The sun., 1913-10-15

cusation from section si+ OF the Penal
LAW 30 as to bring Il within the scope
OF section Sl3 We are simply asking
you to grant the ordinary. casual. every
day amendment. allowed as a matter OF
course in Jurisdictions all over the state
OF New York. either civil or criminal in
their character
Invites Sulser to Appear.
Turning toward Judge Herrick NJ,
Stanchfield thus invited him to put Mr
Sulzer on the stand. He said:
Il speak the sentiment OF the managers
Of the Assembly OF New York and trust
Of high minded. fair minded citizens
everywhere. that II with that change In
view the respondent feels now that he
wishes in person to make answer from
the witness stand or II he feels now in
the light OF that change that there IL
other testimony he desires to produce
aside from himself-for he has the right
to 20 OH or keep off the stand as IN"
may please--if. ! repeat. he desires to
produc" other testimony to meet that ac-
cusaton the door is open, and there will
be no objection raised by the managers
OF this trial"
When Mr.. Stanchneld finished. Senator
Duhamel. a friend Of the Governor. said
that the lawyer had continually referred
to the articles OF impeachment as
Of this trial they have been called "in-
dictments"
The Senator asked Mr.. StanchHeid IL he
knew when any court had ever amended
an indictment. Mr.. Stanchfeld replied
| that. according to the history of impcach
ment trials the charges might be called
either an indictment an Impeachment or
. pleading He said:
II am perfectly right from the techni-
cal standpoint In terming them plead
ing for the reason that the defendant,
when he was called upon to answer had
the right, not simply to plead that he was
| not guilty, but the right to spread upon
the record a complete explanation OF. the
| charges. II no was so advised. and in all
| the trials that have been had the
\ phraseoloEy OF lawyers in their argument
has been usually that Of pleading"
Senator Duhamels second shot was
II would like to know the date that Mr.
Peck appeared before the Frawley COM
, mittee."
"He never appeared, Senator" Mr
! Stanchfield replied.
Judge Herrick opened the new argument
for the defence at the opening OF cour'
In the afternoon. II became evident speed
lily that the contentious Of Mr.. Stanchfielo
In tho morning had irritatcd the veteran
! chief Of the Governors counsel. for h
directed no few sarcasms at the prosecu
tion's lawyers as we'll as a. the board
| OF managers OF the Assembly
I He said that the court had listened tC
! n graceful cloCutionary effort from Mr.
stanchHeld. but that In his opinion 1t wa
an "entire misstatement OF the law In th'
case.
| you have also listened. he continued
| ITO an address which in substance con
ceded that article 4 had not been sus
tained by the evidence In this case. HI
| failed to answer the questions that wer'
| propounded to US by the court last night
Judge Herrick said that the reques
voiced by Judge Miller had seemed an ex
traordinary one to the defence. Then hi
said:
! I'VE had considered article 4 very seri
! ously, as we had all the other articles, ant
we had considered this evidence OF Mr.
Peck, Mr.. Morgenthau and Mr.. Ryan an,
A seemed 10 us that It did not reacl
article 4 at all, had no bearing upoi
that, and could only he considered In tn
case, AZ we understood It to be introduced
as bearing upon the general features y
the case and the credibility. so to speak
of the respondents defence.
LET me say th9t this court Is the high
est In the state and It 10 under correspond
ing obligations to observe the law Rn'
establish no bad presidents; not conSic
a man upon q charge not brought agains
him; not permit man to be charges
with one offence and convicted Of another
Cau't Impesch the Fsture.
"rhis Is a criminal trial and governe'
By the same rules az other crimiha
trials. I.o; ne say again you oanno
indict or impeach a man for crime II
July for crimes committed in, the fol
lowing September.
what does the fourth article charge
in genera, terms. that the respondent' en-