Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1883-04-03
DEATH THRICE DODGED.
THE RARE GOOD FORTUNE OF
A MISSOURI MURDERER.

brought there upon a writ of error from
the Supreme Court of that State.
kring, the plaintiff in error, on
January 4, 1915, shot and killed a
woman named Dora BrOesers. At the
March term of the st. Louis Grim inal
Court in the same year he was indicted
for murder in the first degree, tried, and
found guilty and sentenced to be hanged.
Upon an appeal the judgment of the
Criminal Court was reversed, and a new
trial ordered. Two more trials followed,
in both of which the jury failed to agree.
Upon the fourth trial the prisoner made
an arrangement with the States ATTORNEY
to plead guilty to murder in the second
degree upon condition that his
sentence should be Imprisonment for
a period of not longer than
ten years. Under this plea, however, he
was sentenced to Imprisonment for twen-
ty-6ye years. He again appealed and the
judgment of the lower courts was reversed
by the Supreme Court, and the cause was
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, whereupOn the court ordered a 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. lie appealed successfully to
the Court of Appeals and to
the, Supreme Court of the State.
In both of these tribunals the Judgment
and sentence of the court below were af-
firmed. Sentence was then ordered to be
executed February "a, 1882, but before
that time Judge Miller, of the Supreme
Court, granted writ of error and the
case was brought here for final review.
-
Missouri in force at the time the offence
was committed and the indictment found
the prisoner could not be tried for murder
in the first degree after he had been con-
victed of, or pleaded guilty to murder in
the second degree, but under the consti-
tuition of 1915 as construed by the Su-
preme Court of Missouri one indicted
for murder in the first degree and con-
Victed or sentenced on plea of guilty of
murder in the second degree may be
again tried tor murder in the first degree
in case of an appeal and reversal. 1t
was cOntended in all the courts by the
prisoners counsel that section of
the State constitution of 1879 adopted sub
sequent to the time the offense was COM
mited, and subsequent to the finding of
the indictment, could not be applied to
the prisoners case; that it changed the
punishment; that it was an er post fdctO
law. and as such repugnant to
the Constitution of the United
States. Justice Miller, in long
and carefully written opinion.
rendered the decision of this court, which
may be briefly summed up as follows:
''Weare of the opinion that any law passed
after the commission of an Offense which,
in relation to that Otfense, or its con-
sequences, alters the situations of the
party to his disadvantage, is an er
post tdctO law. No one can be
cl iminally punished in this country eX-
cept according to the law prescribed for
his government by the sovereign author-
ty before the imputed Offense was COM
mitted, and which existed as the law at
the time. The provision of the cOnstitu-
tiOn of Missouri which denies to
the plaintiff in error the
benefit which the previous law gave him
of acquittal of the chaIge of murder in the
first degree on conviction Ofmurder in the
second degree is, as to his case, an er post
tdctO law within the meaning of the Con-
StitutiOn of the United States, and for the
error of the Supreme Court of Missouri in
holding otherwise, its judgment is reversed
and the case remanded to it with direc-
tiOns to reverse the judgment of the
Criminal Court of st. Louis, and for such
further proceedings as are not incOnsist-
ent with this opinion
Chief Justice Waite and Justices Brad
ley, Gray and Matthews dissented.
This decision, rendered by a bare ma
jOrity of one, finally relieves the prisoner
from the sentence of death. which has
been hanging over him for the past seven
years.
SAVANNAH HELD TO IT'S BOND.
A decision was also rendered in the
bond case of the Mayor and Aldermen of
the city of Savannah, Ga, against Eugene
Kelly, which was a suit to enforce the
guarantee of the city endorsed upon a
series of bonds Of the Savannah,
Albany and Gulf Railroad issued i'm
1859. The court held that the act
of the State Legislature of 1888
authorized the guarantee made by the
city of Savannah upon the bonds of the
railroad company and that it constitutes
valid and subsisting liability. The
Judgment of the Circuit Court is therefore
affirmed. The Chief Justice announced
to the bar this afternoon that the United
States Supreme Court would discontinue
hearing of arguments April 9th, and
would adjourn for the term May I.
DECISION REVERSED.
A decision was also rendered by the
court in the tax case of the Memphis and
Charleston Railroad Company against the
United States. 1t was brought here upon
writ of error from the United States Cir
cult Court for the Western District of
Tennessee. This was a suit instituted by
the United States to recover taxes
alleged to be due from the
company under the revenue
acts of 1862, 1864 and
1866. on account of interest coupons
and dividends paid between July 1, 1862,
and January l, 1866. This court holds,
first, that it was not valid defense of 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 the income derived from its
use was actually paid out by the company
in dividends to its stockholders and to
discharge the corporate debts for interest,
and was therefore liable to the tax. 1t
would have been proper for the court be-
low to direct a verdict for the United
States which was given in this branch of
the case.
Second. Where it appears, as in the
second branch of this case, that at the
end of the civil war, during which the in
terest has fallen in arrears and the earn
ings have been substantially suspended,
the company in reOrganizing its affairs
for future business either funds its past
due coupons in new issue of bonds or
pays them from the proceeds of the sales
of new bonds. Such facts constitute
complete offset TO suit for the recovery
of the tax charged on such payment of
interest.
Third. The compromise made between
the United States and the company IN
1870 was, as shown by the papers in evil
dence, confined to the claims of the Unit
ed States for taxes and penalties grow
ing out of the interest which matured be-
tween May, 1866, and July, 1869. The
judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed
and the cause remanded for such further
proceedings, not inconsistent with the
opinion of this court as justice may re-
quire. The opinion is by Chief Justice
Waite.
ANOTHER RAILROAD CASE.
A decision was also delivered to-day in
another case affecting this same railroad,
viz: the Memphis and Charleston Rail-
road Company, against the State of Ala
bama for use of Jackson county. This
was an action brought by the State in one
of its courts against the railroad COM
pany, whose road passed through
its limits, to recover the amount of
the county tax assessed upon the roads
property. The question raised here is
whether the suit was removable from
the State TO the Federal courts on the
ground that the railroad was a corpora
tiOn of Tennessee. This court holds that
the Memphis and Charleston Railroad
bama an Alabama corporation, and
although previously incorporated in Ten
nessee, it cannot remove into the Circuit
Courts of the United States suit brought
against il in Alabama by citizens of Ala
mi 8 4 - n.