The sun., 1897-12-05
norrs or rEeAL rrnxrs.

trial Of Martin Thorn for the murder OF VIII.
liam Gieldsensuppe has been the removal of all
doubt as to tho identity of the alleged victim.
At the outset, the prospect was that great diff.
fculty would be experienced in satisfying a
Jury beyond reasonable doubt, according to
the requirement OF tho law In criminal cases,
either that the human remains which had been
found wero Gioldsensuppc's or that Gieldson.
suppe was not in fact still alive. Indeed, one
adjournment Of the trial was granted to enable
the defendant to obtain evidence that Gield.
sensuppe had been seen in Europe since the sup.
posed date Of tho killing. Tho testimony Of
Mrs. Mack. however, put an end TO any such
defence, for whether she or Thorn did the &C.
tual shooting. there could no longer be any seri.
Gus question that Gieldsensuppe was dead,
and Thorn's own evidence confirms hers to
the extent Of proving that Gieldesensuppo
was the victim Of murderous hands. though
he insists that they wero those Of the woman.
Mr.. Justice Maddox conducted the Thorn
trial In o quiet and lawyor-like manner with.
out any playing to tho galleries" In his meth.
cd OF presiding. His charge to the jury has
not been published in full. but 1t was charao-
terized by the counsel In tho case ard by other
lawyers who heard it as absolutely fair. 1t is
announced that tho defendants counsel rely
mission of evidence that Thorn had made
threats against Gieldscnsuppo over three
months before tho homicide and upon the ac
tion OF the court in permitting the jury to in.
spect the Woodside cottage without the pres
enco of the prisoner. AS this right was ex.
pressly waived by Thorn and his counsel, the
point probably Is that no waiver can be &C
cepted under such circumstances. In the
Cancemi case, 1t was held that prisoner could
not be lawfully tried by jury Of eleven, even
with his own consent, inasmuch as the trial by
jury guaranteed by the Constitution meant
trial by jury of twelve men. The right Of an
accused person to be confronted with the wit
nesses against him (which might also be
held to include the nominate objects put in
evidence against him is not expressly protect
ed by the Constitution OF this Safe, but is de.
clared in the statute known as the Bill Of
Rights.
On Monday tho supreme Court OF the United
States affirmed the decision of the Circuit
Court of Appeals in this city in favor Of the de-
fendant in the false imprisonment suit OF George
+. Underhill against Gen. Jose Manuel Her
nandez, formerly of the revolutionary army in
Venezuela. The plaintiff was citizen of the
United States who had erected a system of wa
terworks in the city Of Bolivar. In 1892 a force
fendant took possession of the city. The de.
fcndant would not allow Mr.. Underhill 10
leave his house unless escorted by soldiers, and
would not give him n passport so that he could
get out of Bolivar. The purpose Of Gen. Her.
nandez was not malicious toward the plaintiff.
but merely to coerce him into operating his wo-
terworks for the benefit of the community and
the revolutionary troops. Tho Circuit Court
OF Appeals, speaking through Judge Wallace,
held that the acts complained Of being those of
q military commander representing q dc facto
Government in the prosecution of a war, did
not render him liable to civil suit in the tri.
bunals of this country. Substantially the same
view of the case is taken by the Supreme Court
at Washington.
News comes from Georgia that bill has beer
introduced in the Legislature abolishing capital
punishment so far as 1t affects women. The
purpose Of the measure Is to prevent the hang
ing OF Elizabeth Mobiles. who is now under sen.
tence Of death for the murder Of her husband In
1896, and in whose behalf an appeal was taken
to the Supreme Court of the United States,
which on Monday handed down q decision re.
fnsing to interfere with the judgment The cir
cumstances of the crime were not such as ought
to excite any sympathy for the convicted wo.
man. The actual killing was done by man
named Families, with "a hatchet furnished to
him for the purpose by Mrs. Mobiles. in consider.
alton of $40 which she paid him for his bloody
work and more money which she promised to
pay. The victim was lured to the place Of his
death, by his wife, who told him that some one
had been stealing corn from his crib. He went
to watch for the thief and families struck him
from behind and killed him. According to the
statement Of this extraordinary case, in the
ninety y-eighth volume OF Georgia law reports
the proof showed that Mrs. Mobiles had made
two efforts to have him thus put out Of the way
before (the matter having been discussed be-
tween her and Families and wife for about two
monthsl, her avowed motive being that he
worked their children very hard ami treated
them roughly, would not provide sufficient
clothing, &C., and she wanted to see peace and
pleasure" After conviction, a motion was
made for new trial upon newly discovered
evidence tending to show that the defendant
was insane. The Supreme Court of Georgia
declared that this evidence was largely fabri
Gated and that the defence of insanity was
wholly imaginative.
The Supreme Court of the United States hal
affirmed the constitutionality of the recent ex
else legislation of the State of Vermont, in thu
case Of the State VS.. Hodgson, decided at Wash
ington last week. 1t was insisted that the pun
ishment prescribed for illegal liquor selling by
the VERMONT statute was cruel and unusual
under the Eighth Amendment to the Constitu
tion Of the United States, but the court ad
heros TO It's ruling in the celebrated O'Neil
case Oath United States Reports, page 323)
that the Eighth Amendment -forbidding crue
and unusual punishments docs not apply to th
States. Mr.. Justice Field, ii viii be remem
beled, disscnted from the opinion of his asso
ciates, holding that the Eighth Amendmen
had been made applicable to the States by th
operation OF tho Fourteenth Amendment. II
the O'Neill case the Imprisonment for ono OF
fence was only one month. but the aggregate
number of offences made the fines 80 largo tina
over fifty.four years OF Imprisonment were re
quired to work out tho fines. There was nj
such feature in this case of Hodgson. wher
the maximum imprisonment was only fou
years.
Some time ago Mrs Cooney. better know
by her stage name Of Miss Lottie Collins
| recovered damages to the amount of co
NJ Inndnns maj nino