OCR Text |
Show TO THE COUNTY JAIL Tliat'a Where Judge Zane Sends Brig Hampton for a Year. A Little Judicial Discourse on Bad Partnerships and Worse Business. The Court's Intention All Sublime To Make the Punishment Fit the " Crime. B. Y. Hampton, convicted of conspiracy con-spiracy to keep a house of ill-fame, was arraigned before Judge Zane yesterday morning to receive sentence. The defense de-fense stated that they were preparing a motion in arrest of judgment and requested re-quested the matter . deferred until the afternoon session for argument. The prosecution had no objections, and the Court granted the postponement. At 2 o'clock the court-room was literally packed with spectators and a sprinkling of city officials, friends of the defendant. Mr. Burmester argued the motion in arrest of judgment at great length in vainly attempting to prove that' the indictment in-dictment did not charge conspiracy to, commit a crime as interpreted by the statute. He emphatically declared that there could be no such thing as a conspiracy con-spiracy to keep a house of ill-fame under our statutes. Mr. Varian responded in opposing the motion on the ground that it was suffi cient evidence for the indictment to allege the conspiracy committed by performing per-forming any criminal act, to prove which, several plain illustrations were given. Judge Zane then overruled the motion, and made THE FOLLOWING DECISION : Counsel for the defendant makes two objections ob-jections to this indictment, and probably there are others made, but they are not bo distinctly set forth that I think it necessary to notice them particularly. The first one is : That the indictment does not charge conspiracy to commit a crime within the meaning of the statute which defines the crime of conspiracy; and second, that it charges no act, besides the agreement, done to effect the object thereof that is, the crime, as stated in the indiotment. The statute provides: "If-two or more persons conspire to commit a crime," and so on, "they shall be punishable," and so forth, "by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding ex-ceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding $1,030.'' The question is: Is keeping a bawdy-house a crime? There is a distinction distinc-tion between a felony and a misdemeanor, and there are distinctions made between high crimes and misdemeanors, but the term "crime,1" in its general sense and it is presumed it is so used in this statute includes in-cludes all crimes, as well as felonies and misdemeanors. It will be found, I think, by examination of other provisions of the criminal code here, that the term "crime" has been used to mclude misdemeanors as well as felonies. It is a more general term than either of these; and, in fact, the wording word-ing of this whole section (section 1914) shows that by the term "crime," as used in the first division of this Bection, the Legislature Legis-lature intended misdemeanors as well as felonies, and I know of no authority that would authorize the Court to confine the word "crime" hre to felonies. There is another provision. In the fifth subdivision of this section the language is: ! 'Commit any act injurious to the public health or public morals." It would seem to me that keeping a bawdy house in the city is injurious to public morals, as we understand under-stand it, and all reasonable persons. But I am of opinion that the offense charged here is an offense to commit a nrimo It is said further, that no act necessary to effect the object is stated in the indiotment. The indictment states in a general way a conspiracy, states the object of it, and states what was done. It states the conspiracy was to keep a house of ill-fame, and what was done under it the keeping of the house The statute says: "No agreement exoept to commit a felony upon the person of another, or to commit arson or burglary, amounts to a conspiracy, unless some act besides such agreement be dona to effect the object . thereof." ! The object is to keep a house of ill-fame. It is effected by all acts that constitute the crime, and the keeping of a house of ill-fame is constituted by a number of acts, usually by a number of very different persons supposed sup-posed to be, at least. But here the act charged, to effect the object, is the keeping of the house. If any one of the acts to effect the keeping of the house had been charged by this indictment, it would have been sufficient. suffi-cient. If it states two, or three, or all of them, that certainly does not make it bad. I am of opinion that this indiotment is sufficient, and the motion in arrest of judgment judg-ment is overruled. . Mr. Sheeks being informed by the Court that sentence would be pronounced at once, stated that he desired to present the certificates of physicians as to the defendant's de-fendant's health. Certificates were read from Doctors Benedict and Anderson to the effect that they had treated Hampton, who is" afflicted with pleuro-pneumonia, and that confinement where he would be affected by cold or dampness would prove detrimental to his health and possiblv result re-sult in death. At the close of Mr. Sheeks' remarks, Mr. Varian briefly addressed the Court, saying this was an entirelv novel and j new proceeding to him ; he had never I had any experience of this kind before. It occurred to him, however, that the law did not contemplate that the doors should be left open to individuals who might be in the same situation it is claimed by these certificates this man is, to avoid the consequences of what might in the discretion dis-cretion of the presiding judge be visited upon them, by reason of their physical condition. He could" conceive of a case where a man might commit the crime of manslaughter and murder, and himself be in such a physical condition that the confinement which . ordinarily follows such offenses would have a very bad effect ef-fect upon him, 3'et he would be confined all the same. Cases of this kind, the speaker thought, might be left to the Executive Ex-ecutive where the circumstances warranted war-ranted it.but for a judge to be called upon" to decide, after conviction and before judgment, whether or not a man can be safely made to suffer the consequences of his acts, is certainly a novel proceeding. So far as observation goes, the defendant here is fairly able, to get about, and so far as the evidence in this case shows, he was reasonably active and diligent in moving about in the prosecution of these cases, both here and elsewhere in adjoining ad-joining States. Mr. Sheeks said that where the statute defines punishment in two different modes, and leaves the question to the Court as to which should be inflicted, it would be no more than proper that the Court should take all the circumstances into consideration in passing judgment. He did not understan1 that the Court or Mr. Varian had any doubt of the truth and correctness of the certificates. It is net an unheard-of proceeding, and it would be quite proper for the Court to take the certificates into consideration. The Court "The Court would not be controlled entirely by those facts, if true. I am disposed to allow them to be shown. The object, of course, is the protection of society by punishing the party committing commit-ting the crime. And it might be a very severe punishment for a man afflicted with any disease, consumption or something some-thing of that character, to confine him in the county jail for a couple of months, while on a robust, sturdy man it would have no effect other than that he was deprived of his liberty. It might be a great deal more punishment to the man who is feeble and not able to bear it. In view of that fact, I am disposed to take ' these matters into considerations. Bring , these physicians in at 10 o'clock to-mor- j row.. The statements are very general, j And I will hear any other physician that j may be brought in, on the subject." - . j Court then adjourned until 10 o'clock j this morning. j MEDICAL OPINIONS ON HAMPTON'S LUNGS. 1 At the opening of court this morning ,' Dr. Benedict was placed upon the stand ! and testified substantially as follows: have i been his physician more or less for fifteen j years ; treated him last for a broken leg, j about one yeir ago ; had lung trouble at j the same time ; I describe the condition j of his lungs by his coughing, spitting and pain ; he has been suffering that way for fifteen years to my knowledge, he has no pleuro-pneumonia, which is an acnte disease, his is a chronic trouble, if it were acute he wouldn't be out of bed ; don't think he is sufiering from pleuro-pneumonia now ; have made no examination of his lungs during the past week ; confinement con-finement would be hazardous and possibly fatal to him under his present condition. From my acquaintance with his complaint, I feel frank in saying it would be prejudicial to confine him, and I think three weeks' j close confinement would prove fatal to him. I am satisfied, without examining Mr. Hampton, as to the truth of the statements made in my certificate. If I were to advise Mr. Hampton, it would be for him to travel in a clime that suits him best. It is all wrong for him to remain in an office even four or five hours a day. I wrote the certificate at , the request of Mr. Hoge, from my knowledge of Mr. Hampton's condition for the past fifteen years. In diagnosing his case I would not take, his temperature. Didn't know nis temperature when I wrote the certificate. cer-tificate. : ; Dr. Anderson was called to the stand and stated that he gave a certificate. He attended him about two weeks since for pleuro-pneumonia, which may be acute or chronic. His case is. chronic; he had dyspnea and chills when I last attended him. Several years ago I attended him when he had very critical pneumonia of both lungs. Have, prescribed for him three or four times the past few years. Havn't examined his lungs, but know that he has been subject to attacks of dyspnea and chills. Made the certificate certifi-cate at the request of Mr. Hampton, who asked me on the street day before yesterday yester-day if I would give a certificate as to the condition of his lungs. By Judge Zane I am Mr. Hampton's family physician; last visited his house about three years since ; have visited' his family several times; I would not pronounce pro-nounce it consumption, as some people would, but would call it chronic inflammation inflam-mation of the lunes. Mr. Vaiian called Dr. Potter to the stand, who defined pleuro-pneumonia as acute or croupous pneumonia or inflammation; inflamma-tion; no two cases appear exactly the same, and do not present all of the symptoms symp-toms belonging to the disease; the disease might affect his voice and it might not; by looking at Mr. Hampton, or any one, could only judge of the condition con-dition of the lungs so far as emaciation and facial expression indicated it; would not give a certificate as to the condition of a man's lungs without examining him ; questions of this kind cannot be answered absolutely on account of possible errors and continual changes ; pneumonia is an acute inflammation of the tissue of the organ, pleuro - pneumonia is pleurisy and pneumonia combined. A constant cough is a symptom of this disease. If he had an attack of pneumonia fifteen years ago, it would be noticed now unless it cleared- ud. To imprisou a man 'with high temperature under an attack of this disease would be no worse in a pure room than in his own private apartment. I was in this courtroom court-room one day last week when the air was very oppressive, and would increase a man 's difficulty in breathing if affected with pleuro-pneumonia. A man afflicted with this complaint would have shown it in this room at the time alluded to. JUDGE ZANE PRONOUNCES SENTENCE. The Court Mr. Hampton, will you stand up? You are aware, Mr. Hampton, that you were tried on the charge of conspiracy-charged conspiracy-charged with conspiring to keep, with one I Mrs. S. J. Fields, a house of ill-fame in this city, to be resorted to for tho practice of prostitution. The jury found you guilty, and the motion in arrest of judgment having been overruled, it now is the duty of the Court to pronounce sentence against you. Have you anything further to say now? Hampton I could say a good, deal, your Honor, but I don't know that I will say anything. any-thing. I am ready for sentence. lhe Court The statute provides in cases of this character that the defendant may be punished by imprisonment in the County Jail not" exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding $1,000. The discretion of the Court is quite wide, and it also extends to the character of the punishment it may be by imprisonment in the County Jail or by fine; it cannot be by both. Counsel have offered the certificates of two physicians of the city, and also their statements with the statement of one other physician, for the purpose of PROVING AND DISPROVING XOUR PHYSICAL CONDITION. CON-DITION. The evidence touching this point is not, to say the least, satisfactory. Physicians sometimes are a little reckless in giving these i certificates, and oftentimes mislead the Court, as in the case of jurors and others, and they ought to feel the responsibility under which they are acting when they present pre-sent certificates for the Court to act upon. I am satisfied from certificates I have received re-ceived in the cases of jurors and others that there has been a recklessness in giving these certificates by some physicians physi-cians that ought to be deprecated, and they are so unreliable that I confess the Court can place but little reliance upon them. The testimony given from the witness wit-ness stand would seem to be more reliable, though that is sometimes indefinite. The reasons given by counsel in the case are not altogether harmonious, and it does not strike my mind, in the absence of a personal examination, as being entitled to verv crent I weight. I would, of course, take into consideration con-sideration the condition of the party I was about to sentence, where I have the power to sentence him to confinement in jailor to impose im-pose a fine, if the evidence was satisfactory and clear that confinement might result in serious injury to the defendant. I am not ' satisfied that such is the case here. The offense with whioh you are charged, Mr. Hampton, is one,, of oourse, that every right-minded man must condemn. No man can honorably enter into A PARTNERSHIP- WITH A PROSTITUTE, j And, according to. your own statement, you ouipioyea inis miserable prostitute, and as the evidence shows, was to give her S25 for each man she might make an affidavit against. The object, of oourse, of the law is to prevent crime, and no man can be justified, justi-fied, no honorable man can be justified in hiring prostitutes when he knows, must know, as a reasonable man, that the result of that will be to cause her to commit crime and cause others to commit crime when she 1 is hired to do this. Again, you say that you employed her for the purpose of detecting crime. -- When - a crime is committed, the . use of ' detectives is proper to ferret it out; but to employ detectives detec-tives of bad character, such as prostitutes, i to commit crime themselves, and induce 1 others to commit crLno, in order that thev ' maybe punished, brings disgrace and infamy in-famy and scandal upon society, involves families m trouble, and is a conspiracy to do that which deserves the deprecation and condemnation of all decent men. No man ! that does this ought to be permitted to so i out among decent people. K I Your conduct as shown by this evidence ' leads me to believe that ( TOU ABE SO LOST TO ALL SENSE OF PROPRIETY AND DECENCY That I confess I feel like pi vino you a severe punishment. The interests of sodet? good of society demands particularly that thu i crime against society in the community shall be punished severely. There is no ex- cuse for saying it is necessary to stop these houses of ill-fame. The general reputation of a house is always competent evidence against it, the general reputatienof the person per-son who occupies it is sufficient, and the general reputation of the persons who- visit it is sufficient, and any Grand Jury, when that reputation is sufficiently established, or any court, is bound not only to indict, but to convict. So, there was no necessity for the establishment of houses and reserving of rooms as was done in these houses, FOB SPIES TO PEER THROUGH APERTURES AND HOLES In order to see the performances, the infamous in-famous and lecherous conduct of men. There is no necessity to import prostitutes from other States, from hundreds of miles away. It is better to get rid of what we have already got; there are plenty here without with-out bringing more in, and they ought to be got rid of. If you were in earnest about doing it, you and others associated with you could attack every house of ill-fame in this j town and punish those responsible for their j existence; because it is not- necessary to j prove 8pecifio acts in order to convict a per-son per-son of keeping a house of ill-fame, or those who frequent or beoome inmates therein; it I is not necessary to set forth specifio acts. In view of all the circumstances in this case, and in view of a fact which I cannot close my eyes to, and which I cannot disre-I disre-I gard, that when men are fined here sometimes some-times it is no punishment at all, others pay the fine; and remembering that THE OBJECT IS TO MAKE THE PUNISHMENT - CERTAIN And definite, in order that it may be a terror to others, I therefore, under these circumstances, circum-stances, don't choose to impose a fine in this base. As you seem to be the leader in this new phase of crime, that seems to be developed here among 1 many others a degraded, disgraoeful and loathsome business as you seem to be the leader of it, I will give you the full benefit of the law. You will be sentenoed to imprisonment im-prisonment in the county jail for the term of one year, and if your physical condition should become such as to render it necessarv to liberate you before that time, the clemency clem-ency rests in the Executive head, and he will doubtless exercise it, if it becomes necessary. nec-essary. I hope that this will be a lesson to you. The costs will also be taxed against you. Judge Hoge gave notice of an appeal to the Supreme Court of the Territory, and made a motion that the defendant be admitted ad-mitted to bail pending the action. The Court denied the motion as heretofore in all such matters, and overruled the appeal ap-peal on the ground that the showing seemed insufficient to authorize the proceeding. pro-ceeding. The prisoner was escorted to Marshal Ireland's office, and taken to the county jail by Sheriff Groesbeck. |