Evening journal., 1918-09-26
MISSPELLED name
VOIDS INDICTMENT
James Wife Beating Charge
Falls in County Court
on Tecnnicality
DEFENDANTS WIFE
DIES IN HOSPITAL

Harry C. James. formerl Of No. 1924
Adams street. against whom there has
been an indictment pending on the
charge Of wife-beating, walked out Of
General Sessions Room. No. 2. Judge
Heisels Court. this morning, a free
man. and the indictment nOlle pressed
His case had been before the court and
jury for about an hour and a half.
but in that time a whole lot Of things
had happened, all OF which were de-
cdedely interesting. As a matter Of
fact the case was a sort Of series OF
bombshells.
Hardly had the case begun than a
most interesting and unexpected mine
was sprung upon the states prosecut-
Ing officer by Herbert H. Ward. Sr.,
counsel for the defence. 10 was only
the difference between the letter IN"
and the letter IN" hut the difference
was in the iypewriting Of the indict-
ment. and Mr.. Ward insisted that IL
was a false flaw. because the use OF
IN" made the wife alleged TO be beaten
by the indictment Alice James" not
Alice James," as it should have been.
Mr.. Ward asked the court TO order
verdict Of not guilty. which would have
ended the trial there But after lengthy
argument the court declined 10 rule in
the matter at the moment and the
trial prOceedeG
The case is one Of somewhat unusual
interest. not the least Of which lies in
the fact that Mrs. James is dead. hav-
ing succumbed TO disease at Farnhurst,
where she was taken shortly after the
events which led to her husbands ar
rest and appearance in City Court,
where the case was heard and where he
was held for the grand jury. which I
early in the present term Of court. re- |
turned an indictment against him on I
the charge OF wife beating The chief
witnesses against James were women .
neighbors Deputy Attorney General /
Green handled the case for the state.
In opening his case. Mr.. Green said .
the State was prepared 10 show James
attacked his wife, Alice. On June &c,
choking her and knocking her down.
that the neighbors heard her cries and .
that some saw him strike her while she
was in the back yard OF the James
house. Further, Mr. Green laid before /
the Jury the fact that Mrs. James is
dead. but he desired them TO under
stand that the State made no allegation
that her death was in any way due TO
James alleged attack. but was due TO
other causes. which would develop dur
ing the progress Of the trial.
The first witness was Mrs. Mary J.
Matthew'S. No. 1923 Adams St. next door
to the James home. which was at 1921.
Mrs. Matthews said that on June &c she
heard Mrs. James screaming in the
lanes back yard and went out 10 sec
Mrs. James and James there Just coming
ont Of the house. She saw James strike
his wife but whether with his fist or
his open hand she didn't know. She
heard him say. that woman is making
me do this" referring, she thought. to
herself. Mrs. James replied, NO, she Is
not Further, went on the witness. she
saw James force his wife down on the
steps leading from the house. and put
his knee upon her Then they went
inside and according 10 Mrs. Matthews
there came forth the awfullcst screams
] ever heard" Later they died down
and Mrs. James and James came into
the yard again and. said the witness.
James struck al his wife, but she could {
not say that the blow landed James
said. You are raising the neighbOr-
hood" and Mrs. James replied: II can't
help it, you drove me to It," or words
10 that effect.
Turned over 10 Mr.. Ward for cross {
examination. the witness was asked '
only one or two questions and then Mr.. .
Ward sprung his move upon the state. !
Holding the indictment and reading {
from IT. he showed that its text named
the person alleged Ia have been attack {
ed as alice James not James. and on {
The flaw created by the use Of M
Instead Of 'N' based his contention that 2
lanes could not be prosecuted under %, I
and asked that the jury be instructed 20 I
find a verdict OF not guilty. In sup
port Of this. Mr.. Ward went into {
lengthy argument and quoted exten- II
siyely from various decisions and cases.
lie held that naming the wife. alleged q
rs having been beaten as James. made c
~ necessary for the State to prove its
Indictment which Of course IL could :
not do. The name James, he said. :
went all through the indictment. and | 4
was not seen as james" Therefore.
Mr.. Ward stood for a verdict Of not
guilty
Mr.. Green replied that James could not
possibly have more than one legal wife
and that the indictment must mean
Mrs. James. There was no doubt. he
admitted, that the indictment read
James" which was, Mr.. Green said.
lnquestionably a typographical error
made by the stenographer in typewrit-
ng the Instrument Mr.. Green. how
'Ver, would not disclaim responsibility.
since ne had signed the indictment. But
le held the view that the error did
not constitute a fatal flaw in the in
'trument' which set forth the main al
egation Of wife beating.