Douglas daily dispatch., 1927-08-20

express, due in Washington at 7:25
a. m. tomorrow. r
Hill had a conference with chief
Justice Walter F. Hall of the superior
court and Justice James H. Sisk of
the Suffolk county court house here
late today. Afterwards Hill said mo
/ action" had been taken in the case.
| Earlier Hill had said:
1--WE propose to state to Chief
Justice Hall that we are about to
file petition for writ of certiarari
with the supreme court Of the United
States based on the federal question
relating to violation of the due pro-
cess clause of the constitution of thu
United States. We shall then ask
Chief Justice Hall to grant a stay
of sentence until the record can be
printed in accordance with the rules
CT the supreme court. We believe he
has athority to grant this stay"
Whether he asked for the stay he
did not disclose when the conference
broke up.
The supreme court decision, which
was written by Justice Henry K.
Graley, was not based in any par
ticular on the question of the guilt
or innocence of Sacco and Vanzetti,
| With regard to the allegations of pre-,
| iUdice on the part of Judge Thayer
which formed large part of the
basis for the defense motions, the
decision said:
''The judicial conduct of the trial
Judge in hearing and deciding the
motion based on his own alleged
bias or prejudice, although urged In
! argument by counsel for the de-
PENDANTS, need not be discussed be-
cause, as we have just said, neither
the Judge nor any Of his associates
had jurisdiction to entertain the mo-
ton" s~
The court ruled that the motion
before Judge Thayer for a new trial
was rightly denied because "a motion
| for new trial in capital cases Comes
too late If made after sentence has
been pronounced"
| AS to the motion for revocation
Of sentence the court said, "Tha
| jurisdiction of the trial court ended
when the defendants were Committed
| in execution"
Justice Sanderson rightly denied"
the petition for writ of error. the
court held, saying:
"The wording of the statute is clear
and must be construed as meaning
that the issuance of a writ of error
in capital case rests in the judicial
discretion of the single justice to whom
the application is presented. Our
system of procedure in criminal cases
makes ample provision for the pro-
lection of the rights of those who
are charged with the commission O..
crime, by exceptions by motion fol,
new trial before sentence has been
passed and by petition for a dis.
cretionary writ of error either before
or after sentence.
Furthermore, it may be said thai.
The assignment of errors of facts noe
being connected with the questions
of jurisdiction is not open on the
present record"
The court dismissed the petition to
the full bench for a writ of error
On the ground that "a period of 81
years has elapsed since the original
I'Sratute (amending the common law
was enacted in 1886, during which
time it has been uniformly followed"
and therefore ga writ of error coram
nobls at common law" for which the
defense had asked "has become ob-
Solete."
The decision in referring to the
history of the case says that in the
supreme court hearing of the excep-
lions to Judge Thayer's denial of a
new trial before sentences was pro-
nounced, which denial the court up-
held, "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 matter of law there was
evidence which would variant a Jury
in finding the defendants guilty"