The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1892-08-08
EFFORTS TO SAVE DIR. GRAVES
Ex-Distriot Attorney stevens Offers Som.
Explanations.

Ex-Dfetrict Attorney Socvens Onere Some
Explanations.
NARRAGANsETT PIER, II. l., Aug. g.
Ex-District Attorney Isaac N. Stevens Of
Arapahoe county, Col. arrived here Sat-
urday and will pass few days at this re-
sort.
Mr.. Stevens was interviewed relative to
the defendants answer, to the States
brief in the DIR. Graves case, and he said
that the counsel for DIR. I. Thatcher
Graves had presented twenty-four:reaso
why a new trial should be granted.
These twenty-four reasons were, one at
time, practically abandoned by the de
fense, aud they have at last come down to
three points upon which they had ac-
tually based their claims for q new
trial.
The defence had laid great stress upon
the ruling Of Judge Rising In admitting
as evidence the statement which Mrs
Barnaby made to Mrs. Edward Worrell,
Jr., and to the latter's mother Mrs. Car
rier. on the day after the taking Of the
poison.
The ladies had testified that Mrs. Barn
aby raised the query, Gould the doctor
have done this ?" meaning the poisoning,
and had added. that when she recovered
she would spend great deal Of ,money in
hunting down the villain who had thus
sought to take her life.
lutTo was uotuluk tuiS eNlueuCe,
declared Mr. Stevens, which was preju-
dicial to the case or the defendant. IL
there had been an error, IL was one entire
ly without prejudice.
"The second point was that Judge
Rising had erred 10 charging relative to
the value OF the circumstantial evidence.
1.-The court instructs you that the
law requiring you to be satisfied of the
defendants guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt In order to warrant conviction
does not require that you should be salts
fled beyond a reasonable doubt OF each
link in the chain Of circumstantial evil
dcnce relied upon to establish the defend
ants guilt
"'It is sufficient IL, taking the testi-
mony all together. you are satisfied be-
yond reasonable doubt that the de-
fendant is guilty.
1.-THE court and the record thus dis
poses of the point which the defense think
they have made on Judge Rising.
Now. as to the third and last point. II
duction of the dead letter which came
from California. Toe facts are that
when that letter was presented 4 objected
to 1t at first; but subsequently, with
drew my objections on the agreement,
which was made in open court, that the
court should make particular reference
to 1t, and give n specific instyuction TO
tho jury touching upon 1t. To this Mr..
Furman, for DIR. Graves, assented, and
the letter went I'm for what il was worth,
as the official record proves.
THUS, you see, the court threw around
DIR. Graves all the protection that lay in
its power to do. AT all times there was
the same strict injunction that there
must be in the minds OF the jury pre-
ponderence Of evidence showing guilt. not
a mere thought or fanciful supposition.
There is not an exception taken or
pressed by the defense that is not based
upon some technicality, and from the
practice of our court i know that where
substantial justice has been done an nc
cused man a new trial will not be granted
because of an inconsequential technical
error.
"This was the rule laid down for us In
the celebrated Chicago Anarchists riot
case, where the defendants were found
guilty Of numbering and melting others
To murder the police officers.
Precisely the same point was raised in
that case that now presents itself In the
Graves case, and since that Chicago rul-
ing there have been scores Of lower court
rulings aud convictions sustained by the
precedence then established.
"Have / any belief that DIR. Graves will
get new triali have no such belief.
am morally sure that there will be no
new trial granted. The case will now rest
where il Is till November when IL will
come up for final argument, at which
time IL am asked u address the court in
behalf Of the people l will do so. / look
for the final act In the Barnaby tragedy
paxt nerefa ber "