Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1888-12-27

view AFA6tA al S%RkA1A S"op@-
In refusing The application for new
trial Of William ]. Calhoun Thursday, the
court, Though Chief Justice oomegys,
gave uttersneo to one sentence, the sig-
nitiosncs Of which could hardly have es-
capped the attention Of any Of the many
auditors present Il was substantially
that "whsrs II can bs shown that the
prisoner in capital case bas not had q
lair and full trial this court will not re-
fuse him . new hearing before jury"
This declaration was significant M the
reversal, by full bench, OF prior decia-
ration OF the court of Oyer and Terminer,
Judges Oomegys, Wootten and Whiteley
Sitting, made in the Ease Of Charles Rob-
inson on January 20th, 1886. On that
occasion, In refusing Robinson's applica-
ton for new trial, the chief justice said,
in substance:
The court has searched a lot OF authori-
ties but has been unable to and an example
OF new trial granted In capital case, ex-
cept In the English books. In this country
1t found no cases, except In states where
the courts had the authority OF a statute or
Of spsclA rule Of practice. There is no
sign OF al application for new trial In a
capital case in this State until 1854, when
an application was made In the case Of the
State vs. Wolfe. Applications were atter-
wards made In the cases OF Patrick Shea,
Turner, John j.. Psle, Abel RiRgs, Samuel
Chambers and George Collins, William
Neal, jeremiah Harrigan, and List and
List, all from New Castle county. In all
these cases the motions were refused. There
has never been but one application In Kent
and none In Sussex, and In none has it ever
boon granted.
The refusal Of new trial in the Rob
inaon case, however, did not tuEn on this
consideration, bat upon the question Of
the impeachment of the competency OF @
juror who had served ou the trial Intae
Neal case, the only capital onse apparently
On record where new trial has been had
in Delaware, the retrisl was ordered by
the Supreme court of the United States;
bscause it had been shown to the salts
faction OF that tribunal that negroes bad
been excluded frcm this panel from which
the first trial jary was drawn.
After few words Of concurrence, by
the late Judge Wootten, the chief Justice
proceeded to say, in considering the
Robinson application:
We have come to the conclusion that we
will not hear any further applications for
new trials in capital cases. There is strong
proof In our minds that thers 10 no warran,
Tor It. II is not done except In states where
there is statute expressly for 1t. The
court will hear no more such applications
The GAzErIT's readers will remember
that this declaration OF the court pro
dueed profound sensation at the Tins
and gave rise to agitation for remedial
Liquidation which, however, did not beal
fruit. That il did not was attributed ts
the facts that IL was not the declaration
of full bench and that the death Of
Judge Whitelsy and the appointment o.
Judge Grubb, shortly after, materisll,
changed the composition of the court be
fore the meeting Of the General Assembly
The effect of this change, which ha
since been made greater by the death 0
Judge Wootten and the appointment Q
Judge Payntsr, has since been seen ii
the continuance of the practice Of hear
ing applications for new trials, but tn
deliverance OF yesterday was the frs
rUutpispe rgsueshUn Of the ntseranoe {
! January Goth, 1886.