The record-union., 1892-03-12
CHARLES FREEMAN.
Judge Van Fleets important Letter
to the Governor.
He Gives His Reasons for Suggesting
That Freeman's Sentence
be COMMITTED.


execution of Charles Freeman, who was
convicted OF the murder of Mark Feeny,
which occurred in this county in March,
1890. The history of the case is familiar
TO the reading public. Freeman appealed
to the Supreme Court for reversal of the
Judgment and for new trial, which were
denied. In its decision, however, the
supreme Court cast some doubt upon the
truthfulness of witness Wilkes, on whose
testimony, chiefly, the jury found the
verdict. Application for commutation
OF sentence has been made to the Gov
ernor by Freeman's counsel, G. n. Post
and G. Il. Jones, based on the Supreme
Courts reference to Wilkes testimony.
Yesterday Superior Judge Van Fleet,
before whom the case was tried, adj
dressed the following communication to
Governor Markham, in which he reviews
all the circumstances and concludes by
suggesting the propriety of a commuta-
ton of sentence. The letter is as follows:
SUPERIOR COURT, DEPARTMENT Two, !
SACRAMENTO CITY, March 10th.
To the Governor, deem it my duty to call
your attenuon to the case OF Charles Freeman,
now under sentence Of death in this county
freeman was tried before me in April, 1890
and convicted of murder in the first degree
lie moved for new trial, which denied,
and he was then sentenced TO be hanged.
subsequently he took an appeal to the Su-
preme Court, where the judgment and order
of the Superior Court were affirmed. His APP
peal having operated a stay Of execution, the
court has, in accordance with law, since the
determination OF the appeal fixed FriGay, the
18th day of the present month of March as
The date for the execution of his Judgment.
end the Judgment will doubtless on that date
be carried out unless your EXcellency should
deem II proper TO interfere.
One OF the grounds embraced in the de-
fendant's motion Tor new trial was INSULT
cheney of the evidence TO sustain the verdict.
This point was not made or argued in the SUI
penor Court, but was, it seems, relied upon
presenting the case 10 the Supreme Court:
and in passing upon the question that court
after stating the substance of the testimony
given at the trial by one Archie Wilkes, the
main witness for the prosecution land with
out whose testimony, / may add, the defend
ant could not have been convictedl and COM
nenting upon IT in manner to indicate the
uyel1eSt SkeptlclSm as to its truth, say:
LAS TO the contention that the verdict is not
supported by the evidence. we can only say
that while the case as presented upon the rec
ord before us leaves room for ora Ve donhtS as
10 the truth of the story told by Wilkes it can
not be held as matter OF law that the jury,
the evidence, but had the great advantage of
observing the deneanor OF the witnesses on
the stand, was not warranted in concluding
that the guilt of the defendant was established
beyond "a reasonable doubt"
1t is obvious that this language of the court
and the adverse comments made upon the
most important evidence of the prosecution
while entirely proper, no doubt, in the judg-
1nent of that court, from the view taken by
them OF the case as presented in the record is
well calculated to, and 1 have reason to be-
lieve has, cast q grave doubt in the public
mind upon the character OF the evidence upon
which this defendant was convicted, and has
given rise to serious apprehension lest the de-
1endant Is about to be unjuStly punished for a
crime of which he may not be guilty And
while under well settled legal principles the
Judgment was properly affirmed, a serious
question nevertheless arises whether under
The circumstances il is best that ii be carried
INTO execution. II the question affected this
defendant alone / should not feel called upon
10 bring the matter to your attention, as after
nearing the evidence given at the trial. in all
It's varying shades and minuteneSS of detail
my mind, in common with that of the jury
was left without reasonable doubt OF the de,
fendants guilt, and thought and still think
the verdict right.
But hardly think the question should be
determined solely from consideration
whether the ends of justice, far as this par
ticular defendant IS concerned, will be best
subserved by his paying the full penalty of
his crime. The comments of the Supreme
Court, coming from an authoritative
source, have, l am satisfied, disturbed public
sentiment with reference TO the case and
aroused distrust as to the correctness of this
verdict, and the question, therefore it seems
to me, should not be determined without
consideration of the effect that this fact NAV
nave upon the future administration OF Grim
2nal justice in the State.
Nothing is more essential to an efficient ad-
nln1StratlOn OF the laws against crime than q
feeling of confidence and security on the mari |
Of the people in the correctness and Justice of
The conclusions reached by their courts more
especially in cases involving the life of the in
Cividual; and anything which tends to i'm I
pair that teljng tends directly toobstruct and
interfere with the administration of Justice. |
Inc Jury system, beng Il part OF our judicial |
machinery, brings the courts in direct de- |
pendence upon the people of the community |
1Or an efficient enforcement OF the laws against
crime. And your eXceIiency is well aware OF
The difficulties daily encountered by the courts
IN securing Just verdicts in important crini- |
mai cases by reason OF the many distractinp
laf1uent es brought to bear upon the minds Of
jurors calculated to render them timid and
uncertain to their duty
One OF the most potent of those. in my udg-
ment, and one always seized upon by astute
JOunSel, and repeatedly called to the attention
ofjuries, is the fact that there have been i'm
stances, unfortunately where persons have
been uniustly convicted OF crime of which
they We're innocent. And while do not be-
lleve thIs TO be such case l am of opinion
that, by reason of the criticism which has
been passed upon ii, u large part of the
community has come to regard it with such
doubt that il has aroused a strong feeling that
the extreme penalty of the law should not be
visited upon this defendant.
To entirely ignore this sentiment and exc
cute the defendant in the face of the doubt
east upon his case would, believe be detri-
mental TO the best interests of Justice in that
II would have strong tendency TO deter
future JurleS from acting with that entire fear
sessness and courage SO essential to just and
honest verdictS. For these reasons. and while !
satisfied that this man has been guilty of a
cruel and unprovoked murder I feel con-
strained 10 suggest to your excellency the
propriety of committing his sentence to that
ofimpriSonment for life.
This question must be addressed TO you for
the reason that the court has now lost iuris-
Csiction OF the caSe except for the single pur-
pose of seeing its Judgment carried into execu-
lion. have the honor to be- yours very
respectfully. W. c. VAN FLEET
Judge of Superior Court