The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-11-14
CONTINUED Wrom Eighth Page.)

WEALTH. " winch inc UcfenuantB
counsel had no chance to reply.
In the New York case the court
charged the jury (see page 1860
to set aside whatever Impress
sions may nave been made upon you
by any statements either oil the dis.
trict attorney or OF counsel tor de-
Tense that We're not borne out ny the
evidence whilst the court i'll the case
at bar not oniy gave no sucn charge
but by It's refusal To stop OF reDuHe
counsel added the weight OF it's up-
prevail 10 the remarks oOJccted 10. Yet
tho New York court held tnat TN.
d.tcndant dld not nave !. iair trial
and a judgment Of CONVICTION must he
reversed AID "a new trial ordered"
uther Citations.
The Suprem. Court Oh Vermont in
the case OF state w. Hunn.tt. says on
page 3s. Counsel IN their argu
IL the jury are pound 70 Keep witnIn
TIA. limit 81 fair and temperate. uIs-
cussion. The range Oh tnat discussion
is cIrcumscrlbeo by the .,luence III
the case. any violation oil tnis rule
entities tne adverse. party to an cx-
ccption wnicn IS a. po,.nt u upset
veruict as any c,ner error committed
during the trial"
In the cusc OF Wiiliuins ~. Il. L. Il;
K, Co, 10 y. l., pdyr -, II was head
tsee last part oi tne syilubusJ lnut
ntSlIuent TO anotncr case an urucr 10
influence their verdlct may not be
permitted"
In Ine case OF Rochester We. shaw.
100 iid., page 2Gt. counsel in ms
speech SAID "rhs school trustees ara
Trying 10 diSGrace anu opprcss At cit,-
zen OF NJ county, ana the yeraict
VAS on account OF TINS language set
asiu", even though the court urIuw
sought by it's INSTRUCTIONS to cure tho
error committed By the use of SUCH
language.
In the case at bar tho counsel 70.
prosecution virtually to!d the jury that
shey would disgrace their state IL
ihey found vernict OF not guilty.
~ is needless to ask which was tho
more Improper remark.
In lee Louisiana in the case of State
We. blackburn, on page 1913. in speak
ing OF the language used By the district
Used was Incorporate and improper
The Language used was an expression
that II the Jury failed to convict Of
murder in the irst degree they were
new trial was granted BY appellate
court
The language used in the case at bar
asserts that the jury would by a YER
and dishonor on the State OF Virginia
that as TO dfapc her In mourning
throughout eternity" and bring ter
ror to our homes"
OF ivey 80. state, decided In 1901. tho
Supreme Court of Georgih set aside 4
.erdict and Judgment in the court
of accused for selling Intoxicating IL
quors had said that good mothers had
wet their pillows with their tears
over their boys. who had been intoni-
Gated by the acts OF the accused" (see
page $3.50 The court went on TO say,
These remarks were not warranted
by the evidence and were plainly cal
culated TO prejudice the accused" II
had said before that 1T Ia under no
circumstances his duty to either go
outside OF tho case and state facts
TO appeal to tho passions or pretudiccs
OF the jury"
In the case at bar both propositions
were violated
SO vital is the principle here involv-
cd and so strictly is 1; guarded that
nero motu. without any objection by
defendants counsel in the court below.
See State Of Kansas We. Cute Kunst,
g Kansas 252. the court saying, page
2Ji. In reference to such remarks, The
court need not and ought not TO walt
10 hear the objection from opposing
counsel. but should interfere of their
own motion"
See also the case of Martin VS.. the
state. 90 Miss, page sos, where the
court says. In giving new trial on
HcTount OF improper remarks OF coun-
sci for Commonwealth: 1T is the duty
Of the presiding Judge to inter-
terc Of his own motion to prevent
breach OF the privilege Of counsel"
NJ.
In reference TO the motion to set
aside the verdict in the case at bar,
which Is contained in the seventeenth
Pill OF exceptions, your petitioner feela
mat the record shows that no such
verdict should have been rendered on
The doubtful and conflicting testimony
IN this case. The proof Is uncontra-
dicted that the relations between him
and his wife were cordial and friendly
This was shown by numerous Wit
ncsses. II was also shown by the un-
contradicted testimony OF unimpeached
witnesses. who had known him from
childhood. that he had an amiable and
kindly disposition utterly Inconsistent
with the commission of the atyocious
and brutal crime with which he was