OF the State to prosecute person who brought TO
light the secrets OF great crime. cv2h though hc
himsclf be participant lie referredto the Warren
county frauds in this State, whore six men in
dicted and of these turned States
evidence and through his testimony the other
fivo were convicted and he let Free lie thought 10
just law, and one 70 prove bcneft TO the
community at large. lie quoted from many legal
authorities. both in this country and in England, to
sustain his argument. He also said that IL Graham
was brought to trial the testimony which
he gave against Hunter would DO used as
against himself. thereby leaving him defence
and no hope. save through the Court OF Pardons.
The Attorney General was brief in his argument,
aud said he was willing TO leave the question with
tho Court to whether the prisoner should be
prosecuted under existing circumstances Contrary
ask that Grahams plea OF murder In the second
degree should be accepted but that he should not
be prosecuted at all.
aRAHAMs COUNSEL.
Mr. Peter Scovcl said that he and his colleague ap
pcarcd as counsel for Graham, acting such under
direction of the Court, having been assigned
given the substance OF the decisions Of
the Court, which he tNIr. scoyep believed
to be correct and to be the law at the
present day. The prisoner had made full
accepted and was essential to the conviction of
Hunter and would be absolutely necessary In the
against Graham.
The Attorney General submitted his authorities,
among which were. The Commonwealth Va. Knapp,
10 Pickering. 4y2; opinion of Judge Howard in IL
Howard, 3o7 LIST Chitty. Criminal Law, pages, 80.
starkie's Evidence, 10. 10; Phillips on Evidence. 20
| and 30.
The Court took the papers and reserved decision.