The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-07-29
Hull Starts for Chicago
JUDGE FORD DENIES
 NEW TRIAL TO BECKER
(Continued from Page One)

cumulative, and hence insufficient" Referring to the plea of w. Burke Cochran, chief counsel for Becker, that the right to grant a new trial is in herent In the court, the decision says: "I cannot find anywhere In the authori- ties even a suggestion that this court l D possesses any such dnherent) power.
 On the contrary, as has been pointed
 out, the power is granted by statute ard must be exercised in strict compli-
 ance With it.'
 Motion Is Denied
 l In conclusion, the court says "As I studied the authorities and examined
 the affidavits, the conviction has grown upon me that 1t Ia new triaD could not
 be granted without disregarding the l law and attempting to usurp the func- 1 tions of another department of govern
 ment. 1 "The motion Is therefore denied The decision refers at some length | to the case of H. c. Benham, which was | urged by MT. Cochran grounds for
 granting a new trial It declares the
 resemblance between the Benham and i Becker motions is that the defendants
 each had knowledge of the facts sought to be proved at the time of the trial and was not permitted by his lawyers l to testify concerning them. In the Ben l ham case there was new evidence aside 1 from the defendants but the court 1 finds no such new evidence in the Beck l CT motion.
 l Howard c. Benham was convicted at l Batavia, N. Y, in 1897, of wife murder. l Al his trial he did not take the stand. l The court of appeals affirmed his con viction and Supreme Court Justice i Hooker later granted new trial. Jus l tlce Ford pointed out that Benham' S
 case differed from that of Becker in | non hap a6 tn fak ha oto nd
 but his lawyers would not permit him. l Justice Ford puts this question in the 1 decisions: Does the evidence set forth | as newly discovered in the affidavits on behalf of the defendant meet the re- 1 quirements of the statute and of the | court of appeals?"
 Interprets Affidavits
 He then interprets the affidavits as l follows:
 "As to the defendants own affidavit, | it is not contended that it sets forth
 newly discovered evidence and must be | disregarded. "Kauffmanns two affidavits detail l certain conversations with Bridgie
 Webber. Rosenthal. Mrs. Rosenthal, | Applebaum and one Muttle, very little | oi which would be admissible under the ! rules of evidence.
 1 go of the affidavit of Edward c. | Ginty, which purports to give the sub l stance of a conversation had with
 Rose to the effect that it was not in- 1 tended that Rosenthal should be killed l that Rose had more than s5000 in his l posses sion to be given to Rosenthal for l the purpose of getting him out of the , way and that Rose was shocked and 1 disappointed when he heard of Rosen- l thal's death. The only theory on which this evidence could he considered 1 competent is that it might be intro duced to impeach or contradict Rose 1 But such proposed evidence is clearly
 of no weight upon this action. ! "The same may be said of the affi- | davit of the convict Murphy"
 | The affidavits of John F. Mcintyre
 and Martin T. Manton of counsel for
 Becker. Deputy Warden Johnson of
 Sing Sing and Harry M. App1ebaum.