New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-02-24
WKANE IN SUSPENSE.
1r-sTICE CULLEN WILL NOT GIVE HIS
DECISION BEFORE MONDAY.

FOR THE GRAVESEND BOSS. AND lNClpENl-
ALLY GIVES JUSTICE BARTLETT
RAP-A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY
TO THE CHARGE OF
CONSPIRACY.
Judge Cullen yesterday morning hearu dISu-
,nents on the stay asked for by John y Mch"He
on, tho issuance Of a certificate Of reasonable
douht McKane was present. but only because
he happened to be called to plead to other IN
dictments pending against him. Oh course HIS
plea was not guilty. The indictments were
against the Town Board and covered the o.
fences Of oppression and obstrucuon' as wei aS
conspiracy
McKane entered the court accompanied ny
Sheriff Buttllng about fifteen minutes before the
appearance Of the Judge. The prisoner appea'e"
depressed. The element OF hope has entirely de-
partcd from his mind. and he Is bracing him-
self up to meet his fate as manfully AS possible.
He IL in deep sorrow and though ne may pe
temporarily buoyed up by the encouraging
words of counsel he sees in the distance the
ynwning gates Of Sing Sing prison and the dis
grace which entrance therein as a convict I'M
poses. not only upon himself but upon those
around whom his affections centre.
Gravesend was we'll represented at the open
ing Of the court and nfty-hvc policemen had
been detailed to suppress any possible disorder
and to protect the people against any overt act
by his supporters in the way Of release There
is no well-grounded belief that Mckanc himself
inspires the demonstrations in his favor; there
s no knowledge that any conspiracy exists; s'ill
the authorities are justified in providing against
possible attempts in that direction.
The defendant soon after his appearance in
court was surrounded by his counsel. consisting
Of Colonel r. c. James. ex-Judge Troy Mr.
Rodcrick Mr. Backus and Mr.. Glendennng. ana
each one cordially shook hands with the prisoner
The words Of announcement whispered in his
ears gave momentary relief from the terrible
strain hc IS undergoing.
On the part os the prosecution there appeared
General Tray. r. VI. Shepard. Mr.. Weinberg
and Colonel Lamb. who grouped themselves near
the bar MrKane was first asked TO plead 10
the charge of conspiracy with the Town Board,
with permission to withdraw the plea If neces-
sary after ihe demurrer argued. McNaAe
pleaded mot guilty" His utterance Of the words
was in low tone. no, audible ten feet away.
Judge Sutherland Judge Newton. jacques 5.
Stryker and William J. Glahdng were called.
Mr. Glcndenning represented judge Sutherland,
who was absent. These defendants We're no; re-
quircd % plead. it was understood that de-
murrers would be !nterposed
COLONEL JAMEs's ARGUMENT.
Colonel James opened his argument on the plea
for the finding ~ a reasonable doubt. Tho coun-
sci argued that II was clearly question u be
argued on the lines of judicial merit. He dwelt
on the recent enactment Of the law under which
Judgment had been secured and deprecated any
thing like hasty determination OF the materia
points involved. lie made many claims for I'M
uunity from punishment under the Criminal
code. In behalf OF the defendant. and read sec
lions ~ IN. law at length In order 70 enforce MS
| views on the Court. lie contended that II was
necessary TO go beyond the election law 70 the
/ Criminal code In order 10 find grounds whl'h
| v,,,,l1 ,,npiIcat. McKane with the guilt Of A
principal He insisted that there had hce n ms
! Application ~ the statutes in the case, dSo '''t
/ there was nothing I'm the Indictment d"cailhS
the frat Gravcsrnd district list a. fals" ana INA l
| there was an absence II motiN" on the pari "i
| McKanr He claimed that whatever might nave
| been the verdict ~ the jury there was nothing
/ more tangible on which 10 base judgment thth
mere advice extended t. officials IN me matter
! nf the concealment of the lists. lmpr"ssively he
| drew thu attention Of the Court 10 the d'.!ard-
! lion that there was nothing In the on"nc'
! rhargeI in the indictment which should bring
the defendant before the Court as f"on. az II
WAS impossible FOR McKanc 10 b. prin''pal D&' &
cause he was not pubhc onlrer. IL" poll!1
| mad. ,y,a technical on this specific ground.
The counsel argued the distinction between a'-
cessorics to crime and the acts OF principals be,
under this particular law. In spNr Vl OS
| strong advocacy OF the case. Justice cullen de
clared that TO be- question Tor de'erInlna'.Hn l m
| under the statute. Still counsel argued tnat the
| Indictment was defective. in that II iallrd 10
define the crime charged. and held that the Grand
| Iurv did not possess IN" power 70 iHi.'t th' u''
| T.njant II the case was to be presented 10 the
| court i'm any such manner ii" insisted ais" ina.
| the crime II any. carried with II punishment
| only as misdeineanor 80
4, This point Colonel James specific In
polntng out sections Of the Code and the Flee
| lion law conflicting In the matter OF the degrees
| of offences under the statute He held that III
| the. Criminal code the act of destroying the reg
| is,ry lists was made a mIsdemeanor. while ths
| net OF restraining individuals from copies of the
| lists was pronounced a felony. and "a this was
| TO be construed as an act OF concealinent under
| IN. Penal Code the crime charged was not a
felony but a mislcmeanOr Much stress was
laid upon this point; ana the argument Hi coun'
sci from beginning to end seemed calculated u
draw the attention Of the Court TO the fact tha'
a lesser crime. as described by the Penal Code
could not under the latter enaction, without the
repeal Of the former provision be accepted as a
felony: hence. McKane. though guilty of mis-
demeanor and punishable by a lower degree oi
sentence. could not properly be held punishable
by a higher degree OF sentence for "A lower de
gree OF offence.
A PuZzLER FOR JUSTICE CULLEN.
Then Colonel James took UP the question OF
evidence but he did not get much comfort from
the Judge on these several points. There was
much OF detail I'm these matters 1t appears that ir
the record statement occurs that a process
server met one OF the inspectors and delivered Il
him copy OF an injunction. and the receiver
had told the server that he would deliver II t.
| McKane. This really the statement OF
| man who had told the witness what some Other
| man had said The record did not show the rul
| ing OF the evidence on either side. The prosecu
| tion cOntendc1 that Ii was ruled out by the fre
quent decisions Of the Court The defence In
sisted that nasmuch II not ruled on
in that particular instance II was accepted b,
the Court and passing 10 the jury as delivered
by the witness. necessarily should be considered
as a fault In the record. nasmuch as the justic
should have taken II upon himself 10 reject thi
testimony. even though there had been no inter
position with respect to It's reception on the par
OF the prosecution. This seemed to be a sort o
stumbling block to Justice Cullen, and he ad
mitted that he would be obliged to consider IN
subject carefully when he came TO make hi
decision.
1t was evident. however. that Justice Cullen
with the exception Of the single point made. wa
opposed to the defence