Evening journal., 1909-06-24
ARGUE APPEAL
IN GOODWIN CASE
Counsel for Convicted Man
Contend State Did Not
Prove Case
MAY BE DECISION
IN SIX MONTHS


DOVER. Del, June 2EWith prac-
tlcally no audience. in Supreme Court
yesterday attorneys for John Fl. Cod
win argued the most important cleo
ton case that has ever been appealed
in this State-that wherein Goodwin
was convicted Of attempting 10 bribc
qualified voter of Red Lion hundred,
the prosecuting witness being Philip
Oliver
Four lawyers for the defendant COM
batted with Attorney General Gray.
who met them single-h handed and
seemed to have the intricate details of
the case we'll in mind
Mr. Churchman. arguing for the ap-
peal, dwelt at great length on the
states failure to prove that Goodwin
was the Goodwin wanted. and he cited
decision after decision where. in all
special constitutional proceeding like
one in Delaware for violation Of cleo
tion laws, the Intermediates Of grand
and petit juries are done away with
to prove that the positive identification
of the defendants as the offender must
have taken place in open court and
must have become a part of the
record
1t is said here that the Supreme
Court will not hand down a decision
should there be no withdrawal of the
Goodwin case. until the January term
six months hence Meantime Godwin's
special bail. taken pending the appeal.
holds good.
The exhaustive attack on Godwin's
| conviction, which was later answered
in detail by Attorney General Gray.
was supported by decisions from all
over the country.
The questions involved in the case
on appeal and the manner IN which
they are raised are as follows
That it was not admitted by the de-
PENDANTS counsel that the defendant
was ever held to bail or that Philip
oliver was q registered voter
That there was no evidence adduced
at the trial of any examination %
the defendant as stated in the infor-
nation which resulted in either a
commitment Of the defendant or a
holding to bail of the defendant on
the charge alleged in the information
by either a Judge or a Justice Of the
Peace. pursuant to the provisions of
Sec. 8. Art of the Constitution.
That there was no evidence adduced
tthe trial Of either a commitment
Of the defendant. or holding to bail
on the charge alleged in the informa-
tion. by either a Judge or a Justice
Of the Peace. as stated in the nforma
tion. pursuant to the provisions OF
Sec. 8. Art Of the Constitution.
That the record in this case fails
to show that 1ohn Goodwin. referred
to in the evidence produced by the
state. was the John Goodwin. the de-
fohdant. who is charged in the in-
formation with unlawfully offering or
promising certain money as an induce
ment t. vote. E. g.. that the defendant
was not identified as the person who
committed the offense charged
That there was no evidence adduced
at the trial that Philip Oliver The
person to whom the promise or Offer
Of certain money as an inducemeni
to vote. was made was then and ther,
a registered voter Of the state of Del.
aware. at the General Election held
on November 3. 1873, as charged IN
the information.
That there was. no evidence adduced
at the trial. that Philip oliver, Tho
person TO whom the promise or offel
OF certain money. as an inducemen
10 vote. was made. was a qualified
voter Of the state of Delaware, o.
Election Day, TO wit, the third da,
Of November A. d. 1908, as alleged
in the information.
That there was no evidence adduced
at the trial. that Philip oliver, th'
person to whom the promise or offe
Of certain money, as an inducemen
70 vote. was made, was on the da.
Of election. TO wit the third day o
I November. a. ID. 1908. duly registered
and qualified to vote as an elector q
the general election held on that day
in the First election district Of tn
Twelfth Representative district o
New Castle county, as alleged in tn
I information.
That there was no evidence adduced
at the trial. that Philip oliver IN
person to whom the alleged promise o
offer of certain money. as an induce
ment to vote. was made. on the da
( Of the general election held Novem
Der 3. A. D. 1908. had not, in fact al
ready voted at the time of the allege
offer.
= That in considering the evidence ad
g duced. the character of both John God
win. the defendant. and Philip Oliver
: the prosecuting witness, having bee
attacked. if their evidence. for tha
reason should be wholly rejected, thi
would leave Andrew Crossan as tn
. only other witness who testified tina
= the offer or promise of money wa
!. made, and his testimony on Yer
: material point was contradicted b
. several witnesses, whose testimony
unimpeached which raises a reason