Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-11-24
DUNN AND MURPHY SENTENCED.
Judge WyIie Oyerrules the Motions for
New Trial.
HE GIVES HIS OPINION OF THE EVIDENCE OF ACCOM-
PLICES-A HAPPY DAY WHEN THREE-CARD MONTE
WAS DECIDED TO be LARCENY


In the Criminal Court to-day. before Judge Wvlte
the motion for new trials in the cases Of Thomas
Dunn and Robert Murphy We're argued. The for
mer was convicted in two cases OF larceny by means
OF three-card monte, and the latter in one case
Mr.. Chas. Pelham and Mr.. A. b. Williams appeared
for the defendants
The argument was Onenpd on the case in which
Inc delendanfS were Jointly indicted. by Mr. Pei
ham. who claimed that there was no cOrrolIration
81 ne Ieslnnony OF Leary, the accompltce, and
that the Jury We're influenced by the proceedings Of
tiit cltiIt rs committee. the chairman Of which
was present during the trial. Mr.. Pelham claimed
mat there had been no proof that there vas any
1raud III this game.
HAPPY DAY.
The court said that there was never a llaDpier
day than that Oh which the court came to the con-
clu>ion that three-caTd monte vas larceny. There
had never been such important results following n
decision lie said that the decision had broken up
q practice BY which ii was claimed the peOne had
been robbed annually of $2500t0
N.T. Pelham said that when the court 50 tlecidnd
tLeac rai tieo h3d given up the business.
TIE EVIDENCE OF AN ACCoMP!ICE.
The court said that he might have committed an
error in respect TO the weight to be given the ev-
dtncc OF an accomplish. The court would say
that It would he better not to convict on the EVIL
dence Of an acc0mplice: but il would not say the
Jury could not convict on such evidence. There
were many ways the jury could find confederation.
lhey could draw inIertnceS from the testimony Of
Then there was proof that these men were en-
q g'1 in this bliSinesS-cOmmittirg larceny under
TIE EtiSt ~ Il SaIne-in neighbJring state and
that tended 10 coTTObOrate the governments wit
neSStS. The question 10 how much credit should
hf given an acconpice belonged TO the jury. Then
there are other considerations. man II,av change
his course CT life and build up a character and an
other may have no such character Here are two
men incompetent, one with character and one
with none. ANA all the court could say to
The jury Was TO give such credit as
thyir testimony was enHtIed To. Although the
flle was 10 receive such evidence with suspicion
the court would not set aside the verdict. The
court could not tell how the jury found the cor
rODafatiVe testimony. The motion was Oyerruled.
MI lef III said they would note exception.
] he motion for " trial In Dunn'S case was
also formally 0veTried.
MURPHY DECLARES THAT HE Is INNOCENT.
The prisoners were called up for sentence and
Dunn said he had nothing to say, and Murphy pro-
Claimed his own innocence, saying that he was in
Baltimore on the day the larceny was alleged to
have been committed.
THE DEFENDANTS SENTENCED.
Judge Wylie said such points should have been
brought TO notice on the trial and the counsel in
formed of It. He then sentenced Murphy to two
years in the New Hampshire state prison. Dunn
received like sentence In one case and one year in
the other
MI Williams gave notice that he would take
the case to the General Term on exceptions. and
lhe execution OF the sentences were Suspended for
~ days beyond the next term.