The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1905-06-10
PATRICK is FOUND
GUILTY OF MURDER
Court of Appeals SuStains the
Lower Body
DISSENTING OPINION HELD
Was Convicted of Murde. of Million
are Rice BY Chloroform and Mer.
curry Administered Dur
ing His Sickness.

Albany, n. Y, June 9.-The court of ap-
peals today, by divided count. voting 1
to 3, sustained the lower courts in ad
Judging Albert 7. Patrick, the New York
lawyer, guilty of murder in the first de-
gree in causing the death of William
Marsh Rice, an aged millionaire. former
| ly resident of Texas.
| on April Z, 1902, Patrick was convicted
. on an indictment charging him with the
murder of Rice by chloroform and mer-
curry. administered to lEm during his sick
ness on September 49, 1900
! The case reached the court of appeals
on March IA of this year, when David
| b. Fill, who appeared for the appellant,
| based his argument for a reversal mainly
on the contention that the condition of
Rice's body revealed by the postmortem
examination might have been caused by
fluids used in embalmns
| The prevailing opinion is by Judge Gray.
with whom concur Judges Bartlett,
| Haight and Werner.
Dissenting Opinion Filed.
| There is a dissenting opinion by Judge
OBrien, Chief Judge Cullen and Judge
Vann concurring, Chief Judge Cullen filing
also memorandum.
| Patrick has succeeded In postponing
| the ultimate decision of his fate for over
three years by display of acumen and
resourcefulness that has excited the won
der of the members of the bar and the
public at large. The opinion of the court
written by Judge Gray, Is very exhaus-
tive, reviewing the formidable record in
every detail and containing upwards of
$1,000 words.
Judge Gray sets forth that the theory
of the people was that the defendant had
conspired with Charles f. Jones, the
valet, or as sometimes called, the secre-
tary OF Rice, to kill Rice, and that the
defendant procured Jones to administer
chloroform to him while he was asleep,
in the accomplishment of their joint pur
pose. This purpose they say was motived
by the desire to obtain possession of
Rce's estate, through will in favor Of
the defendant, and through various trans
fers to him of properties all purporting
to have been executed by Rice, but which
had, in fact, been forged by the defendant
with Jones aid.
The defense is based upon a denial that
Rice's death was effected by violent
| means or that it was by the procure
ment of the defendant and the PROPOSE
tion is advanced that the forgeries were
not brought home to the defendant, or
IL the evidence warranted the finding tina.
they were that that fact did not neces-
sarily fasten upon him a criminal agencies
in the murder.
Induced and Aided Crime.
1t was not claimed that Patrick per-
sonally committed the murder for the
the prosecution had the voluntary con-
fesson of Jones that 1t was he who did
IL, induced and aided tAereto by Patrick;
I1f, ,,,.f,, Al l.,
the commission of the crime under our
law, If he aided and abetted 1t, whether
present or assent or II he directly or
indirectly "courselled, csplmanded. in
duced or procured" another to commit It.
The trial therefore presented these ques-
tons to the jury upon evidence, whether
it was established that the death was the
result Of poisoning or whether that result
was aided. or a cited, induced or procured
by this defendant. Circumstantial evi-
dence was sufficient for their determine
tion, death being admitted, If 1t was Of
such a character as to leave an infer
ence of guilty the only reasonable one
possible from the facts disclosed
The jurors were warranted In believing
that death was caused by chloroform
poisoning and tfatrcertain material facts
sworn to by witnesses. other than Jones,
taken by themselves. led irreslstably to
the one inference that defendants was
the mind that had conceived the criminal
act and induced its commission. The evil
dence Independently Of the testimony of
the accomplce is fraught with crush
ing Implication Of defendant In the de-
liberate purpose TO kill Rice, In order that
he might possess MS estate
Material Errors Permitted.
The dissenting judges said that ma
te-sal errors were permitted In the trial
of the case. and that important evidence
in Patrick's favor was Improperly ex-
cluded. Judge O'Brien's opinion holds that
il was not proved and cannot be proved
| that Rice was living when the chlorotorm
~-----~>~--~-~---~>-->-->-~~
| (cortinred OIL Second Page)