The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1898-01-31

Sence OF the Attorney General. Surely
that fact ought not to delay this case.
The State is represented by two able and
capable men, as able and capable as they
could procure that I can see no reason
for this adjournment. We. too, had en-
gagged on our side the services of the ex-
Attorney General, but he was forced to
go away, yet we don't ask to postpone.
We are ready to go on, and respectfully
submit that the absence of the Attorney
General is no excuse for this move on the
part of the State"
1.-THE circumstances of the case,'' con-
tinued Judge Hoffman. impressively, ''are
extremely peculiar. Here are two men
ready to face their accusers, and for their
case to go off is fraught with such disas
trous effects that I must respectfully in
sist that there shall be no postponement
today of their trial. They are practically
penniless, and it does seem unjust that
this case should go over. They are de-
prived of doing their business, and one or
them is prevent from representing his
county in the halls of the Legislature.
They are without money, and cannot
help saying that it would not be a proper
thing for this Court to entertain this mo-
ton
Justice Lippincott here interrupted cour-
sci by saying that the rule was that 1t
was customary to move trial in the
same term wherein the Indictment was
found, The Court merely wished to make
it clear that that was the law, and the
practice followed in the court. Further,
the Court was just as anxious to have the
case disposed of as counsel, but there was
the work of the Court also to be consid-
cred.
"If the case" Judge Hoffman interposed
''is to go off, while I appreciate your
honor's work. may l ask for day during
the present term of court?'
The Court did not reply, and ex-Judge
Garretson took the opportunity to offer
an explanation why he could not continue
with the trial without the Attorney Gen
eral He, Mr.. Garretson. only appeared
in the case at the urgent request of the
Prosecutor after he had decided that the
case was so important that the services of
the Attorney General were asked. The
Attorney General, continued Mr.. Garrett
son. had responded to the request to con-
duct the case. and had since been actively
engaged in its preparation. To go on
without the Attorney Generals assist
ance would be impossible, and he, Mr..
Garretson, did not come to assume the re-
sponsibility of proceeding with the case
in his absence. The Attorney General,
he said, in conclusion, would doubtless
be able soon to come, and when he was
well the case would go on Immediately. :
The two Judges here held a consuta-
ton and at its close Counsellor w. H.
Speer said
,.,,1xe n
that the court shall proceed at this time
to hear the case because we insist that
not sufficient reason has been offered
why postponement should take place
We make this motion irrespective of the
statute and we wish. to get our motlon
on record. We contend that the
statute is unconstitutional because it dis
tinetly interferes with the constitutional
right of a defendant to have speedy
trial. The Legislature had no right to
pass such an act. We insist with all
respect and fairness, that this case
should go to trial.
Suppose the Prosecutor" replied JUS
tice Lipincott, "were sick in case OF
great magnitude would 1t be wrong to
insist on a trial? The rights of the state
would be affected in that case You cam
have your motion entered on the record
..But the Prosecutor persisted Mr..
speer. Sin this case is not i'll nor is his
assistant. As for the Attorney General,
the State had no business to engage
him"
"You make an error there" said the
Court.
81 may be wrong, but my reading OF
the law is
.You are in error, Mr.. Speer," said the
Court 'My reading of the law is dl1fer-
ent: the Attorney General may come in
if the Court so desires, and his services
in this case were asked
stWell. your honor, all we want Is
speedy trial. and we would like the Court
to fix day.
Another consultation between Justices
Lippincott and Hudspeth took place, when
the former. after looking at calendar,
said that after February II next he would
be engaged every day for at least six
weeks. He would have three days before
the opening of the Supreme Court, but
he was sure the present case could not be
finished within that time The last week
in March was the only time he would
have at his disposal to hear the trial.
eve would rather said ex-Judge
Noonan, commence the trial the last
week in March,
''But Judge Hudspeth goes off the bench
on the first day of April" the Court in
terrupted.
''Oh, well in that case,'' said Judge
Hoffman. "after Judge Hudspeth goes off
the bench then eIcan get him as a wit
ness both for our side and that of the
State'
A laugh followed this suggestion in
view of the recent consultation between
counsel for the defendants, the States
lawyers and the two Judges, at which it
was agreed that Judge Hudspeth should
not be called by either side to give testi-
mony.
why not set the trial down for next
Monday" said Judge Noonan.
"And suppose the Attorney General
should not be better, what then?" asked
the Court.
Adjourn again.
The Court at this point said that having
to prepare for the meeting of the Supreme
Court and Court of Errors and Appeals
should the case be set down for next
Monday, it would leave very little time
to prepare opinions and would greatly in
terfere with the judicial comfort of the
Court. His honor thought that to name
next Monday would in every way be in
convenient and the Attorney General