New Britain herald., 1927-08-19
Will Go to Death Tues
day Unless 18th Hour
Appeal to United
States Highest Court
Succeeds.
Preparations Made for
W0rld-Wide" Protest on
Day of Execution of the
Two Anarchists - De-
cision Made at 9 Today.

Boston, Aug. 10 R-The full
bench OF the Massachusetts, supreme
court today overruled the exceptions
by Sacco-Vanzetti defense counsel
to decision by Justice George A.
Sanderson Of that court and by
Judge Webster Thayer Of the su-
perior court and refuse to grant a
writ OF error.
The decision was announced just
after 9 a. m. by the supreme court
recorder, with whom the justices
filed it yesterday.
The decision upheld the ruling Of
Judge Thayer that the motion for a
new trial came too late because
sentence had been pronounced.
Neither the Judge nor any Of his
associates had jurisdiction" the de-
cision said, to entertain the motion
for revocation of sentence.
With regard to the petition for a
writ of error the decision says:
THE wording of the statute is
clear and must be construed as
meaning that the issuance Of writ
of error in a capital case rests IN
the sound judicial discretion Of the
single justice to whom the applica-
ton is presented" and that 1.-The pc
tition was rightly denied"
Writ OF Error Dismissed.
The petition for writ Of error
submitted to the full bench was dis
missed because "a writ of error
coram nobis at common law has be-
come obsolete In view OF the express
purpose Of the legislature as mani
tested by the statute"
The exceptions were to the refus-
81 Of Justice Sanderson to grant a
writ Of error and to the refusal by
Judge Thayer of a new trial, a re-
vocation Of sentence and a stay Of
execution. Arguments on these ex-
ceptions we're made last Tuesday
before four justices OF the supreme
court sitting as the full bench and
at the conclusion defense counsel
filed a petition for writ OF error
direct with the full bench. The
court had querled Arthur D. Hill.
defense counsel, as to why this pro-
cedure had not been followed in the
first place.
Arguments for the state were
made by Attorney General Arthur
X. Reading.
The four justices we're Henry K.
Braley, who presided in view Of the
illness OF Chief Justice Arthur P.
Rues; Edward F. Pierce. James B.
Carroll and William f. Wait.
Based on Prejudice.
These legal steps by counsel for
Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo VAN
zetti whose respite from execution
for murder expires at midnight on
August 90 were based chiefly on a
ALLEGATIONS Of prejudice on the
part of Judge Thayer who presided
at the trial and whose previous re-
tusal to grant a new trial was up
held bv the Massachusetts, supreme
court last April.
THE defendants. Sacco and Van
zetti who were indicted, tried and
convicted OF murder in the first
degree, alleged exceptions to rulings
at the trial. as we'll as to the de-
malls OF numerous motions for
new trial. on various grounds. and
the rulings OF law thereon. which
we're overruled, and rescript was
sent accordingly on May 49, 1925.
THE defendants. on May 25. 1926,
Filed motion in the trial courts
for a new trial on the grounds OF
newly discovered evidence. which
Was denied subject to the exceptions
of the defendants duly entered and
argued in this court. On April 5,
,oa7 these exceptions were over
ruled.
1.-THE argument for the defend
ants was full and exhaustive cover
ing every error claimed to have
been committed either at the trial
or any subsequent proceeding. and
it was decided as a matter OF law
there was evidence which would
warrant a jury in finding the de-
PENDANTS guilty. On April - l92'
sentence of death was imposed III
accordance WIFI VI. ~. ~ -
the defendants We're delivered to the
sheriff In execution OF their sentence
and application for clemency was
mad eunder the provisions OF CHAP
.. Sec. I. Article s. constitution OF
the commonwealth. The application
having been denied, the defendants
on Aug. 6, 1927, filed motion for a
new trial on grounds of newly dis
covered evidence and for revocation
of sentence. The hearing OF the
motion the trial judge refused not
only to rule as requested by the de-
PENDANTS. but denied the motions
and the defendants excepted. raising
the questions presented by the rec
ord in the first Of the cases at par
Motion Too Late
ut Is contended that aficdaNllS
in support Of the motions show such
prejudice against them by the pre-
siding Judge at the trial on the
Continued on Page Ten)