New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-01-26
MR.. SEMPLE W0RRIED BY CRITICISM

TIMES COMING AID GILDHRsLFEvE DO NOT LIKE
MS ACTIoH-DF PENDING HIMSELF.
Tho refusal Of Assistant District Attorney somple
20 mako any arguments to sustain tho Judgments OF
tho Court Of General Sessions In two cases taken on
appeaI before tho General OF the Supreme Court
was tho subject OF constant comment in the General
Sessions Building yesterday. Tho action OF tho CEN
oral Term In unanimously affirming Tho Judgments IN
spite of the fact that brief for tho people was pre-
scented taken showing that Dir. sompio was
mistaken in his views OF tho law. As to his nSht I'd
suggest that a verdict be set aside the officials familiar
with tho practice said that 1t always the custom
for tho District Attorney to support tho ruling OF the
courts I'm cases OF con, lotion Evidence was OHeTcd
by tho rlcAttorney. through his trial assistant
and tho same Dstrict-AttOrney, acting through an
other assistant, could not say that the Judge was
wrong In admitting tbs testimony.
Mr.. Sempe was worried by tho published CRITICISMS
of his conduct IIo was at the DStrlct-Attorncy's
Office all day. and spent part of the morning In pro
pairing q statement OF his opinions on tho dnty OF an
Assistant District Attorney In such cases. DISTRICT
Attorney Fellows left tho Office about noon having
been summoned home account OF tho serious SICK
ness OF his wife He said that he would connlt win
the Judges and until he had done so he would not
talk about Mr.. Semple's actions Mr.. Scmplo SAID III
explanation of his action on the appeals
al did not argue the De Leon nor McGrsth cases
before the General Term, nor submit briefs on mo
points, because thought tho judgment in each case
duty of prosecuting officer is to be frank and candid
with the Judges OF any court before which he may
appear. His duty IS that sf semlJudical officer.
The District Attorney who believes that defendant Is
entitled a trial would disregard the obligations
of his Office il he should argue against his own con
vctlons, however much at fault they may be- was
prompted by these considerations In not arguing tho
DO Leon and McGrath cases nor presenting briefs
"Whlle in Albany 70 argue tho DFisc9h case
before the Court OF Appeals, some time after MI
Nicoll and cx-Jude Comsock were there TO argue Tho
Sharp case, l mot OF the Judges OF tho General
Term. he asked mo If | intended 10 submit Drict
and points in tho DE Leon case said DID not for
the reason that OF The opinion thai In; judgment
could not stand told him that had given The case
a thorough examination. lie told me that IL was nay
duty as District Attorney to submit to tho General
Term the results of my labor in the case. and tho
course of reasoning by which reached ny conciHSon
| stated my regret thai l unable 10 vudicatc our
system of criminal Jurisprudence nom th' rrIoach %
making no prov5i0 as thohght Tor Inc pnhsnic NJ
OF sue dJstardly offenders as DO Loon ono MS axe
confer with ths judges OF the General Sessions who
presided al tho trial. shonld have done 50 before
views adverse to Judge GilderSlceye's ruiings in tho
trial. | actuaied by the ,amc considerations IN
tho McGraih CASE which was tried before Judge cow
Did Mr.. MARITIME agree with your views in regard
10 No cannot say that ho did 10 left these Things
entirely to mc.'
statement: ." still think that his was mistake on
the part Of Mr. scm6S lie is yon or man fo Go
stupidity. or Dccausc rs desired 10 pat his opinion
above that Of tho Judges see, however ~ Inc
saicment that he TO think his opinions OF IN
portaucc. ard they may be 81. | am sorry to Ier-
ccl.c that he presses his regret that he IS unable
to vndlcate system IF criminal rsPrndcnce MS
far az ] concerned, have taien care that me Ne
Grah shall be- properly represented at tho 'onit
of Appeals II the appeal shcnld be taken to ai court
The attention OF Judge GIdclSleeVc was also called
TO the statement of Mr. Semplc He said: Mr..
Semples duties In the District Attorneys Office were
sim pe and rigid and there should scarcely be devia
ton from his set line of duty. He had no right-no
power-tO say whether tho trial fair or not, nor
| whether the evidence was not admissible. IL
his duty. and his only duty to investigate all the
material in his hands looking toward an airmanoo Oi
tho Judgment OF the court