New-York tribune., 1902-11-18
ILLEGAL BARGAIN, HE SAYS
PATRICK's COUNSEL IN MOTION FOR
NEW TRIAL ATTACKS IMMUNITY
OF JONES.


A motion for a new trial for Albert T. Pat
rick who was convicted several months ago Of
numbering William March Rice, will be argued
next Monday before Recorder Goff An appeal
from the conviction was taken, and IL the pres
ent motion fails the case will be argued before
the Court Of Appeals later on. The present
application for new trial is made the
ground Of alleged newly discovered evidence.
and therefore. must be made TO the judge who
presided at the trial.
After the conviction Of Patrick the lawyers
who had defended him his trial withdrew
from his case and the case on appeal was un-
dertaI1en by John c. Tomlinson, Francis L.
Wellman NJ. J. Kohler and z. J. Kohler. The
application for a trial made yesterday
10 Recorder Goff. who issued order for the
District Attorney TO show cause next Monday
why a new trial should not be granted The
application is in the form of printed book of
l25 pages. and consists in large part of an af-
davit by Mr. Tomlinson. II attacks the prosecu-
tion's methods on the trial of Patrick and
makes revelations regarding those methods, al
leging them to be new evidence.
The immunity from punishment granted by
the District Attorney to Charles F. Jones, the
self-oonfessed murderer of Mr.. Rice. is declared
TO be the result of illegal bargain and
new trial is demanded on the ground that the
a wrong light. The affidavit says that the Dis
trict Attorney. by failing to obtain the indict-
ment of Jones' put himself in the position
where he solely and without action review
by the court could accord complete immunity
10 Jones" This immunity was accorded by
illegal means" the affidavit declares, and then
follows this statement:
The complete immunity accorded 70 the witness
Jones in the nature Of an illegal bargain
between the District Attorney and the witness,
and constituted in law bribe 10 the witness at
the hands of the prosecuting officers OF this county
which would not only have destroyed his entire
credibility as witness before the jury ny, m tins t9ls
but which the facts being now presented 10 the
frict Attorney makes it the imperative duty Of
the TO set aside the verdict OF convection ana
grant a new trlaL
The keeping of Jones at a boarding house and
paving S65 week for his board: his life of
luxury at the expense of the State. and his re-
lease under nominal bail. with permission TO 60
10 Texas after Patrick's conviction are men
toned as proof OF the bargain which helped
10 make the testimony OF Jones effective on the
trial.
In presenting newly discovered evidence
relating 10 the actual cause Of the death OF
William NJ Rice the affidavit deals with the
testimony of Dr. Edward J. Donlin and DR..
Hamilton Williams at the trial Their testimony
was in support of Jones's statement that Rice
was killed with chloroform. and they testified
as ooroner's physicians public officials, basing
their opinions on the autopsy. Several affidavits
Of persons present at the autopsy are presented
20 show that the two coroners physicians said
the autopsy apparently showed that MI Rice
died Of old age Then transcripts from rec
ords in the Controllers Office are presented TO
prove that the coroners' physicians were paid
witnesses Of the prosecution. a fact Of which
the Jury had been kept in ignorance.
r.aFk
year from the city as coroner's physician,
charged 81 800 for his services in the Patrick
trial He later accepted 5000. his bin having
been cut down after an investigation.
The expert had reported. among other things.
that the experiments of DR.. Williams were not
new or original" and the results could have
been obtained in Well organized library or
laboratory"
DR.. Donlin. the other coroneTs physician had
been more modest as a paid witness, charging
81. .lJ0. and finally accepting $500. The facts.
Mr.. Tomlinson's affidavit says show that Don
lin and Williams were not disinterested public
officials, they We're believed by the jury TO be-
but were heavily interested in furnishing evil
dence designed 10 please the prosecution and
had been coached to testify in its behalf"
Incidentally, DR.. Williams is shown 10 have
ceived an extra sum of 1926 for attending Jones
physician. The fees for professional ser
vices are declared 20 be eXorbitant in view of
the reputation and standing of DR.. Williams.
While Mr.. Tomlinsons affidavit does not
charge conspiracy 10 convict Patrick IL calls
attention TO the close and intimate connection
between the proponents of the Will of William
NJ Rice made in 1896 and the prosecution of the
defendant" 1t brings up of the history
OF the two wills to indicate that the conviction
OF Patrick, the beneficiary OF the will Of 1900
was strongly desired by the proponents Of the
previous will
Mr.. Tomlinson calls particular attention 10 the
testimony before the Surrogate of the witnesses
Schepflin Bergstronn French Drake CantVeIi
Wood and Langell in the will case as constitut-
ing evidence which. in his opinion would be OF
great Importance upon new trial. and which
would. IL before received, have probably changed
the verdict"
A speedy determination Of the motion for A
new trial is asked for that in the event OF
its denial by the Recorder. these proceedings
may be included In the case appeal TO the
Court OF Appeals, that court having directed
that that appeal should be argued before March
L 1908"