The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1883-04-03

supreme court and the case second
time genandqIs UponfAis Eek rial the
paisafer refussd witlafleaw4his plea OF
aafffty of murder iii She ecqfa gree o.
to make another plea Thefedpon tlie
Court ordered the plea of not guilty to be
entered for him and he was again tried
for murder in the first degree, found
guilty and sentenced to death. He ap-
pealed successfully to the court OF appeals
and the supreme court of the state. In
both of these tribunals the judgment and
zssntsnee of me ponrt blow were affirmed.
TIE senteuee was then ordered to be exc
that time Judge Miller, of the United
States supreme court, granted a writ of
error, aid the case was brought here for
a final review.
Under the constitution and laws of Mis-!
souri atuthe time tAe offence WAS seemmit-
ted md the iadiatment found the prisoner
|eouldaaot bestrled for murder in the first
degree after he had been convicted or
pleaded guilty Of murder in the second des
gree; but under the constitution as CON
structed by the supreme court of Mis-
s0uri, one indicted for nAelfdeF in the first
degree and convicted or surrendered on a
plea of guilty of murder in the second de
gree, may be again tried for murder in
the first degree, in the case of an appeal
and reversal. 1t was contended IN all the
courts by the prisoners counsel
that that section of the state cons
stItuti0n 1875 was adopted; subse-
.Quentlg faa finding of an indictments
could not be applied to the prisoners case;
That it changed punishment. and that it
was an erp0st .fdcto law and as such re
pugnant to the constitution, of the United
States 8ka1l. efJtklH
Justice Miller in a long and carefully
written opinion rendered the decision of
this court. which may be briefly summed
as follows:
We afe of the opinion that any law
passedAfter thec0fnmission of an offense
which ihsrelatiQn 10 that offense or its con-
SEQUENCES alters the situation of the party
to his disadvantage, is an erpOst facto law
No one can be criminally punished in this
country except according to the law pro
vided for his government by sovereign aa-
thority, before which the imputed offense
was committed, and which existed as a
law at the time. The provisi on of the
CONSTITUTION of Missouri which denies to
plaintiff in error the benefit which the
previous law gave him of acquit-
tai of the charge of murder in the
jarstsebegree @ensp coupctioR ofEnupaer in
ahesseeond degree. us, IS 10 LIS case an
srpost. tacto Lag within tfelaneaning Of the
PROSTITUTION ths Unsted States and
fofesEor of rs Hlipreine court Of Mis-
sour fh holding; otherwise its Judgment
is reversed and the case remanded TO it,
with directions to reverse the Judgment
Of the crinaiaal asurt azaizzaSkr Louis and
Tor suelsothet pteceeaingsSas not in
consistent viii this opinion Chief Jus
tice Waite and Justices Bradley, Gray,
and Matthews dissented This opinion
was rendered by bare majority of one,
and.hnally relieves khe prisonef from the
senfenee of death. which has been4hang
ing over him for the past seven years.
The opinion of the attorney general
upen the question AS to whether the presi
dent can ill the vacancy caused by the
death of the postmaster general by tenn
porarg appoin tpent for q longer period
than ten days, +. said At The White House
to be substantially identical with the
opinion of General Devens. In that
opinion Devens held that the period for
which the vacancy can be filled by desig
nation is limited to ten days. 1T would
not, Therefore, "he-said, She in tile power
of the President after such ten days to
designate another officer or the same
officer to act for an additional period of
ten aays.~zHis statutory power being ex-
hausted the president is RENTED to his
constitutional power of appointment"