The morning call., 1894-05-08

II say they were knaves. The publiN
was thirstlng for this mans blood, crying
out for vengeance. That jury dare not
have returned a verdict of not guilty.
/ They would have been hissed. They were
| all awed by the crowd, by the whole sur
! rOundings of the case. and my client has
not mad fair trial.
Now. all | desire is to save this de-
fendant's neck. That he is a dangerous
man to the community at large | am
forced to admit and that the community is
at his heels there is no doubt. The public
thirsts for vengeance. l also admit that
my client went into that bank for the pur-
pose Of rObbing it and that he is morally
responsible for Herrick's death. But this
court allows no judicial killing. and if
Fredericks did not fire the shot which
terminated tie life of Herrick he cannot
be hanged for it.
"ln many ways my client has not had
fair trial. The rulings of the court have,
indeed, been extremely fair. But public
opinion, the demands of an outraged public,
have been stronger than the law. San Fran
cisco has painted this man in wrong colors
from the first, and again l say that the
jury in this case dare not have returned
another verdict! l submit the motion"
Judge Levy said that before proceeding
on the motion for a new trial he wished TO
comment upon the affidavit of Mr.. Colwell
respecting the remarks made by District
Attorney Barnes. No exception was taken
to them at the time, but had Mr.. Colwell
so done the court would have sustained
the exception and checked Mr.. Barnes
fo tn ba ah afo of bo of
the opinion of the court it was the only
possible theory which could have been
presented. The court could conceive no
ther defense.
In the aifidavits supporting Mr.. Col
wells motion for a new trial the same
theory had been presented. The testi-
mony of Melvin had been introduced with
a view of showing that Herrick might
have been shot by Melvin. Judge Levy
did not think so. He quoted from Melvin's
testimony where it was stated that the
first two shots were fired by Fredericks.
the third by HerricB, and the fourth and
last by Melvin himself.
"This theory of the defense was care
fully submitted to the jury. who in their
turn carefully weighed the testimony as it
was presented. But there is evidence here
which is absolutely unc0ntradicted. The
motion for n new trial Will be denied"
MIR. Colwell then said he desired to move
for an arrest of Judgment He said that
the information in this case ought to be
set aside, as the court had no jurisdiction.
The information alleged that the offeDse
was committed in the city and county of
San Francisco, whereas the bank premises
stood on United States soil, over which
the Superior Court had no jurisdiction"
"Perhaps You say that this tragedy did
not occur in any State of the Union? ?"
dryly asked the Judge.
Mr.. Colwell. however. was unabashed
and proceeded with his argument. quoting
authorities in support thereof. When it
was submitted Judge Levy said he did not
desire to hear from Mr.. Hosmer in reply.
but would forthwith deny the motion.
"Fredercks, stand upl" commanded
Judge Levy. "a motion for new trial in
your case and motion for an arrest of
judgment have been denied by the court.
Have you anything further to say why
Judgment should not be pronounced upon
you?"
Fredericks answered mo" in a suf-
fcientIy firm tone.
Judge Levy then told him that he had