Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-05-25

no notice given to TnaW or near ing upon the question of insanity, that no hearing was accorded to him, that he has been deprived of his liberty without due process of law, and that the statute under which he was committed does not provide method by which his men, tai condition, as then existing, could be legally ascertained, or any meth- cd by which his sanity could be shown.
 The people contend that Thaw was not deprived of his liberty with out due process of law because he knew that If he chose to prove upon the trial of the indictment that he was insane when he killed Stanford White, and if that defense was suc- cessful and the jury acquitted him of the charge against him on that ground, it became the duty of the court, if it deemed his discharge dangerous to the public peace or safety, to order him to be commit- ted to the state lunatic asylum until such time as he should be legally adjudged sane. He had the right to appear in person and to be rep resented by counsel, and he had the right to introduce evidence of his present sanity.
 If upon all the evidence and the verdict of the jury the court should decide his discharge to be dangerous to the public peace and safety, and commit the defendent to an insane hospital until sane under the pro- visions of section 454 of the code Of criminal procedure and Tbaw having had this opportunity of a full hear ing, this right to be represented in person and by counsel, this right of offering proof in his own behalf, there was no violation of article l, section 6, of the constitution of the state of New York, nor of article XIV of the United States constitu tion.
 Thaw had the opportunity on the trial to introduce evidence of his mental condition at that time which he did not do; he should have known that the adjudication of the court would follow verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity; he was repre- sented by able counsel who urged the jury before whom he was tried upon a charge of homicide to acquit him because of his insanity.
 have made a careful examination of the authorities ani 1 do not find that this statute as ever been passed upon by any of the courts in this state. It has been ill existence and operation for many years without question, and it is the duty of the court to presume in favor of the va iidity of the statute until It's violation of the constitution is established be- yond all reasonable doubt and upon such determination the result which may follow from one construction or another Is always potent factor and is sometimes in and of itself conelu- siye.
 In construiug this statement 1t should be borne in mud that inc safety and welfare of the community is of more importance than the free
 
 Ii is we'll settled that where there is a right of an appeal no court should declare in the first instance a statute unconstitutional unless its unconsti- tutionality is plain, especially when the statute has been long in force and its constitutionality has never been questioned. This may well be the rule when the effect of q declaration of unconstitutionality would be to free from needful restraint n number of persons of un- sound mind of whom 1t has been ad- judged by competent courts that their going at large would be dangerous to the public peace or safety.
 After James q. Graham, his at- torney, had shown him a copy os Judge Morschausers opinion Harry K Thaw gave the reporters an in- terview and talked volubly about the case. He talked unreservedly ok everything except his wife, and when her suit for annulment of heir marriage was mentioned he stood up and indicated that the interview was at an end.
 Before that he conyersed freely about his trial. His chief theme was the newspaper reports of the evidence. While not accusing the reporters of wilful misrepresen.a- ton he said that much testimony fa- vorable 10 him was not published probably because it did not appear to the reporters as interesting, while undue prominence was giYen to Dis trict Jerome's cross-examination of Thaw's experts because Jerome knew how to make it interesting. He said:
 Take for instance Dr IaCoby. His direct testimony vas conclusive. but not interesting: his cross-examina- ton under Mir Jerome was interest ing and the newspapers printed G. Probably ! should have done the same as the reporters in the same position"
 This did not discuss the action of the court. He said that Mr Jerome had done what he deemed his duty
 Asked about a report that Evelyn Thaw would withdraw her annuIment suit in order to try 10 have herself appointed committee of her husbani's property. Thaw said he had no fear of any such action. Thaw was cheer ful for a man who had just heard bad news
 Mr Graham said that the order Tor reeommitment would probably not be signed by Judge Morschauser until a week from next Saturday. In the meantime efforts will eb made to In- duce Mr Jerome to consent to Thaws commitment to one of the state hospi- taIs other than Matteawsn if Mr Jerome consents Thaw will not sp-