Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-05-03
QUESTIONS BY JUDGE
HELD TO Be IMPROPER
Circuit Court of Appeals Criticizes
Conduct OF Trial by Dis
trict Judge Rose.
CANNOT SERVE AS WITNESS
In Case Of Lepper, Presiding Judge
Asked Questions of Accused From
Facts In His Own knowledge Not
Otherwise I'm Evidence.

Otherwise I'm Evidence.
While paying a compliment to the
learning and judicial temperament OF
| District Judge Rose. of Baltimore.
| Judge Woods, OF the United States
Circuit Court OF Appeals. in an opinion
handed down yesterday. entered pro-
| test against the action of the Mary
land jurist in impartinG from the bench
knowledge that had come to him touch
ing the case OF a man who was being
tried In his court for counterfeiting,
Despite the fact. however. that Judge
| Rose fell into the inadvertence OF
asking the defendant questions as to
letters acknowledging guilt written TO
| him." the appellate court. in an opinion
by Judge Knapp. supported In con-
curing one by Judge Woods sus-
tanned the Judgment of the lower
tribunal in sending Hiram Lepper Of
many aliases. to the Federal peniten-
| tiary for term of fifteen years
Judge Pritchard dissented
| Though represented by one of the
| ablest members Of the Baltimore bar
who did not except to anything that
transpired at the trial, Lepper took hs
case to the Circuit Court OF the one
plea that tho trial judge committed an
error so grave and glazing" in letting
| the Jury into the secrets of COM
munication between tho prisoner at the
| bar and himself, as to entitle him to Il
reversal of Judgment. despite the fact
! that the case had not come up in the
| usual way.
| RELIES on JUDGE FOR
| ACE0TTNT rGNrnINCG
For some reason. there was no
stenographic report of tho trial Tho
appellate court. therefore, relied on the
judge himself for n version OF the oc-
currcnce for which the condemned man
censured him.
| Substantially, Judge Roses version
of the affair was as follows:
| THE prisoner at the bar was asked
by the judge whether he had written
or procured others to write letters to
the Judge In which his guilt was ad-
! mitted, and In which the Judge WAS
asked to suspend sentence over him.
, He answered that he had. The court
| the asked him why, II he had not COM
mitted the offense, he had done So and
| he replied that he had had 20 much
trouble with charges Of this kind that
he thought it was the safest way to
deal with it,"
| Judge Knapp was not quite sure that
an error had been committed. The
| lack of stcnoEraphic report made It
| Impossible for the court to take into
! consideration the circumstances sur
rounding the occurrence. In any event.
! the lawyer who represented Lcpper
! had entered no objection. and that I'm
! piled that he thought the question n
legitimate one. He did not even ask
| the judge TO produce the letters. Tho
! facts. as they were before the appellate
court tended to show that the ques-
lions were not material, so far as they
| might influence the jury. and the whole
affair was 4 mere incident.
! Judge Woods summed II up this way:
II think the questions asked by Judge
| Rose were clearly improper. IF Judge
has in his possession evidences OF
| defendants guilt or innocence, they
| can I've adduccd for or against him only
| by examination and cross contamination
of the Judge OH the witness stand. II
seems clear beyond argument, that It
would be fatal to any conviction of
crime that it was founded on refer
enccs of the trial Judge TO facts within
his own knowledge
Indeed. a judge presiding at trial
|
duties OF a Judge and n witness are In
compatible. Tho danger OF lowering
the dignity of the bench. subjecting it's
fmpariiali,y TO suspicious and placing
the defendant At an unfair advantage
by admitting the presiding judge rs
! "A witness Is very obvious.
NO one would be more jealous Of
me obligations OF the bench in these
respects than the fair and learned
judge who fell into the inadvcrtence Of
asking the defendant questions as to
letters acknowledging guilt written 20
him by or OF behalf of the defendant
me inadrertcnce was no doubt due to
the conviction OF the judge that the
defendant was trilinG with the court"
l-eppcr was. confcsscdly. n notorious
"isreRarder OF the law when il came
TO money matters. He admitted in omen
court that. for a period Of twenty years
all told. ne had served time in Illi-
nots. Michigan. Kansas and in the Fed
GRAZ prison nj Atlanta for tamperinp
with Uncle Sans currency
"Raislnr" Il silver certificate froro &,
TO $40 was it is alleged, favorite
game with Leppcr He would call upon
Inc Keeper. usually a woman, OF n
cheap observation-disclosures. engage n room.
tehder The raised" bill for payment in
ADVANCE ana then skip TO parts un-
known.
when ;riai;;ned at Baltimore on the
charge Of which he was finally CON
! V'cted, l.epper pleaded guilty, but. for
some reason. the judge refused to
accept the plea and let him go on his
own recoEniz"Itce. provided he abandon
MS criminal practices and conduct him
sell an law-ahiding citizen
but ne fen from grace. again fell
into the clutches OF the law and waa
sentenced in May, 1914.
'lnh sends Check to FIremen
check for 500 was forwarded n
, the CITY Fire Department Yesterday
by the Newfoundland Cluh rs a takan