The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-03-15
Right to Counsel in Criminal Cases

We believe that the application Of
ALBERT T. PATRICK TO be allowed 10
argue the appeal from the judgment
of death against him before the Court
Of Appeals at Albany is the first instance
Of the assertion Of the right Of person
condemned as a murderer to be heard
In bis own behalf, not simply through
counsel, but IN person, before an appel
late tribunal. Chief Judge CULLEN
recognized this right by instruoting
the warden OF the State prison at Sing
Sing to produce the prisoner at the time
fixed for the argument Of the appeal,
IN order that he might present his own
case; but on second thoughts and I'M
der the advice Of his counsel, PATRICK
abandoned his idea Of presenting his
case himself and left it to be argued by
his lawyers.
The Constitution Of this State provides
that sin any trial in any court whatever
tho party accused shall be allowed to
appear and defend in person and with
counsel as In oivn actions It VIII be
observed that the right to counsel thus
guaranteed relates only to trials; and
In tho strict and technicalsense the trial
oEa criminal case is hadfn the court Of
first instance, and the hearing Of an
appeal is not usually denominated a
trial. The word trial, however seems
to have been used by the trainers Of the
Constitution in a broadeUsense, as APP
plicable TO any contested hearing in a
criminal action or proceeding; and this
was evidently the view Of Chief Judge
CULLEN in acceding to PATRICK's APP
plioation Orleave to be heard in person.
We are so familiar in this country
with the doctrine Of the right of a de-
PENDANT in a criminal oause'to be heard
by counsel that it is difficult to realize
that this right was denied in England
TO persons accused Of felonies other
than treason up to the year 1885; so that
less than seventy years ago a man on
trial before an English court Of justice
for murder was compelled to defend
himself as best he could, without any
legal assistance whatever. Indeed jlsre
was no right to the aid Of counsel in
prosecutions for high treason prio. to
the revolution of 1888. To illustrate
the spirit of the old English law on this
subject, Chief Justice COOLEY, in his
we'll known treatise on Constitutional
Limitations, refers to the case Of Sir
WILLIAM PARKINs, who was tried for
high treason before Lord HOLT and his
associate justices in the year 1895. The
trial came on after the statute permitting
the aid Of counsel in prosecutions for
high treason had been enacted, but
one day before it was 20 take effect. Sir
WILLIAM PARKINS entreated the Court
10 be allowed counsel. inasmuch as he
would have a right to counsel if the
trial were postponed but for one day;
and he read the preamble Of the statute
10 show the Parliamentary recognition
Of the justice of his claim. The Court,
however, denied his request, allowed the
case to be forced to trial, andthe prisoner
was convicted and executed.
Whatever may be said Of the present
imperfections Of legal procedure in this
country, our law is not justly subject
to the reproach Of inhumanity in criminal
prosecutions, such "a was commonly
practised in England up to a period !
within the memory Of living men.