| Show FORKING FOR HAYES Ills Case Before the State Board of Pardons dl aeeenueCone 0 soendO 01 ee hll ur 1I0b I IooeLeeata Tlio attorneys Inc Harry Hayes remaking re-making a strong ilrc to have him ticipe the death penally The nut Ir t wan taken to Ilio Supreme court niltlng lot a writ ol habeas oorfui and that body jeaterday slleroooD hounded down a decision denying Ibe writ Tciliy the mail erccai laid before Ibo State board of pardon and n largo number 01 Mil laWN were presented to prove hoi Hayes was In lurek at the tlmo the murders weio cjinmlllca nt Pelican point nod to eliow that toiue ol the witnesses who tMtlfloJ t to having Bteu him In certain places must have ben mistaken I Attorney King lor the prosecution sllcil bet be would DOt resist tbo application I I lu Hi decision the Supreme coon briefly recites the contention 01 Ibo i petitioner that the jurora were not urawn In pursuance ol nny valid low that Ih ocelot odor which the Jury was drawn lauucouilllullonal and waste periled b > u later law nod as the JurorB I were summoned uujer Ibo repetled I law and thu trial wan under the later I law I ami II was fatal to the validity of i the Judgment to The opinion then eaya that thine points not bavlof been presented to the court ou appeal the court coo not now look beyond the juilctnent to ilelermluu the questions which arose I during ttie trial tit tbo caie aol which 1C they bad been o reeen led on appeal might have mulled In a reversal ol llldinieiir I II the Jurora were illegally drawn Ibo defendant could have obccted by challenging tile panel at the lopor time and II the deieudaul tailed to do Ibat and failed to brlns up tbu wholo recor d on appeal It was hla own misfortune mis-fortune and he cannot now bring up tne matter under habeas cormi Uavlnc reached tbli conclusion It Is neceitary to determine wtether or sot the act lu quiotlon U I uucouatllu llonal or waa repealed The writ la I I dented nod Ibo prloa remanded ° |
