The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1890-06-07
FLAUK'S CONVICTION HOLDS.
ME AND MS SON MAI APPEAL ONCE
MORE OR GO 10 JAIL

The General Tsrua Says JudGe Barrstt Wee
Right In Telling the Jury that the DE
voree Was FraVduleht-What boehstn-
yer DIa No Excuse for what Meehs Dld
The surreme Court. General Term, in an
opinion By Presiding Justice Van Brunt. mas
aflrmed the conviction OF EX-Shertn tlack and
hIa hon for conspiracy to porvcrt the law by
proourinR q fraudulent divorce. The appel
iants excepted to the charge OF Judge Barrett
TINT the divorce was fraudulent. and to other
points In the charge, and also submitted the
ouoation whether the presence OF an caves
dropper In the jury room did not vitIate the
verdict The General Term holds that upon
the uncontradlcted evidence tho lower court
Vas comrelled to charge that the decree OF
divorce was void.
who" Gays the court, was to Judge as
70 whether the law had been cheated and
dofrAuded by the manner In which this de-
cree had been obtainedl Was 1t for the
juryp There was no dispute az TO these facts.
lit was void because OF fraud, We can
see no reason why the court should not charao-
terlze its nothingness by the proper appellation.
The jury was expressly charged that even
these facts did not mako any OF the defendants
nent, because the court said Whether the
judgment and these proceedings were the re-
S6eh
81 doubt before any 81 them could be con-
ave 90 not think" continues the court,
that any one will have the hardihood to
snd the eeS " divorces II
could under these circumstances be innocent
sSas the ea dons Of tho so aSts istendns do
them showed a criminal Intent: was clearly
relation GV to the s quit Of James A. Fsot as tho
Jury we're instructed that he was not connected
~ NnItR W
:fiit was fraud upon the court to procure
StS@ped With confessed dishonesty, then the
learned Judge would be derelict In his duty to
than no has done. in law. az least. Fraudulent
means can never culmins ate In honest results"
esed In s eSaPse e
o5 Mesks Il he the act; Thfh 10
Judge Bookstayer had no right TO direct
Meeks to commit acts which under no clToum.
Bookstaver had no power to direct the com.
mission Of forgery and pe5 pIJ upon which 70
lowing the direction from tho consequences OF
bis acts. But Judge Bookstaver II he did so
Witch TSud re Re
S9ss e 0ot ns IS hf he he
are servants OF the people. to perform their
duties in accordance with the law. :, A Judge
IL
performance OF acts which must necessarily
result IN fraud and render absolutely void all
action had thereon. such case 10 not the
case OF an error of ludEment but Is the case Of
the perversion Of judgment"
AS TO the eayesdropper. the court say, that as
It appears that the Judgment OF the jurors was
In no manner affected by reason OF the intru
sion OF this man wthout0their knowledge into
the jury room. 1t is evident that the defendants
have sustained no damage, and the verdict
after having full knowledge OF this fact. the
defendants permitted the trial TO go on. and
asked the court for instructions to the jury on
their behalf.
THE learned Judge who presided at the trial
in no manner usurped the functions Of the
jury. but where conceded acts were frauds he
so characterized them. and he was bound to do
80. There DO not appear to DO any errors
ment and 1t should be affirmed"
Chief Clerk Sparks will not issue warrant
from the General Term cory Of The decislon,
tho Flscks will be notified to appear. A
stay may be obtained on further appeal. The
Imprisonment in the Tombs and $500, fine. The
sentence Of his son was four months imprison-
mont In the penitentiary and $500 fine.