New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-07-11
.HE|NEMAN'S CONVICTION
AS SLAYER IS UPHELD
Judue Swami Says Decision by
Appellate Division indicates
Rulings at Trial.
ABUSED BY MAX D. STEUER
Justice Seabury's Criticisms
Commented Upon-Man Who
Shot Robert Dooley Must
Serve Ten Years.

The Appellate Division yesterday az
frmed the conviction OF William Heine-
man. who was tried for manslaughter
three years ago before Judge Swami, In
General Sessions and sentenced 10 not
less than ten nor more than twenty
years. Heinemans bondsman was di-
rected by the District Attorney to surren-
der him Monday.
Judge Swami. whose attitude at the
trial was described by Justice Seabury
as preiudicial to the defendant. yester-
day said the action OF the Appellate d.
vision vindicates him and substanuates
his belief that since the inception OF the
Heineman case there was powerful
though hidden, influence at work to free
him.
In regard TO Justice Seabury and his
remarks at the time he granted Max ID.
Stcuer. counsel for Heineman. certi1-
cate OF reasonable doubt, Judge Swami
issued the following statement in his
chambers yesterday:
This was the case in which Justice
Seabury granted certificate OF reason
able doubt and criticised Judge Swami
for his rulings and also expressed the
opinion that Judge SWANS rulings would
certainly be reversed.
Justice Seabury allowed Max d. Steuer
10 indulge in personal abuse OF Judge
Swami in his argument, and the abusive
argument vas published in all Of the
newspapers. The unanimous affirmance
by the Appellate Division sustains and
vindicates Judge Swami and disapproves
the rulings OF Justice Seabury and shows
the abuse and vituperation by Steuer,
which was permitted by Justice seabury'
10 be wholly without Justification
Heineman shot and killed Robert Dooi'y
New Years night. 1910. At the inquest
Coroner Feinberg empanelled no jury ana
found a verdict Of justltiable homicide.
The case was taken before two grand
turies without an indictment being re-
turned James A. Delehanty. Assistant
District Attorney, took It before third
grand Jury. which indicted Heineman.
At the trial Judge Swami recognized
Walter l.. Pfyfe. one OF Heineman's wit
nesses, as a man who had testified FOR
two Chinese in a murder trial short
time before. At that trial Pfyfe's testi-
mony that the Chinese had been assault
ed before they fred shot brought about
an acquttal Judge Swami examined
Pfyfe on that subject.
After the jury had convicted Heineman
Judge Swami asked IT'S members IL they
believed the testimony Of Pfyfe They
said they did not Judge Swami COM
mitted Pfyfe for perjury. Pfyfe then ad-
mitted TO Judge Swami that he had been
promised 1900 and "a Job for lie" II he
would get Heineman on. Pfyfe pleaded
guilty and was sentenced TO three years
and six months by Judge Mulqueen.
In applying FOR certificate OF reason
able doubt Max d. Steuer told Justice
Seabury that Judge SWANS attitude
throughout the case had been such as to
prejudice the Jury against Heineman.
1T seems TO me" said Justice Seabury
in granting the certificate. that the
statement OF the court after defendant $
counsel had summed up was prejudicial
TO the defendant. The courts statement
was incorrect as matter OF law and was
volunteered at time and In manner
hurtful 10 the defendant
The opinion Of the Appellate Division,
which was written by Justice Ingraham.
is as follows:
"A careful examination OF the records
and the charge by which the case was
submitted TO the jury satisfies us that
the defendant had fair trial before an
impartial jury and that the evidence JUS
! titled the conviction, and We would not.
therefore be justified In reversing the
Judgment"