New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-12-07

A crowd that filed every seat in the court
room of the Criminal Branch of the Supreme
Court yesterday afternoon, heard Albert T. Pat
rick plead his own case before Justice Rogers,
arguing unsuccessfully against the motion for
a resentence to death in the electric chair
Here was the man convicted of the murder Of
william Marsh Rice, and sentenced to death
nearly four years ago, who spent more than
three years in the. death house in Sing Sing
gEorbfng and studying to aid the lawyers who
managed his case on appeal, sighting for a little
delay when the Court of Appeals had
given second and final decision against him.
Excepting for a slight prison paIlor, Patrick
looked as we'll as when he was on trial, although
there was report that he was near collapse at
Sing Sing earlier in the day. He arrived IN the
city early in the afternoon, guarded by two
prison keepers, and was taken at first to the
County Court House, before Justice Slower who
decided that the motion for resentence should
be heard in the Criminal Branch by Justice
Rogers. Patrick enjoyed a walk up Centre-st.,
carrying some of the legal documents in his case
and talking with Edward J. KohIer, who is as
ISOLATED with Ex-Governor David B Hill as his
counsel.
Some delay in the Patrick case before Justice
Rogers was caused by the closing of the trial
of Thomas P. W-ckes, and there was inter
ruption in the argument of Mr.. Kohler when
the jury brought in a verdict of guilty in the
Wickes case
District Attorney Jerome reviewed the Patrick
case briefly and asked Justice Rogers to fix
new date for execution of sentence. Mr. Kohler
objected, arguing that the court had no jurisdtc-
ton TO resentence Patrick and applying for
stay of proceedings pending an appeal which
Mr. Hill is to take before the United States
Supreme Court on constitutional grounds Mr.
Kohler talked about two hours, making a tech
nical argument, which seemed to have no effect.
Justice Rogers seemed to be growing impatient
when Mr.. Kohler raised the point that there
was new evidence to show that the conviction OF
Patrick had been obtained by fraud. Mr.. Kohler
was proceeding to recite the evidence, when
District Attorney Jerome, evidently wanting to
bring the long argument to close, consented
TO have all the evidence submitted made part
of the court record.
1t was then that Patrick rose and made
known his intention to speak in his own behalf.
Before your honor decides this matter" he
said I have several views 1 would like TO give
to the court which, I think. will be understood
readily"
The surprise OF Justice Rogers was apparent,
and he asked: DO you want me to set aside the
decision of the higher courts2"
Mr.. Kohler asked for a brief consultation with
Patrick and then said that Patrick who was a
LAWYER, was bent on making statement against
the advice Of his counsel. When Patrick saw
he was to have q hearing, he smiled. He rose
and began to talk with the air of lawyer
pIeading an ordinary case. He said:
Nav II please your honor the court. no one bet
ter than / understands more about reckless words
and am not going to rehash this entire case;
Awning 1 say must be said WITHIN the scope of
the law and l not going TO urge anything l m
not entitled 10 in law
Now the counsel ] had upon my .Uial are not
NV attorneys now. Upon a motion for new trial
on newly discovered evidence, in which con-
tended that the judgment had been fraqdulently
nrocllred our regular counsel appeared Recorder
Con denied that motion and later, when the Court
of Appeals took up the case, II took judicial cog
njzance of that motion and denied *. After that
motion I lost my counsel and then Ex-Governor
Hill took UP the case
Since that time of The Court of Appeals hearing
I have discovered new evidence and matters thar
present legal reasons why want 10 stay the hand
of this court in passing judgment upon me
want to these new matters 10 the court.
I want to say 10 your honor very frankly that
do not want you TO oVerrue the Court of Appeals
or the court Of conviction / know my rights. and
stand here waiting to assert them.
a criminal nature. The burden is upon show
legal reasons for being here. This court has power
to render judgment in this case and 10 grant
affirmative relief
We are asked if We have any legal reasons to
show why Judgment of the court should not he
proved against us. l have my day in court,
and j must state these reasons The court must
Continued on second
OWED MIGHT TO CHICAGO