Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1892-03-01
WILL REMAIN IN 1T
Adverse Decision In the Chi
eago Anarchist Case.
THEY MUST REMAIN IN JOLIET
APpesls of Butter and aalomon IN Behalf
of Fielden and sehwab Wee
Without Avail

wAsaISsros, Feb. 99.-Tns United
States supreme court decided this altar
noon that the points raised BY General
Butler aud Attorney Solomon in tshaif
Of the Chicago anxrchuts were not veil
taken. Flelden and schwab will there
tore have 10 remain In the Joliet psni-
tertiary for the remainder Of their nat
uiai iIves-
Ben Butler had received . tip that Q
decision in the case would be handed
down today and WAS early in the court
room, securing . seat in The front row
by the aide Of Attorney General Hunt
and solicitor General Tagt. There be
sat. his head resting on MS right hand
and stirring only when the entry OF the
honorable court made il necessary for
ell To rise. There were goodsy num-
Ter OF spectators present, for they, too
had had = tip. They all waited
patiently while decision after decision
was read. There were thirty-six deci-
sions to 10 handed down and that of
the anarchists was among the fast read.
After recitBg IN brief the plea OF the
plaintiffs attorneys. Justice Harlan
eaId:
1T is contended by the appellant
that the judgment was vold ns not be-
ing that due process Of law required
bv the constitution Of the United
States where hfe or liberty 10 involved.
At common law lt vas deemed In
cispensabIy necessary in capital cases
that INQUIRY be made of the defendant
before judgment was passed whether
he had anything to cay why the SEN
IL a k~
.nounced upon hins. yhus giving him an
opportunity to alIege any ground of
ARREST or TO plead pardon If he had
obtained one. or 10 urge any other
legal objection TO further proceedings
against him. This privilege was deemed
OF such substantial value 70 the &C
cnsed that the judgment would be re-
versed II the record did not show that
1t Was accorded To him.
But this rule OF common law, ~ the
authorizes clearly show, applied to the
court OF original jurisdiction which pro-
nounced the sentence. and not to an
appellate court. which, upon review OF
the proceedings IN the trial court.
merely afiirms the iinal judgment
where no error was committed TO the
prejudice OF the accused and does not
render . new judgment.
The entire argument on behalf OF the
appellant assumes that the supreme
court OF Illinois pronounced = sentence
of death upon him, but such is not the
fact. The sentence of death by hang
ing was pronounced BY tho criminal
court OF Cook county October .. 1886,
neither the said defendant. nor his
counsel for him. sayipg anything fur
ther Why the Judgment Of the court
should not now be pronounced against
him 90 the verdict OF guilty heretofore
rendered 10 the Indictment in this
sause. The execution of the sentence
>svinR been stayed by the prosecution
81 awrito OF error with supersedeas. tie
upseme court OF the state, upon ex-
animation Of the matters assigned for
error, affirmed the jud .ment on all
.binKs and, the day originally fixed for
'he execution having passed. fixed No.
sember II, 1887, as the day Tor carrying
nto .execution the sentence by the
:riminal court OF Cook county. What
hat court did was in strict conformity
s'ith the criminal cods Of Illinois rela-
ang to prosecutions ~ indictment for
tspital offenses-