The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1905-01-18


\ ~ Y appeal 10 this honorable NJ court, where!
human lie is The stake, and 4 fair opportunity
OF being heard at It's bar8 by ounsel. Is !one
which, according to The theory, practice and
X trad ,tions Of the government OF IL his Com
&iilonwealth; can be almost classed among Tie
absolute rights Of mankind. u &, U rs
aS II. Indeed sthe grounds upon which suah
right Is invoked bio frivolous or unlmI rtant,
or be such an have alreudy been z djudicttea
and settled by this court. nfter{ full argument,
Slsdnnbtedly should !. his court refuse tocnter.
tain the appeal and not sui y the dignityFnnd
aIinF!,y h .ritfa T., Wi1h
\ TO he condemned and such as may have
brought about his condetna.lon; and where hers
the correctness and regularity of8.the jldg-
1nont conlplained Of Is in good ia ith called in
Question upon. points which have not been
If f is b
eonsderaton q nc court and te profession
mini OF u right Within tho conten.plstion OF nc
Il col. 10 the benefit Of counsel Gs 5l,iaetically
denied II tlic counsel be simply pefmlt tied 70
assign error in u petition TO the court, and
q have no opportunity 10 answer or combat the
y reasons by which the, court Ia INT uenced IN
VI deciding adversely III III vi N, .33$
II may bc fthlt In the estimation OF Tho
court the grounds IL It's decision nro n,prns-
nable. but the question Is when human 5llfo
Is tie stake. ought the court. however eminent
syit be, and however oDsciiru the counscl, G 70
conclude the iiat ter until its 4reasops have
II becI, subjccted 10 the test OF n fair4anu run
II opportunity OF C6mha ting Them, when the car
presented in several Important ASPECTS, ~ one
n or first impression in this cpinnlonws tll |?
E3It is i,npossibie in any suci, filsr US peli-
tion's q for council however d!ligent. 70 anti
& cpate the difficulties Which ltyl!I5 arise IN Tie
minds Dt the court. Indeed niany az the
Il question: for adjudication being new, and the
x case ilsslf ingcying the Wpightlcst co,isdGra-
tipli within the realm or human Jurisdiction
" iIe;iiionf' counsel did not realize that II MAJ
y necessary. 10 attempt 10 anticipate IN Their
q presellla lon Gt the case in the petition, ul
" tint n might bis urged Irnin Tie adversary
& Etapdpolnt I',ify naturally and REASONABLY
s,cxpectcd an opportunity tps combat tbs ulNstse
Il view IN tbs argument before the court (
st;nffini Of ,lie questions, 1T lsast, are new
II and Hitherto nnadJndlcated ia this Staie.t-
r NOTABLY the qnes,ion ~ 70 the Jury reading
SieWarApfrs, aud that CONCERNING the com
" sIrpction and scope At the recent atnrndment
3S party iii,pcarhing lis own witness.
III regard 10 tho first nj these, II has hem
stated In he press that the ground upon which
3ttliis court prnriued The object IN, MAS that
q The jim yaskeil pernSspu Of the court 70 read
n Ehwsl5abcrs and petitioner did not than obs
jsct,5RI,p II SO, liut % the matter ives ROT
5siiflHpned ~ the petitioner on his counsel;
{whests Views ~ regar thereto Is Was not
Il defined material "a consult %, conslder; and
z IN t3,,yas undersihoi that The Jurors Werr
+ ;y,leaesl not "a reHd anything IN rcfsrencr
q 10 The case on trial, whereas, In fact, they
fpr so,ne or lhenl Nd dy so, Nd
a& hut has II eSfr occurred 10 this honorable
& court how uptust Is Vas to pinse petitioner