Evening star., 1914-04-12

NEW YORK. April 1.-THE last hope
of the four gunmen condemned to die
Monday for the murder of Herman Ros
enthal. the gambler. seemingly was blast
ed tonight when Supreme Court justice:
John W. Goff to whom final appeal for
a new trial had been made, declined to
reopen their case.
At prolonged hearing today Justice
Goff, who was the presiding Judge at the
trial of the gunner. listened to the tes-
timony of new witnesses produced at the
last moment by counsel for the doomed
men.
Late in the afternoon. after District At
torney Charles s. Whitman had been
given his opportunity to Offset the newly
offered evidence with testimony by wit
nesses of his own, Justice Con took the
case under advisement. announcing that
he would render decision tonight.
For more than four hours the Justice
toiled over the record OF the day's pro
ceedings. Then. moment or two before
10 o'clock, he appeared at the door of his
chambers and briefly and quietly an
nounced to the waiting crowd of news
paper men that he had denied the appli
cation for a new trial. adding merely that
his opinion would be given out as soon AZ
copies of it could be prepared.
His Heart-Searching Burden.
Justice Goff. in his opinion denying the
motion for a new trial. cited that the
application had been referred to him be
cause the law requires that motion for
new trial be made before the justice
who presided at the trial He continued
Were it possible, in the sense Of judicia
propriety. for me to avoid hearing the
7 haV fo fha
end that a stronger mind would be en-
ployed, and that I would be relieved
from very onerous and heart-searching
burden. But the law casts upon me
responsibility and a duty, and no mat
ter how grave the responsibility may be
or how disa greeable the duty shall not
shift the one nor fall to discharge tho
other
Pointing out that on behalf of the de-
PENDANTS nineteen affidavits had been
presented the court declared that fifteen
should be disregarded as consisting
mainly of hearsay, Impressions anc
matters that are irrelevant and imma
terial.'
Four Afidavits Considered.
OF the others. four af1idavits. those o:
Dresner. Burwell. kalmanson and REQ.
would be considered of any probatiy.
value whatever. Consideration of thes.
four affidavits must include ther. ora
examination and cross-examination hal
in open court.
Continuing, the decision said
The point of Importance dwelt upon
by Dresner was that he was present the
thirteenth of July, 1872, outside the Gar
den restaurant when he heard Rose say
to Vallon and Webber, as Rosenthai
emerged from the restaurant. There he
comes. Go and put it over him. That
yx-f,n thnk oof
crossed the street to avoid danger. an"
that Rose took him for a private detec-
tive. Rose did not so testify on the trial
What Rose testified to was: Tt began
to look too much like business, and |
called Louie aside. and I said. pointing
to a man across the street: DO you
see that fellow over there? He said
Yes I said: Il am almost positive
that is a private detective that District
Attorney Whitman has assigned to watca
Rosenthal. They took the hint and de
parted and went home.
To Fit Roses Testimony.
This testimony of Dresner bears the
unmistakable stamp of being made to 1T
Roses testimony . 1t is sonewha;
remarkable Notwithstanding the appre-
hension OF Dresner that something dire
was going TO happen because Of the
words alleged to have been uttered by
Rose
while the testimony OF Rose on ths
trial concerning the incident at the Gar
den restaurant was competent to show
preparation and combination on the part
of the main defendants for the commits
sion Of a crime il WAS merely step
the progression of proof and contra
diction Of that, even If true. would Of it
self be wholly insufficient to warrant the
granting of a new trial. This witness
went or to narrate what he says he oh
served on the morning of the 10th
when Rosenthal was killed. He did nor
testify that he saw the killing or heard
shots. notwithstanding he was On 4sd
street at the time of the killing and ths
passing of the automobile. He claims -
have identified Vallon, Webber and
Schepps in the passing automobile
Unworthy of Credence.
1T is remarkable that this witness
should be found to be present at these
two important times; that is. on the 18th
at the Garden restaurant, and on the
18th, in 48d street. at the time Of the kill
ing. 1ntrinsicaliy. this testimony In un-
worthy of credence. and II there was anv
element for that conviction II 10 furnished
by the witness himself. maSuauch As