The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-07-30
NORDSTROA MAKES 4 MOVE.
Starts on His ADnnal Trip to the
Supreme Court.
STAY OF ex curaon DENIED.


ssrsnss Seek sssiI ~ Dasgss.
Charles ". NcrdssrsEn. vino was con-
vtcted sevsn yesfs ago Of the muF.ssr OF
Willie Aas0H on Cedar mouAlaia. eut SsEs~
tNac~d 70 BE- hesxe5. eDensnencesi his an
nual trip 10 tEs Tnstst STATES suprsme
court YESTERDAY
Assuming thar Sogd<srorn Ia inxans. Al
sorTsey = Henry Dennfns. an Bis nsss
friend. applied 70 Ju5ge HzntorS for .
writ 81 babeAs eorpsst ssss the sroar<ta that
ssrofs III previous petition had been
remeassd. that Sofaxtrsm was sentenced
FOR murder In tfse asss degree. whereas *
should haye been second. and that tho
Dfoseesssnwn 10 iiss Sordxsromss ans;y wss-
illegal
Judge Hanford y~Temrtariiy denied the
wit ard sefused 20 syans q stay OF ~xecs-
ton He Was caapssI3d. hawsseT. 10 ale
low an appeal A. two weeks remain bs-
fOrs the proposed execnfion. SDr1sesson
Will nays an opportunity - sstemps 10
secure stay from the United f5sates s1-
preme court az from Judge Jacobs. In
easa az d failure from these sources Gov.
Rogers could Erxas rsprseye-
In the petssion for writ OF habeas cor
psts = judicial history OF the case In given.
Following this II - stated TIA. the first
petition Tor = writ 81 hsissas cospa. Ia the
Enstsd States circuit ooarf was disrnisxei
By the UnitHd Ssatc3 supreme eynrf for the
season THAI copies u the information and
the verdtcf were NOT attached "a that PEE
sItion. - n was eoHtendesi Ia that appii-
eassoo that Soristrom had never been con-
WINGED legally es any offense greater than
murder Ira The second degree.
The petition Sled yesterday supplies these
deficiencies. The contention II that Nord-
strom waa charged By information in the
superior court OF Two offenmes. namely.
murder In the first and murder In the
second degrees and that the verdict re-
turned by the Jury was guilty as eharK-
al. = Under this verdict the pesitione. sets
firth the claim that SorsAssrom was en-
titled 60 q sentence not greater than maf-
d~Ts In the second degree. which Ia impr:s-
nnmsnt In the aeussentiary for not more
than twenty Year,. Cnitr this cans.ruc-
ton Of s,se verdict Il - alleged that the
trial cours erred IN discriminating asains;
the prisoner by sentencing him To death.
or thu severer punishment, Instead Of re-
81iylnx ara reasonable stonhs In hia favor.
Under The contention Of the petition the
sasxtsat failed 10 Indicate whether Nord-
ssrosn un2 sugty of mtsrses IN the irst or
second dsxree N4sth being the case the
court shoald have PASSED sentence under
the laW kovsrntn2 the e.esnd d~gre.
Another elaam that In nxine the day
for Nordrsren1R execution on AuEasH n.
Judge Jacobs hG3ed Without hf1r1ittion In
the former hahcas corpus case the supreme
conrs u the United States did not ,schni-
caIig dismiss the appeal from Judge Han
fofsl's court bsls remasisisd The caaae for
further proceedings before Judge Hansosd.
The petition claims thai Sorxtssron Should
have been giEen an opportunity 20 amend
that pftislon regarding the lnxuf5fcsencs of
the vefairs ~ support sentence of death.
bat that M opportunity was given for such
amendment and tina, despite the defend.
ants stgats judge Jacobs assumed 10 take
Jurisdiction and fixed August II for Nord-
ssroui.s exscusisn.
The petitsea further SETS forth that in
any event Judge fiasferd should have
made due order transferring the ease
hack TO the superior court. which was not
done
Tne petition SETS forth that the formal
ohi.ctioa 70 the Jurisdiction of Judge
Jaests 9sr. presented In The superior court
and that Judge Iaeeh~ essfruiesi them
The Third gfaIns fer relief Is that Seris
esrasn Is insane All % the proceel sags had
before judge Jacobs are nas forth IN sh.
petition from the fling OF tho affidavit
alleging NoFfSfrom's insanity and through
the entire proceedings Of the investigating
committee appointed by Judge Jacobs. IT
Il claimed thar Judge Jacobs acted con-
trary 10 law 10 she investigation into
Nossistsans'a sanity. Inssea5 of appointing
q commission as Judge Iaeassa eis. II =
claimed tssat he should have tried the ques-
tion ef Neysistram's sanity either before a
jury Of lwesfs men. Or isfers n commission
tn open court. Instead o. star chamber
rommk~san. and that Norfstsasn should
have tsen sven an opportunity 81 produce
witnesses "a prove aaas ne was insane, I,
will ~ remembered tnas Jaeigs Jacobs ar
pointed ecFnmhs az 81 SIX rhyzictans "a
.sAntaa lusa Neya~syaus condition. and
tire commission hega strictly secret sessions.
go, admitting ihs defendants counsel "a
the hearing and net permitting them to
eai sitnSsgFs prove shat Nefdsirayss a.
snsare the easnnltfs. acting IN an arhs-
srsFy manner. calling aYly a few vii.
nessrz unknown 50 she defendant, and re-
turning 10 The SQUIRT that they heievsf,
Sossfesroas % ~ sane This proceeding shs
petsslsrsvr sa,a nss Was Wholly vait and eoa.
trary a .aw sma tststea 70 Sagststrosn shs
dur rEeesrs az law as guaranteed by ths
so@ssttassaa ~ ssse United safes There
ID no statute in she state ef washingteu
reevsasng fer the manner af trauite tngc
the mental conditions OF a pevzaa alleged "a
have t.~s.erne inxsne while wns4r sentence
es death ana $50 th~ absence 81 steh 4
stasute tie ps.issau@T claims sass the .sFs.
sssssit 70 " safNes hf*h&ss "sssNfa - TOT fHfst'
cial insemsry- either by fasv oy commission
tn onen Sauvs
TIE gssitien farther ssfx farfh shef ar
aepess was tatee esena .iasfsr jacobs cear;
ussea jhe lwsanlsy matter 80 sne supreme
eeaft ~ shS wate ard tAat ssss supreme
eaGrs 80 the state tlsfnaNsvsf the @nsss
srFxsn tae sres9na shst ssssTe IS ~ statute
~ sAs srernssl sls& xsich apgsa5
Ne 8ssts8en saS ns-sn y@arhesI a. ~ shs
esses rssgrss % - ps,Ts8ea IN securing 8
say ~ eSseess0a.
LAST VOYAGE rNf~ ES~aN