The sun., 1909-06-05
DARRAGH GETS 7 TO 20 YEARS
4tTO DRIVER SENT TO SING
SING ~ JUDGE MILlt ZEN.

Tells Con, ,ic,cd Chauffeur That the .Iur.
Was ActHated Only by n Sense NJ
Duty and Spirit OF Mercy Next Maj
Convicted May Pay with Hts Life
William Darragh. tho chauffeur wht
drove the automobile that struck anc
killed Ingvaard Trimble. thirteen-year
old boy. at Morningside avenue ane
l1sth street on March ~ last. was sen
fenced yesterday by Judge Muiqueen II
General Sessions to not less than sever
nor more than twenty years in Sing Sint
prison. Darragh was indicted for murder
in the first degree and one week ago 6
jury In General Sessions found him guilty
Of granddaughter in the first degree. In
pronouncing sentence Judge Muloueer
said that the sentence should be a warn
ing to reckless drivers and that the next
man who came before the Court charged
with a like offence might pay the penalty
with his life Judge Mulqueen said in
part:
This case has excited such interest that
seems proper to state briefly the princi-
pies that guide the determination OF the
sentence to be imposed. Not that wish to
add to your suffering, but because l think
that the public should have clear notion
vi the matter.
No new or obscure law has been invoked
In this instance. The statute defining
murder in the first degree Is very old. II
provides as follows
The killing OF a human being. unless II
fs excusable or justiN able. Is murder in
the first degree when committed by an
act imminently dangerous to others and
a. ual nd r1laca nj
human life. although without a premedi-
tated design to effect the death Of any in
dividual
That law was ed ut time when the
automobile was unknown and when the
present conditions could not possibly have
been foreseen. And yet it so clearly applies
to the reckless use OF these machines that
doubt II its terms could be improved upon
by the most expert legislative drafts
man. II was urged by your learned counsel
that YOU did not intend to kill your victim
But IT is an elementary legal rule that a
m an g intent may be inferred from his acts.
II has been said that You have been con.
victed for the crimes Of others and that
the popular clamor produced this verdict
Nothing Is further from the truth.
II any motive swayed the jury other than
a sense OF duty 1t was not a desire for re-
renge, but rather a spirit OF mercy. Indeed
I am convinced that IL you had been a rich
man or dissolute man the verdict would
have been murder. The legal proof OF muir
der was overwhelming. but not even the
most sympathetic Juror could ac0uit YOU
OF manslau ghter. The statutes defining that
crime were clearly applicable and no ques-
tion OF intent is involved ia them. The law
does not seek revenge. and punishment OF
one criminal is intended to serve as warn
ing to others.
A difficult situation cohfronts ua to-day,
The ant omobie has come to stay. Properly
used it is a source OF healthful recreation.
II Is an important factor in business. II
affords remunerative employment for many.
But il il clear that its use is fraught with
the gravest danger to the people, There
fore all drivers and owners OF these ma
chimes must be extremely careful. Reck-
lessness and negligence will subject them
TO severe penalties. They must not GEEK
their own pleasure or convenience at the
risk OF the public. II is the paramount
duty OF the State to protect the lives OF our
people.
1t is incumbent on the Court 70 impose
a sent enc. that will drive the lesson home
to all. The next man who comes to the bar
Of this court charged with this offence may
pay the penalty with his life. To the ordi-
nary appeals for mercy 1 cannot properly
iste In so grave case. But some OF the
Jurors who convicted you have asked me
no to inAict the maximum penalty since
il is really the first case OF its kind. and |
therefore sentence you to not less than
seven nor more than twenty years at hard
Ia bOr In State p prjsOn