New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-05-11
PRISON FOR HUMMEL
CONVICTION AFFIRMED.
Mast Serrc Sentence Unless Il ppeal
Is Granted.

The conviction of Abraham H. Hummel last
year on the charge OF conspiracy in the Dodge
Morse divorce scandal upheld yesterday by
the unanimous decision of the Appellate Division Of
the Supreme Court. This that Hummel will
have 10 serve a year in prison and pay fine of
$500 according 70 the terms Of his sentence, unless
his case can be carried 10 the Court Of Appeals
John B. Stanchfield said yesterday that, acting as
counsel for Huinnel. he would make effort TO
get from Of the judges of the Court of Ap-
peals a certificate of reasonable doubt to keep his
client out Of prison. pending an appeal to the
highest court. Hummel has been at liberty under
$1,000 bail pending the trial Of his appeal before
the Appellate Division. He disbarred from the
practice OF law after his conviction. His
nephew. A II. Kafenburgh, undertook to keep the
law business Of Howe Hummel going for time,
but he also was disbarred, and the firm went out
of existence Years ago. the lifetime of Will
lam F Howe it had larger practice in the crimi-
nal courts than had any other firm Of lawyers in
the city.
Justice Ingraham wrote tho opinion Of the Ap-
peate Division in H1.mmers case. He reviews at
length the testimony relating to the Dodge divorce
conspiracy and says:
The facts that the defendant al the instance Of
ton TO or conyersant with the action of Dodge
on P9 TO 10 Kew D2 %6k P Ps 70 hm
had him verify an affidavit that was false ana
then, as his attorney r7ade an application to the
Supreme Court upon this false AFFIDAVIT and pro-
this false testimony PRESENTED TO and Obtained
from the order vacating judgment. re-
ceiving from the third person who had instigat ed
the proceedings. the of $1,000 justies the IN
ference that this whole attack upon this judgment
was device invented by the defendant TO upset
the decree Of divorce. in which scheme and device
Dodge was participant, actuated by a common
purpose TO make much money out Of those
whose interests might be affected by upsetting or
maintaining the judgment of divorce as was pos
sible
As 10 the point raised on the Hummel appeal
that the verdict illegal because the jury had
not been told to disregard Hummels failure haze
his law partners and clerks testify the trial,
Justice Ingraham says,
The jury were bound to consider that the test-
mony OF the people was uncontradicted There
were involved with the defendant in the COM
planned OF MI partner and clerks. I do think
il can be said that the jury not justified in
considering, in connection with the truth Of the
evidence, that the defendant had failed call his
partners and clerks TO testify the circum-
stances under which Dodge brought back to
New York and paid these large of money.
But there nothing in the record that required
the judge, matter Of law, tell the jury that
they were not TO consider the fact that none OF
these partners or clerks had been called by the
defendant
Justice Ingraham remarks in closing:
There is also claim that the course of the Dis
trict Attorney. the examination of witnesses esd
his address 10 the jury, misconduct which Re
ouires US 10 reverse the judgment but l do not
think that anything that the District Attorney
said or did on the trial requires the reversal Of
this Judgment.