Arizona weekly citizen., 1883-04-15
TEN TIMES IN JEOPARDY. AND NOT YET
 nrrrnFn


 4 most remarkable murder trial, in
 which the prisoner was four times con- victed of murder in the first degree, once sentenced to the penitentIary for twenty-five years, but at last his case
 weut to the Supreme Court of the United States, on judgment and sen
 tence of murder in the first degree.
 which has jnst been reversed by that
 court. About eight years ago, Charles
 F. Kring, druggist of St. Louis, shot
 aud fatally injured Mrs. Dora Bromstr.
 his partners wife, because she refused
 to elope with him. Mrs. Bromser died
 soon after, when Kring was arrested and
 indicted for murder in the first degree
 He was tried in 1875 and verdict of
 gnilty was returned, and he wss seD-
 teuced to be hanged m March, 1S76 A
 new trial was granted and he was tried
 a second time in May, 1878. The argu-
 ment for the defense was going on when one of the jurors was taken sick and the case was adjourned. In January, 1879, the third trial began, and the jury being unable to agree, were discharged. In
 the following April, tue defendant fail ing in health secured for him the free dom of the jail Aoor-previous to this time he had been confined in a cell On agreement with Mir. Ludue, who was then Circuit Attorney, the plea of not guilty was withdrawn and a plea cf guilty of murder in the second degree ! was entered, upon condition that his ! sentence should be imprisonment fer ten years. He appealed to the Supreme Court of Missouri, and the judgment of | the lower court was reversed and the l case remanded. Upon his next trial, the prisoner refused to withdraw his | plea of guilty of murder in the second i degree, or to make any plea, where IpOn l the court ordered a plea of not 1 guilty to be entered for him, | aud he was again tried for murder in the | first degree, found guilty, and sentenced | to death. He appealed successively to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme | Court of the State. Tn both of these l tribunals the judgment and sentence Of the court below were affirmed. The | sentence was then ordered to be exc cuted in February, 1882; but before that time, Judge Miller, of the United States Supreme Court, granted a writ of error, and the case went before the Supreme | Court of the United States for final re- vIew. Under the constitution and laws of Missouri, in force at the time the crime was committed and the indict- meut found, the prisoner could not be tried for murder i'll the first degree after be had been convicted or pleaded guilty of murder in the second degree but under the constitution of 1875, as con strued by the Supreme Court of Mis- souri, one indicted for murder in the first degree, and convicted, or sentenced on plea of guilty of murder in the sec ond degree, may be again tried for mur- der in the first degree, in case of an ap- peal and reversal. 1t was contended in all the courts by the prisoners counsel that the section of the State Constitu- tion of 1875, adopted subsequent to the time the ofTense was committed and sub to the finding of the indictment, could not be applied to the prisoners zasv, tnET II changed the punishment; that 1t was an ex post facto law, and, as such, repuguant to the constitution of the United States. Justice Miller, ID T long and carefully written opinion, rendered the decision of the court which may be briefly summed up as follows:
 "We are of opinion that any law passed after the commission of an of iense, which, in relation to that offense pr its consequences. alters the situation jf a party to his dlsadvantage, Is an ex- post facto law. No one can be crim- ually punished in this country except 1 according to a law prescribed for his government by the sovereign authority , before the imputed offense was com and which existed as law at the time. The provision of the cUnsti- tutIon of Missouri which denies to the plaintiff in error the benefit which the previous law gave him of &C., luittal of the charge of murder Tn the first degree on conviction of murder Tn the second degree Is, as to his case, an ex post facto law within the meaning of 1 the constitution of the United States, , and for the error of tre Supreme Court
 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 proceed Iugs as are not inconsistent with thIs opinion" Chief Justice Waite and Ju>tices Bradley, Gray, and Matthews iissented. This decision. rendered by bare majority of one, finally relieves the prisoner from the sentence of death . winch has been hanging over him for