New-York tribune., 1902-01-12
A STAY FOR GLENNON.
JUSTICE GAYNOR GRANTS A CERTIFI-
CATE OF REASONABLE DOUBT.

HE SAYS THAT THE SECTION OF THE CHAR
TER UNDER WHICH THE wARDMAN WAS
CONVICTED EITHER LEGALIzEs DIS
ORDERLY HOUSES OR IS VOID.
A certificate of reasonable doubt has been
granted to Edward G. Glennon, the convicted
wardman of the Tenderloin Precinct. by Justice
Gaynor, of the Supreme Court Brooklyn. In
his decision handed down last night Justice
Gaynor says that the section of the charter
under which it was alleged Glennon should have
acted either legalizes disorderly houses or is
void. He says that it does not seem possible
that it could have been meant to legalize such
places and calls attention to Mr. Philbins dec
laraton that such was not the construction in
tended
The part of the decision relating to this sec
tion of the charter is follows:
This is certainly most extraordinary enact
ment Lawful and unlawful businesses and places
are enumerated in common class. and it is
and inspect them and 'repress and restrain all
unlawful and disordery conduct or practices there
in" 1t is easy to understand how policemen may
be detailed to duty in places of public amusement,
places and other lawful public places. to fcare-
fully observe and inspect" them and 'repress and
practices therein" But does this statute mean
that policemen liz m may be detsilsd to duty in the he
spect' them, and prevent unlawful or disorderly
keep order in them? And what would be unlawful
in such house? 1t Is only the keeper OF such a
terpret this strange statute to mean that the po-
lice may be detailed to duty in such houses for
hold that they are legazed thereby and put under der
the visitation, observation and regulation or the
police 1t does not seem that any such thing can
And if, on the other, hand, it could be construed
as giving the police the right to arbitrarily enter
such houses at will on suspicion and search them
be-" be void bieS' 'e'e''' al "'"0u' d 'a'''' ~
Justice Gaynor says that a trial judge in re-
fusing to charge that in spite of strong moral
certainty that house was of i'll fame, the
defendant had no right to make arrest un-
less somebody would swear to 1t of his own
knowledge. conveyed to the jury that the raids
so often made without warrant by the police
in the county of New-York on hearsay sus-
picion were really lawful, and that that was
the course this defendant should have followed.
He adds:
Instead the jury seems to me- should 3TEt hsys gs
jealous limitations which the law puts on the
rests. For instead Of police officers having the
tyrannical powers of arrest ATTRIBUTED 10 1henI
offence which every citizen does not possess
Ex-District Attorney Philbin also comes in
for criticism follows:
This was one Of those trials where the defendant
Is entitled 10 be &c eare5H guarded ar by tae nd pTs
dice 1t seems TO from the whole tenor Of the
trial that he treated quite the reverse OF this
very able and conscientious prosecuting attorney
forgot his duty in this respect. AS understand
II. the people OF the State do not want their dis
convt ang ONE If the pan facts fairly
do convict then the people of the State do not
a conviction. And this Is doubly true or a
up and accused of neglect TO arrest keepers of
houses which have long been tolerated, now
tolerated. and apparently to continue 10 be toll
Grated by those in chief authority over the police
and over all of II such a neglect is to be the
subject OF Indictment. one may we'll wonder why
those in chief authority should not be indicted
other recent case which arose in New-York County.
ever before anywhere convicted OF what
this defendant stands convicted.
When by Tribune reporter last evening
Mr.. Philbin said that he had not heard before OF
Justice Gaynors decision and that he did not
feel free TO discuss it until he had read it.
being broken" he added. "he certainly has a
right to enter a place prevent the violation
OF the law In this case complaints had been
made to the police station and had been brought
to Glennon's knowledge. He admitted that he
his duty 10 investigate them in good faith.
and not merely go to the door and make pre-
tence of trying to get In. The jury passed Judg-
ment this, and decided that Glennon was not
acting in good faith. and did not make any real
effort to secure evidence of a violation OF the
law. Another view of this means that II an off,
heard sounds emanating from house that
indicated that murder was being committed. he
would have right to enter unless he had a
warrant TO do So An officer is different than
other citizens, and must seek evidence for the
affirmation of the law"