The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1893-06-12
DAY SPENT IN ARGUMENTS.
The Admissibility OF Lizzie's Testimony
at the Inquest Discussed.
SPECIAL TO THE NEWS.

at the Inquest Discussed.
SPECIAL TO THE NEWS
COURT HOUSE. NEW BEDFORD, Mass,
June 12.-Miss Borden appeared again
this morning without flowers, but her
lawyers have received in her behalf an
invitation that is unique. A proprietor
Of two prominent hotels at two shore re-
sorts Of note has telegraphed congratu-
iatio on the outcome OF the trial. He
already presses the acquittal OF the
prisoner, and he has invited her to visit
his hotels for as long time as she may
see fit with such attendants as she may
bring. entirely free OF charte
1t is not yet known whether this gentle
man is actuated ~ spirit of advertising
philanthropy or Of philanthroplc adver-
tisIng.
At the one hing of the court this morn
ing the jury were requested to retire
and Mr.. Moody ar oss to argue the ques-
ton of the admssability of the evidence
OF Lizzie Borden made at the trial.
Mr.. Moody Opens the Battle.--
Mr.. Moody cited the public statutes OF
Massachusetts,, showing that at inquests
over the bodies of persons who met
death by violence any or all persons may
be summoned to t, stify, that any or all
persons may be excluded from such in
quests aud that such inquests may be
held openly or secretly, as the judge be-
fore whom 1t is heard may decide.
lat IL
ly according to law. No one denies that
fact. The character Of that testimony
was not in the nature Of n confession.
1t was rather in tue nature or denial.
Between the two there was vast diff
ference. Mr.. Moody citad case OF
murderer named Piper who had a con-
versation with pastor named Pentacost.
This conversation was hating, he stating
and somewhat contradictory aid was
evidence of a consciousness OF guilt. The
prosecuting attorney claimed that 1t was
n denial rathan thaI confe sion AID
as such the conversation was admitted as
evidence.
Not Under Compulsion.
The point under discussion in the
present case Is as TO whether the testi-
mony Is such as to take IL out Of the
realm of confederation rendered under
compulsion.
The law states that no declaration OBJ
tanned bv compulsion from n defendant
can be admitted as evidence. but all
declarations hat are voluntary are adj
nissible. This is a case however upon
which there is some difference OF opinion.
l begin. as is the custom, by citing
English cases, and pass over them briefly
because they are, with exception, poorly
reported, contradictory and unsatisfac'
tory. Tney therefore afford little light
on the question.
Moreover. they are fully cited aud
commented upon in case which will
hereafter be touched upon.
That case is the case Of 'People vs.
Hendricks" on in New York In 1854.
New York Has Satisfactory Law.
New York is the only state where a
satisfactory law on this subject exists.
On the ,se In question the declaration Of
ted ON the ground that IL TOO was de-
nial and not "A confession.
Iu 1857 murder WAS committed. A
MIN was sum noned TO the inquest. He
WAS Informed that he was under sus-
pcion; that he would be arressed tnat
he should be careful not to incriminate
himself, aud he was warned BY the dis
giving evidence.
A third case was cited of foreigner
who was arres'ed, but not waraed of his
rights by the district attorney.
The Court of Appeals decided that ths
testimony was not admissible.
In the Judges suming up of the last
case cited Mr.. Moody read exi racts show
lug that all otner c)nsi lerations were
brushed aside aud the soie point made
prominent is whether or not the defend
sut il under arrest
The fact OF warning as TO the evil
dence to be given is held of little wei ght.
A case IN Maine was next cited where
n defendant made declaration and was
arrested aud tie only test that the Judge
allowed was as To whether { Ie DECLARE
tion was voluntary or not. Similar cases
from Missouri and South Carolina were
given.
Justice Mason asked II the decision in
tue Wisconsin case showed WHITTIER the
witness himself requested To { stify.
Mr.. Moody said l. did not.
Justice Blodgett asked II IL showed
whether the prosecuting attorney ask d
the prisoner To testify.
Mr.. Moody said not Mr.. Moody
claimed that he evidence At hand showed
clearly that he matter OF cautioniug tue
witness was OF no importance
The sole question IL as to compulsion
aud arrest. Clearly, also. therefore
the declaration OF any one made AZ
AN I'll quest, when that person was
not arrested until after said inquest was
admissible, "a precedent o. tns sta
favored IL aud I'm this case especially il
ought to be admitted.
Mr.. Robinsop's Reply.
Governor Robinson rose TO repl,
Tnis il not question, your honors. OF
lnI Lar l.