Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1893-04-02
MAY eWe HARRIs A CHANCE.
A Bill Introd uced in the Albany Leglsla-
ture Which May Save Him.
New York Herald ]
~ ~

new lOrk neIuiusI
The life of CARLYLE w. Harris may be
saved after all without appeal TO Cover
nor Flower. If an amendment to an act to
amend section 465 Of the Code OF Criminal
Procedure introduced in the New York
State Senate on Wednesday last by Sen
ator Coggeshall should pass:
The latest move III behalf Of the con
demned wife-murderer originated with
Howe Il Hummel. Harriss lawyers. The
amendment which Is here given. together
with the act, was prepared by Mr. Howe
last Monday and on Tuesday was IN Sena-
tor Coggeshal's hands at Albany.
The act IS as follows:
The People of the State of New York,
represented IN the Senate and Assembly,
do enact as follows:
An ACT TO AMEND SECTION 465 OF THE CODE
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.
Section 1. Section 465 Of the Code of
Criminal Procedure is hereby amended so
az 20 read rs follows:
Section 4G5. In What Cases Granted.-
The court IN which trial has been had
upon an issue of fact has power to grant
peE trial. when verdict has been rem
dered against the defendant by which his
substantial rights have been preludlced,
upon his application, III the following
cases:
/. When the trial has been had in his
absence. If the indictment be for felony.
.. when tie Jury has received any evil
dence out Of court, other than that re-
sulting from o view. as provided in section
All.
OTHER REASONS.
g. When the jury have separated with
out leave Of the Court. after retiring TO
deliberate upon their verdict. or have been
guilty Of anv misconduct by which fair
and due consideration OF the case has been
prevented. ,,
| bv lot. or bv any other than fair express
sion of opinion on the part OF all the lu-
| :OTs.
8. When the Court has mlsdirected the
1 jury IN matter of law, or has refused 70
: instruct them rs prescribed IN section 4zO.
/ and the defendant has. at the trial. eX-
/ cepted to such misdirection or refusal.
! L. When the verdict IS contrary TO law
| or clearly against evidence.
2. When II is made 10 appear. by atti-
/ daut. that upon another trial the de
! fendant can produce evidence such as, II
/ before received. would probably nave
/ changed the verdict; If sucn evidence has
besu discovered since the trial Is not GU
mu!atiye, aud the failure TO produce IT. on
/ the trial was not owing to want OF dlll-
I gence.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
Mr.. Howe's proposed amendment to this
act IS as follows:
"ln the case mentioned IN subdivision
where the application - made IN case
/ where sentence of death has been imposed
and such application u denied. the defend
ant NAV, within sixty days after service OF
copy OF the order denying the same. have
the right TO appeal IN the General Term oi
the Supreme Court, IN the department
where sucn application is made, from the
order denying such application, and the
General Term NAV upon such Application
examine the facts aud ascertain whether
iustice demands a new trial or not and
may grant a new trial where justice ue-
mauds the same and that pending an ap-
peal In such q case the execution or the
sentence shall be stayed upon the ming OF
notice Of appeal from such order until al
ter the determination or such appeal by
! the General Term o. the Supreme Court.
This act shall tako eject immediately,
In explaining the grounds on whIch ne
drew up the amendment Mr.. Howe sa'u
that when Sindrim, the murderer, was
under sentence OF death several years ago
! Justice Thomas 4. Grady, who was at that
! time State senator. introduced the bill
/ 10 amend section 465 Of the Code OF Crimi-
nal Procedure. thereby giving the Judge
who tried case where the defendant was
I committed power to grant him a new triai
| on the ground of evidence discovered
SINCE the close of the trial.
That statute gave the defendant the
right 10 apply for new trial In the court
/ where he had been convicted. and If that
/ court was not in session thea be could ap-
ply 10 one OF the Justices of the Supreme
| Court.
Nh HowE's VIEWS.
Now. no possible harm can result 20
| @ha naoD,e IN om fhe DropOsel amendment"
said Mr. Howe. while in tbs particular
ease justice would be subserved by per-
| mtting an appellate court to review the
/ action Of the trial judge.
! Under this new measure we ask the
| right to 90 to three judges of the Su-
premo Court, sitting In general term, and
request that the decision of the Judge In