New-York tribune., 1909-01-18
A EHAJfEFTL BOAST.

On. the face of it the acquittal Of Thornton
J. Hams might be SCI. down TO hlunders or the
prosecution and a conflict of evidence that had
left the jury honestly in doubt whether or not
the defendant had acted simply in his own de-
fence and that of his brother, without being
privy TO the crime. But Hains's own statement
puts different construction upon it He said;
The jury. By returning verdict acquitting
me of original responsibility for the death OF
Annis, has placed the unwntten law hlsn
above the written law Of the State OF New YORK
Clearly the Jury Vindicated the righteousness or
the '.unwritten law" by finding me not guilty as
charged That must be obvious TO every r1lnd
that has followed the trend Of the testimony ana
grasped the significance of the verdict IN Co
relation with the Judges charge. Clearly, also,
If I am guTtless my brother is guiitless; Snoulo
he now be tried there is not any DOUBT thaI ne
will be acquitted.
That is practically boast that he was guilty
but escaped punishment He says nothing about
his going to the Yacht club for the innocent
purpose of looking at real estate and being
totally unprepared for and surprised at MS
brothers attack upon Annis- With his defence
the assertion, 'if am guilrless my brother is
guiltless" is inconsistent and 1t is also lnCon-
sistent with his brothers defence of insanity
being only reconcilable with the plea OF the un-
written law for both Of them Hams got on
according to his own declaration, because the
Jury has placed tie unwritten law high above
his brother should be acquitted not because he
is insane but because of the righteousness CT
private vengeance on the part of w-ronged
husband and his family. No other explanation
of the jury's verdict is conceivable to the mlno
of Thornton Hams, who knows now mucn
weight should attach TO his OWL testimony ana
that of his witnesses that he went TO Bayslde
for an innocent purpose
If Hains's boast is true. then the result #
ar-=ae Of II
tice If he is right in MS judgment Of the mo-
tives that Influenced that jury in finding IT'S
verdict of acquittal, then that jury brought
greater disgrace upon the administration OF
criminal law in this city and state than IL mas
suffered from in many long year Let US see: !:
That statement of Hains's valves the allega-
ton that he was not privy to the captain
act The fair implication of ii is that he
and the captain together killed Ann1s 10
avenge the corruption Of the captains VIE
and the ruin of the captains home, with no
defence but the "unwTitten law" If that IS
so. and if that is the way the common sense OF
the iurymen interpreted the evidence, then they
have paIIiated one of the most cowardly muir
ders conceivable, the killing by two men of one
unarmed and defenceless man, in the presence
of the latter's wife and children and or hoh-
day crowd Of men and women. Does the IN
written law cover cowardice as well as murder! /!
We are loath to believe that the jury has "vln-
dicated the righteousness" of private vengeance
or sanctifed the practice of converting yacht
club regattas or theatre roof gardens into bloody
shsmbles. We should prefer to think 1t had
been misled by the testimony before It, rather
than to believe It capable Of such sentiments as
Hains imputes to it. Perhaps it will be easier
to Judge, however. Of the position OF the IN
written law when the trial Of the other de-
fendant, Captain Hams, is. over. The state
ment which Thornton Hams has just issued
should be placed before the jury that tries his
brother. That jury should know that ne re
garded himself as helping his brother TO win
dicate the righteousness of the unwritten law.
If Peter Hains was insane at the time or the
killing. then the unwritten law had nothing 70
do with his case. But his brother has just said
that it had everything TO do with both cases.
With that statement before it, the jury Will be
in good position TO judge Peter Hains's sanity