New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-03-15
BAIL FOR WEBSTER REFUSED
JUDGE ANDREWS REVIEWS THE CASE.
JURORS WHO VOTED FOR ACoUITTL DIsEE.
GARDED LAW AND FACTS

the Jury harshly for the verdict and lie also has
something say about the opening remarks OF
Websters counsel in making charges against the char
acter o. Goodwin which The court would not allow 70
be proved on the trial lie that the jury evil
denhy took these remarks into consideration IN spite
O. the fact that there was evidence offered TO sup
port the charges. The main points Of the opinion
are follows
"Under the laws Of this state defendant charged
with murder or any felony Is not entitled 70 be ad
nitted 10 bail rs matter OF right but max be ad-
mitted 10 BAIL IN the discretion Of the 10 which
or of the Judge "a whom the application l. made IN
case Ike this where the defendant Is under indict
ment In the Court OF General Sessions for crime
punishable with death such discretion he exercised
by a Judge Of the supreme Court only This dscrc
ton, however. IS not an arbitrary but judicial ohe
and Is to be exercised in accordance with established
principles and precedentS The general rule, estab
shed Is that prisoner charged with murder should
not be bailed unless II appears 10 be quite doubnl
whether the defendant IS guilty. And the fact that
upon the trial of defendant charged with murder or
manslaughter the jury has disagreed has been held
70 such doubt TO the guilt Of the Defendant
rs 10 Justify the admission 10 bail.
When however it IS claimed that The doubt arises
upon the law and upon the facts there Is no liked
and precise rule BY which It can be determined with
absolute certainty whether defendant should be ao'
ritted 10 bail and every application for bail under
such circumstances must he determined according to
al bar after q protraced trial the jury disagreed
eight Of the jurors voting for his acqutta and the
contention OF the defendants counsel that he should
be admitted to bail IS therefore to some extent sup
ported by the cited and by others which might
be mentioned.
"Tle District Attorney. however. strenuously OPP
poses the application and states that be intends 10
move the case again for TRIAL at an early day have
therefore examined with great care the VoluhhouS
record OF The trial which has Just been had and after
such examination feel constrained TO h0.d that the
defendant ought not 10 be admitted to ball at the
present time The prosecution conducted with
yigor and ZEAL and ii appears 10 that the learned
Judge who presided at the trial ruled correctly upon
most of the numerous questions which arose DURING
the trial and stated the law applicable to the case
correctly in his charge to the jury.
THE trial however. occupied nine DAYS. q great
amount Of testimony taken. and l cannot heip
thinking as to the Instructions given to the jury BY
the Judge his charge that uey NAV have DISREGARD
ed Inexperienced the same in certain important
particulars. There can be doubt uDon the evil
dence that the defendant shot and killed Goodwin
when the latter in his own apartment but it was
sought justify the homicide. the ground that
the defendant acted upon selfdefence
"a great deal of testimony introduced behalf
of the defendant for the OF proving and which
tended TO prove the following facts That within
short period before the shooting. the deceased had
frequently grossly nsulted the wife of the defendant
that on a day long prior to the shooting. he had
insulted the defendant himself: that on the night Of the
shooting the deceased went TO the occupied bv
the defendant and his wife, knocked loudly at the
door OF the room and when the defendant opened the
door. made what appeared 10 be an exclamation Of
surprise at seeing him. and struck. made effort
TO strike the defendant in the face that the deceased
then went TO his apartments: that the defendant
Immediately followed the deceased, who entered
his apartments, leaving the door open: that there
upon the defendant, after brief remark to the de-
ceased while standing I'm the doorway, little ont
side OF the shot the deceased who standing
yeveral feet from the defendant. and about to
throw. I'm the act Of throwing IA cuspidOr at
the defendant.
"The evidence introduced by the District Attorney
connicted seriously with that given bv and on
behalf Of the defendant but the testimony given bv
the defendant and his witnesses TO the conduct Of
Goodwin prior to the day Of shooting and that
day true. the defendant certainly had great
cation Assuming. however. that he also testified
he went 20 the apartments Of the deceased merely to
demonstrate with the latter, 1t IS difficult to under
stand whv when he that Goodwin had Gus
pidor II ne was peaceaby inclined. he did not retreat
through the open DOORWAY IN or near 10 which be
stood into the hallway The court correctly in
structed the Jury that such prOvocation, II given by
the deceased. did not justify the shooting and that
the defendant II 1t was true that the deceased was
about to throw the cuspdor bound TO retreat
II be could with safety
The defendant himself testified that lie believed
his life was In danger and that he could not retreat
with safety but in view Of his own testimony as TO
where be stood and the circumstances under which
re fired the fatal shot, 1t to me that the juroT,
who appear TO have thought that the defendant had
committed crime whatever and voted to acqmt
him, must have dsregarded the instruction Of the court
that the alleged provocaton did justify the shoot
ing have misunderstood the instruction of the
court as 20 the duty OF the defendant 10 retreat
Moreover the counsel for the defendant. In opening
the defence 10 the jury, made many charges against
Goodwin concerning matters which did not directly
relate to the shooting but which, II true, seriously
reflected upon his moral character and subsequently
such counsel offered evidence to sustain such charges.
most Of which excluded by the court
THE mere fact however, that such statements were
made and that such evidence offered was certainly
calculated to prejudice the Jury against Goodwin and
TO induce them 10 believe that the que ton to be dc
cided by them was not whether Webster killed Good
win In selfdcfence, but whether Goodwin wac
sort Of moral monster, the killing OF whom should not
be seriously regretted. II the Jurors who voted for
the acquitta did in fact disreeau or msunderstand
against the deceased by such charges against him. the
fact that they voted and that the jury disagreed
Nshed by the cited in regard the admission to
bail of PRISONERS charged with murder have given
the application the careful and serious consideration
to which ii was entitled, and my opinion Is that II
should be denied
District Attorney NcO said yesterday that there
was no possibility of trying Webster again before the
MAY term, and that the date might be later Twenty
five homicide awaiting Trial ard MIR. NicOli
could postpone all of them 10 try Webster again At
several persons who claim to know Burton G.
Webster circulated story Yesterday 10 the effect that
they saw the slayer o: Charles +. Goodwin eating
dinner one evening last week with party OF his
friends the Coleman House. II was SAID that
Webster WAS in the custody OF deputy sheriff all
the time, however ard was taken back ~ his cell
in the Tomb after he had had good vine supper and
a good time generally with HIS friends.
Night Warden Orr when seen at the T0mbs prison
last night denied cnphatically that Webster had
been out OF the prison at any time since his conhne
meht there except when he was taken 10 the court
room.
al an sure that Webster was not ont OF here last
week. ut all said Mr.. OFT.
Is MRS ADA THORPE LOTUS INSANE
Ada Thorpe LOTUS was taken before sheriff. jury
yesterday 20 have the question Of her mental condition
Aaalaaa .ha L.. INcn Rlnnnn A.Ylnm slnce