National Republican., 1883-04-03
THE SUPREME COURT.
A Missouri Murderer Escapes the Rope After
Being Under Sentence Seven Years,
A Largo Number OF other Cases Decided
Submitted Cases.

A Largo Number Of other Cases Decided
Submitted Cases.
A decision was rendered by tho United
States supreme court yesterday in the inter-
csting criminal case of Charles f. kring,
plaintitr in error against the state of Missouri,
brought here upon writ of error from the
supreme court of that state. Kring, the
plaintiff in error, ON Jan. 4, 1915, shot and
killed a woman named Dora Brocnser. At
the March term Of the st. Louis criminal
court in the same year he was indicted for
murder in the first degree, tried, found
guilty, and sentenced TO be hanged Upon
appeal the Judgment of the criminal court
was reversed and new trial ordered. Two
moro trials followed, in both Of which the
Jury iailcd to agree. Upon the fourth trial
the prisoner made an arrangement with
the states attorney to plead guilty OF
murder in the second degree upon condition
that his sentence should be imprisonment
for a period not longer than ten years.
Under this plea, however, he was sentenced
TO Imprisonment for twenty-five years. He
again appealed and the judgment of the
lower courts was reversed by the supreme
court and the cause a second time remanded.
Upon his next trial the prisoner refused to
withdraw his plea of guilty of murder in the
second degree or TO make any other plea,
whcl eupon the court ordered plea of not
guilty to be entered for him, and he was
again tried for murder in first degree, found
guilty, and sentenced to DEATH He appealed
succcssivcly to tho court of appeals and TO the
supreme court of tho state. In both OF these
tribunals the Judgment and sentence of tho
court below were affirmed. The sentence
was then ordered to be executed Feb 2i, 1852,
but before that time Judge Miller, OF the
United States supreme court, granted writ
of error aud thS case was brought mere Tor
final review.
Under ths constitution and laws of Mis-
souri, in force at the time the otfenso was
committed and the indictment found, the
prisoner could not be tried for murder in tho
frs degree after he had been convicted or
pleaded guilty of murder in tho second de-
gree, but under the constitution of 1870 as
construed by the supreme court OF Missouri
one indicted for murder in the first degree
and convicted, or sentenced on plea Of
gull y of murder in the second degree, may
he again tried for murder in the first degree
in case of an appeal and reversal.
1t was contendcd in all the courts by the
prisoners counsel that the section of the state
constitution of 1875 adopted subsequent to
the time the oiiense was committed and sub
seQuent to tho finding of the indictment,
could not be applied to the prisoners case !;
that IL changed the punishment; that 1t was
an ex post iaCto law and as such repugnant to
the constitution of the United States.
Justice Miller, in a long and carefully
written opinion, rendered the decision of this
court, which may be summed up as follows;
ave are of opinion that any law passed
after the commission of an oflense, which, in
relation to that otiense or its consequences,
alters tho situation of party to his disad-
vantage, is an eX post facto law. No one can
be criminally punished in this country eX-
cept according to u law prescribed for his gov
ornment by the sovereign authority before
the imputed oifense was committed, and
which existed as law at the time.
The provision of the constitution of Mis-
souri, which denies to the plaintiff in error the
benefit which the previous law gave him OF
ncduittal of the charge of murder in the first
degree on condition of murder In the second
degree, is, as TO his case, an ex post tacto law
within The meaning of the constitution Of the
United States and for the error of the su.
preme court of Missouri in holding otherwise
its Judgment is reversed and the case re.
manded to it with directions to reverse the
Judgment of the criminal court OF st. Louis
and for such further prOCeedingsas are not in-
consistent with this opinion"
Chief Justice Waite and Justices Bradley,
Gray, and Matthews dissented.
This decision, rendered by bare majority
of one finally relieves the prisoner from the
sentence of death, which has been hanging
over him for the past seven years.
A decision was also rendered in the tax
case of the Memphis and Charleston railway
company against the United States, brought
here upon a writ of error from the United
States circuit court for the western district OF
Tennessee This was a suit instituted by the
ia1 n tnXn9 ALLEGED
duo from the company under the revenue acts
of 1862 1864, and 1866, on account of interest
coupons and dividends paid between July l.
1862. and Jan. l. 1866.
This court hOds--frst, that ii was not o
valid defense for the company to show that
its income during the time specified came
from property which was within confederate
territory The property, although within the
confederate lines, belonged to the company,
and tho income derived from its use was
actually paid out by the company in dividends
to stockholders, and to discharge the cor
poratc debts for interest aud was, therefore
liable to tax. 1t would have been proper fol-
the court below to direct the verdict for the
United States, which was given in this branch
of tho cas- :; second, where it appears, as in
the second branch of this case, that Mt the end
of civil war, during which interest has
fallen in arrears and earnings have been
substantially suspended, the company, in re-
organizing ltS aIlAlfS lOr lulUfc business
either funds its past due coupons in n new
Issue of bonds or pays them from the pro-
ceeds of the sales of the new bonds, such
facts constitute n complete defense to suit
for the recovery of tax charged on such
payments OF interest. Third the compromise
made between the United States and the com
pany in 1870 was, as shown by the papers in
evidence confined to the claims of the United
States for taxes and penalties growing out o
the interest which matured between May
1866, and July, 1869, The judgment of the
circuit court is reversed and tho cause re-
manded for such further proceedings, not in
consistent with the opinion of this court, as
justice may require. Opinion by Chief Jus
ticc Waite.
decision was also rendered in another
case affecting this same railway, viz, the
Memphis and Charleston Railway company
against the state Of Alabama for tho use o
Jackson county. This was an action brought
by the state in one of 8 courts against the
railway company, whose road passed through
its limits, TO recover the amount of county
tax assessed upon the ROADS property. The
question raised here is whether tlo suit wa
removable from the state to the fedora
courts on the ground that the railway was
corporation Of Tennessee. This court hold,
that tho Memphis and Charleston Railway
company is made by the statutes of Alabami
an Alabama corporation, and although pre-
YiOusly incorporated in Tennessee IL CannO
remove into the circuit courts of the United
States suit brought against it in Alabami
by citizen of Alabama. The decree Of tn,
circuit court Is affirmed, Opinion by JustiC