The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-11-17
HOUSTON. MoNnAY. nov. II. t9o2
JUDGE elLLAsplE's ORDER.

SSON'N- - -~A ~ - -
In repsonse to note from The Post
Judge GillaspIe yesterday sent the follow
lug FOR publication;
To the Editor Of The Post.
Houston, Texas, November I6,--l dislike
very much 10 appear IN print, aud especial
IL concerning tue matter inquired about IN
your note Of this date, but appreciate
your desire TO know exactly the true status
of the matter ana Will therefore comply
With your request.
The Williams trial was on, the witnesses
had all been sworn, placed under the rule
sud Instructed that they should not talk
about the facts Of the case aud not 10
permit anyone to speak 70 them Of IL. This
rule, as Is well known, is 10 prevent Wit
nesses from being tempered with OK IN
dueuced in their testimony.
The case had attracted considerable in
terest all ever the county and ! feared,
lust whar did happen a mistriai. ana 81
that event a publication Of the testimony
would militate against, Il not result in
total failH.c II, Justice In future trial.
And with tho sole purpose of attaining JUS.
tie called the reporters into my private
office, acquainted thcm Of the fears / en-.
tertsined Of mistrlal and what, in nv
opinion, publication 81 the testimony
would result In and requested trem 10 TO.
Train from printing the evidence until after
verdict could be had in the case, and II
such was done II would he regarded as
contempt Of the court. Respectfully.
Judge Criminal Court
On account q the gross misrepresentation
Of the facts in this case many newspapers
Throughout the country have fallen into
serions error. and have uniustly condemned
an upright and well-meaning tudee. who in
his career rs prosecuting attorney and Grim
inal Judge has done more to punish
crime than all hts critics put together.
For the sake 81 setting the matter clearly
before the thoughtful press The Post 70.
states the unbeatable facts upon which the
Judge based his action:
Houston has been for several years dis
sraced by series Of outrageous murders
the most Of which have gone unpunlshed
The criminals have escaped through
suoorning OF testimony. through tamperug
with Jurors and through jury nxinr the
most bare.faced and notorious
This Is state of affairs which no lnteni-
gent person In this community will deny.
II has provoked unsparirg condemnation
from the local press and good citizens. and
has been the subject OF comment through.
out the entire State.
The Williams case. which came on for
hearing at the last term OF Judge Gil.
laspie's court. was one Of extreme gravity.
II the facts were as they appeared al the
Inquest Il was heinous murder. without
the remotest justification. IL is not TOO
much TO say that this was the opinion OF
the general public, II Is not going beyond
the record 90 add that Il was practically
the judges opinion, for he refused to grant
bail on habeas corpus hearing based upon
the evidence submitted In the trial
Yet there was a mistral Several of the
Jurors stood for aequlttal And Judge Gil.
laspie anticipated a mstriaL Note that
well He was familiar with Houston Meth
DDS Of criminal practice, and with the ma.
teflal Of Houston jurics, Before the trsti.
mony began he formed this opinion. which
results confirmed.
The judge recalled from experience that
the appellate courts Of this state have
granted changes OF venue upon the ground
that newspaper publication Of testimony
had prejudiccd the public mind thar in.
telligent citizens here were accustomed ia
plead as an excuse from Jury service. bias
from reading newspaper testimony; that
witnesses for the defense have been MAIDS
acquainted with the evidence Of tho state
on one tHnl. by reading 1t In newspapers
and have reinforced their own testimony
to counteract the State upon another trlnl
OF the same case.
Foreseeing a mistrIal, he sought TO pre
vent such tamperins with testimony ana
such uncandid disqualification OF Jurors in
ahoiher trial Of the same cause ana ordered
cue poslponement Of the publication of the
testimony until a verdict was rendered
be u observed that the Judge DID NOT
PROHIBIT THE PUBLICATION OF rtua
TESTIMONY, HE DISTINCTLY roLD
THE REPORTERS THEY coUtD ms.
MAIN IN THE COURT ROOM. TAKE
THE TESTIMONY AND pUBT,fsU Jr
UPON TIE ANNOUNCEMENT OF A yFR.
DIT Hts sole purpose was to prevent tbe
manufacture q Testimony during tho trl,,
and 10 forestail the disqualification ~ i,-ors
Tor another trial In short. he was ro
solved 70 remove every impeachment reo, nr
Imaginary to prompt and complete inst,cs
and to afford 10 technical cause FOR 4
change Of venue.
~
ihese arr Judge GiIlasgies roas MS FOR Is
aeuoh, AND NO WELLORDERGD MIND
GAN FIND IL THEM ANY MorIy,s ,ro
sGFPREss FREE SPEECH OR MuzzLE
THE PRESS. There was 10 thmebt j,
ssmblance Of star-chamber nroeoedh-
The Pest has contended ana sti,i boi,.
that the evils aiIaed at should he corrected
tee ehould be 50 governed by tho Inv ami
tna courts aa ~ prevent tampering win
Witnesses and to estop these subteifuees 81
Jury disqualification. The law is eutire,y
roo lax In these respects. But that is an.
other story.
Judge GilIaspie was confronting condl-
ton Of fragrant criminality. He adopted
severe measures 10 meet desperate com.
finaton q circumstances, and The Post,
6ut ot rospect to bis opinion ana in sym
rathy with HIS high purpose realcred
sheerful obedience 70 his order.
y may be remarked also, in this con
uection that four newspapers were repre-
terfcd o. the triel and their reporters an
i'esirsd Jedee cliiatpip's order, Wis, rhs
Heustep Pest, the Gslvssten Nave, the
Hepsson Tribune ana tins Houston chgop-