Evening journal., 1908-05-23
HUGH |. ARMOUR
GETS IS MONTHS

Hugh /, Armour. recently convicted
in the United States Court Of violations
of the oleomarsarine laws, was ar.
rigned in that tribunal for sentence to-
day Judge Bradford FIRST set aside
four counts. namely Nos. 2, 3. and g,
10 all Of which the jury which heard
the case. brought a verdict of guilty
and in the three remaining counts.
Nos. 1, and z. The court refused
to grant new trial. after argument
was heard several days ago
Armour was sentenced TO pay a fine
of S2500 on count ]. and S25O0 on counts
6 and 7. and to serve is months each
on counts and Z, the place Of I'M
prisonment designated being the Fed
eral prison at Atlanta. Ga. He will
serve the terms concurrently, however
or Is months in all
| Defendant in ~ Health.
Harry p Joslyn. one Of the counsel
for the defendant. made an able plea
TO save his client from prison. and he
| Furthermore produced affidavits from
physicians CONCERNING the defendants
I health. which had great weight with
Judge Bradford. The latter had in
tended. so he said, to impose the maxi
mum penalty. which would have been
a fine of $4,000 and fur years inn
prisonment. but after hearing the plea
Of Mr. Joslyn. he changed the sent
ence.
Mr.. Joslyn presented afidavits from
DR.. p. L. Ballentine, OF Philadelphia.
DR.. John A. Williams Of Ashville. ".
c.. a physician in West Virginia. and
/ DR.. b. B. Housekeeper, OF Rising Sun,
Nd. all testifying to tho fact that Ar
mour was suffering with tuberculosis
and that any long term In confinement
would result seriously for him. Mr..
Joslyn also informed the court that he
had a verbal statement from DR.. Sam
uel C. Rumford, physician at the coun-
ty workhouse, where Armour has been
confined for sometime. in which tho
latter informed him that confinement
in prison would result seriously for his
client.
In concluding his plea Mr.. Joslyr
said that he did not believe It was the
courts desire to put a man in prison ts
die
The Duties Of Judge.
Judge Bradford in replying to Mr.
Joslyn said that il was the most dis
agreeable part OF a judges functionl
TO impose sentence on convicted de-
PENDANTS. and yet il was put upon th'
judge to see that crime Is punished
not merely as a punishment for the Of
fender. but to deter others from COM
hitting crime lie said that 1t yer,
often happens. as in this case, whe''
the defendant has relatives or wife
who are dependent on him, hut tn
wrongdoers who have relatives an
wives he said, should bear That fac
in mind before committing an offens
against tine laws Of the land.
The Court said that IL Gid lot know
of a case in which there was a NOR
deliberate violation of the law, lonl
continued and one in secrecy. and tn
verdict 4 the jury could not hav
been anything else but guilty.
The maximum punishment in tn
three counts remaining" said TN
court, "is $4,000 fine and years i'm
, prisonment and l had intended tina
this defendant should be punished I
the maximum, but since hearing III
Joslyn, have altered the sentence.
. is not the function of the court to III
man and for a judge to deliberatel
S put a man in prison for any other tho
a capital offense to die. would max
T him unfit for the judiciary"
The court called attention to III
fact that all prisons have skilled ply
sicians, whose duty il is TO examin
prisoners, and if the man examined
. is in danger of losing his life by bein
. confined. the man so confined, woui
= meet with clemency "Since 1 hav
{ been on the bench" said the cour
eleven years. I have never failed I
. any case to recommend executiv
clemency to any prisoner in a case G
this kind"