The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1905-10-03
A REMARKABLE PLEA
Ex-senator Hill Attacks Judge Gray
In Behalf of Patrick.
RECEIVES SINGING REsUKE

Wakes TOlnk nat 0uIlbt OUT was
Among Prosecutors Of Murderer,
Which Opposing Brief Declares Is
Contemplate and lmpudent.
Albany. NJ Y, oct 3-The case OF
Albert r. Patrick, who since March 26,
1902, has been under conviction Of the
murder OF the aged millionaire. VII.
liam Marsh Rice, in New York city in
1900. came again before the court OF
appeals in an aspect as remarkable as
any of the previous phases OF this
case. which throughout has been one
OF the most extraordinary in the
criminal history Of this state.
Patricks counsel, former United
States Senator David b. Hill, present
cd brief In support OF his motion for
re-argument Of the case, which was
decided against Patrick by the court
last June by a vote OF 4 10 3. In the
course Of this brief he points out that
a son Of Judge John Clinton Gray, one
OF the judges Of the court Of appeals
and one Of those who voted against
the reversal of Patrick's conviction,
was an assistant district attorney Of
New York county and participated In
the prosecution OF Patrick.
Mr.. Hill said that while at the time
OF the former argument he had a per
sonal conviction that this relationship
made It desirable that Judge Gray
should not sit in the case. he knew Of
no procedure or practice for the chal
lenge Of a judge upon the argument
and therefore contented himself with
merely stating the fact of young Mr.
Grays appearance in the case, beliey
ing II sufficient to bring the matter TO
the attention Of Judge Gray and the
court.
The statute provides that no judge
shall sit in a case in which he is in
terested." Mr.. Hill argued that the
present circumstances came at least
within the spirit Of the law, and that
in matter Of life and death the point
was an important one.
1.-THE opinion OF Judge Gray" said
Mr.. Hill Shows that he either misun'
derstood, ignored or declined to con
slider numerous important rulings in.
juriously affecting the substantial
rights OF the defendant, which the in.
terests OF justice and common fair
ness require should now be consid'
cred by this court on a re-argument.
Judge Gray's opinion contains ma
terial mistakes as to the evidence,
disclosing a misapprehension and
overlooking Of material points of fact
by the majority Of the court"
The opposing brief Of District Az
torney Jerome. drawn. 1t is said, by
the late ex-Justice Judson S. Landon
a short time before his recent death,
and filed by Assistant District Attor-
ney Howard Cans. characterizes Sen
ator Hills comment upon Judge Gray's
participation in the judgment Of the
court as being such as mo degree OF
eminence in counsel could render re-
spectacle"
The suggestion that Judge Gray
violated the proprieties in taking part
in this case is as contemplate as 1t is
impudent." the district attorneys
brief declares.
Patrick was arrested October 4
1900 and convicted March &c, 1902
being placed in the death house at
Sing Sing April Z following A petit
ton for a new trial was denied on
March 8. 1903, and again on June 3
1905. Execution was set for Angus
7, but a motion for reargument and
stay Of execution was granted July "a
1905. with renewal Of a motion for re-
argument October 2, 1905.