The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-12-07
CARLYLE HARRlS'S APPEAL.
,iUrER HOWE BEGINS hrs ARGU-
MENT ron A NEW TRIAL.

an incompetent IcStImOny introduced Tor
the Purpose OF PrciudicinG the Jury.
Albany. Dec. G.-Only the usual mum Der OF
.,cctotors, consisting Of law students, depart
mont clerks, and stray visitors, were present
II IN, court Of Appeals chambers this after
noon when william T. Howe Of the firm OF
uove 4 llummel rose to begin his argument
n ,lc nrrcal Of CARLYLE W. Harris for another
,h.ncc for his lie. Mr.. Howe and District
,,,n,ucy De 1ancey Nicoll had boon waiting
ay.r since tho court had opened. Two real
..,o,c cases had got on the days calendar
.nc,a Of them Whom these were finished Mr..
Howe began:
"Moy IL ,lcnsc the court. this 10 an appeal
t,om the decision from the Court OF General
ssssions In New York city on a conviction OF
,,,rder in tho first degree. upon which my
nii.nt. Carlyle W. Harris. was sentenced to
J.nh Ivy electricity. Tho case was one simply
n circumstantial evidence. an! that at the
woaves, KIND The conviction under 1t was
,rude and unjust, Your Honors. As to tho in
,,,ducto.l OF incompetent evidence for tho
,rtnosc VI rrcJudicing the jury. would call
,onr attention to tho opinion Of Judge Earl in
N. ease Of the People Igt Greenwnll. wherein
Wusia,ei a person on trial for his life is en-
,n,.a 10 all the advantages which the law gives
,im, and among them tho right to have his
,s,snt evidence.
THAT was tho language in tho Greenwnll
,pinion, and | invoke tho principle in this
.,.e shall show that in this case conviction
,assccu.si by the most Incompetent: testi.
rony eve. notrd in the history OF jurispru-
dance The evidence presents u case whore
Tho defendant Was convicted OF the highest
eimc known to the law upon nstantiai
evidence" which Of itself was clearly insuif-
t.rntt' s,,eian son , and which con.
Ned IN the minds "f the Jury hy proof OF acts
entirely disconnected wi tn the transaction al
legged IL tho indictment. under the Cuise OF
lar, -, eieNdant
'"Ihr le.rnuunt was n medical student. and
was auuut 10 graduate when charged with this
serious crime. Tho deceased was the defend
sn,'s vile, 10 whom he had been, secretly
.c at ~ WIT r street, .. She Ina
Comviaineh Of illness. and the defendant had
prescribed for her. On tho day previous to her
uIon tEs street. On tho night Of the 3lst Of
January, 1854. she was seriously I'll. and Drs.
Foxle.. Bauer. and korr attended her. Il does
not a,irar from tho evidence that the do
cease! !.nm the time that she first exhibited
ANY SYMPTOMS whatever Of II ness that night
unit! tho time OF her death was ever con-
lciIus Of explained anything concerning her
il!aess: and the case was treated BY the ply
Oh I" ,hem. whitn they diarnoseI as m ovcr-
"Aceorilps to the testimony. DR.. Fowler said
'wo have irightful case hero. and there must
hsyo aeen soiao very Croat mistake. Harris.
hS s s'n' 5ssa SET, IL
and reported that :hs ak capsules Of twenty
1.-Two grains OF uanine to one grain OF morphine
yh.ts was ~ s;tsa,rs e cast the blanc upon
III. druggist hero. At.erward the defendant
IT,, .,n 0' hsi s ' thu st.r d' sss motif
Or testified lefore tho Coroner that
asctei WITH the e case. sxesp. by IL. Defendant
S$SS docs as sppsar That thsrs
!heorios Of the Is that the deceased ever
to-, ,CoA any ono U.s., Q, the SSspsulsSss which
re.ical part o. tho case Is supported mainly
Nnon al autopsy, made lifty;Gyo days after
Ss xss Sssod had b. ow.1 an rs otssr
TIE line %0 .tS sra 'hat n1n wss
~a sny u
Us TINT :rui sEsel, r. aTtop ,,S would hay?
the case l.scloscs that no such thing was
taonghsof until long after the defendant had
"Bsfore going inta tho circumstances testi-
tel - on the trial. It Is propcr that this court
h,rii BE- advised Of tho glartngly unfair pro;
border to obtain CONVICTION. where tho eyI-
teacc. as, We respectfully submit. was INSULT
s A. ss G s ssan Saaf b
lie strange fact does appear tina. from the
.ma q ~ snking q ,hai inquest md rs reIa;;
Now York. not a vestige Of the. evidence can
he found IN any oliic. where 1t should. pur-
:" law i DO on nlcu As nH nd the as TO
nstmi;'sl I" tako portions of the remains Of
ln, fIU mi ri
snalyze them. Why. then with n defendant in
eEstnly. was II rot rioper. the case INVOLVING
and At ns '@s when
the chsm"ni analysis was made. to have per
mittsd tho defenl.nt 20 he rcprcsented by ex-
verified nrruntradicted the appearances. proc
esses, and results elaine to have been found
nnsf aso bo,r in mind that TIM
theory in this case. MS to whether there was
morphine in the stomach or as to the cause OF
very iinsly spun theories, dependent upon GER
:nin nors being produced by the usc Of chemi-
ns SSS s"' and t them chansns
10 different coors-a change. be 1t marked.
that inoS place in tho smallest Of water glob-
the life II this young man upon the uncor-
lnh"rntrd statement OF DR.. MitthRus IN to
vi, WIN, ne say IN tI,nt brief ncrol seems to me
Dr. W,'theu,'s rycs; to say that for, II few Sec
, .nhs 40 saw faint blue then red. then violet:
81
matter which could only 10 seon by micro
scope
II was sought oil TINT trial to show that the
He'"nlant wn- cool. drln crate. and calculat-
Ire criminal. " h" Was would lie have mo-
Gur'n "nl"u'" which rXOneia'"d tn. drug
EiHt nom AL Ilam"s Or IT, ~ alleged he had
tnml, red With one. WHY w"ul he not have
.'mi'rI;, W,,h nn"'h". and thereby placed
,;"shohsinliy n",n ne drnGGiStt 1t Was
nrsr,' u" in"tiv. forthis crime thnt Ills de-
r I" conceal his marriage Was sufficient tn
iGhrr MN 20 comm II. lut yuur Nonors
VII mn that months eture tie girls mn,hor
now II. and even knew ~ the false nam. il :.
husrt. nut nssumimg that such motives
rNistrd. II don- not follow that merely ncnus,
they 'ltl exist the defendant SHOULD be h,.I,
III" poison. 'T
But the ease Eeing devoid Of any positiy,
rrrof. circumstances To prejudice the defend
ont were nut of"r" tho Jury hy the Distrin
Attorney, snm" extremely remote: and tn,
i"nrt, notwithstanding tho direction and rX
r,lt"n o. defendants counsel. ndlnittc,
every species of incuin petrnt testimony oi
,"rct! hy the District Attorney. The Eistrir
Attorney was also illegally permitted to PROV
every tran. action ctween tn" decreased AM
'he Defendant from the timo OF their frs nc
Mnainiaura; and every conve sat on bet weel
Memorandum and the drceased's mother. an
MlA" matters totally discon nected with tn
Ease which had ~" legal bearing or the ease