By the time the State Supreme1 Court came to pass upon Cowperwood’s plea for a reversal of the lower court and the granting of a new trial, the rumor2 of his connection with Aileen had spread far and wide. As has been seen, it had done and was still doing him much damage. It confirmed the impression, which the politicians had originally tried to create, that Cowperwood was the true criminal and Stener the victim. His semi-legitimate4 financial subtlety5, backed indeed by his financial genius, but certainly on this account not worse than that being practiced in peace and quiet and with much applause in many other quarters — was now seen to be Machiavellian6 trickery of the most dangerous type. He had a wife and two children; and without knowing what his real thoughts had been the fruitfully imaginative public jumped to the conclusion that he had been on the verge7 of deserting them, divorcing Lillian, and marrying Aileen. This was criminal enough in itself, from the conservative point of view; but when taken in connection with his financial record, his trial, conviction, and general bankruptcy8 situation, the public was inclined to believe that he was all the politicians said he was. He ought to be convicted. The Supreme Court ought not to grant his prayer for a new trial. It is thus that our inmost thoughts and intentions burst at times via no known material agency into public thoughts. People know, when they cannot apparently9 possibly know why they know. There is such a thing as thought-transference and transcendentalism of ideas.
It reached, for one thing, the ears of the five judges of the State Supreme Court and of the Governor of the State.
During the four weeks Cowperwood had been free on a certificate of reasonable doubt both Harper Steger and Dennis Shannon appeared before the judges of the State Supreme Court, and argued pro10 and con3 as to the reasonableness of granting a new trial. Through his lawyer, Cowperwood made a learned appeal to the Supreme Court judges, showing how he had been unfairly indicted11 in the first place, how there was no real substantial evidence on which to base a charge of larceny12 or anything else. It took Steger two hours and ten minutes to make his argument, and District–Attorney Shannon longer to make his reply, during which the five judges on the bench, men of considerable legal experience but no great financial understanding, listened with rapt attention. Three of them, Judges Smithson, Rainey, and Beckwith, men most amenable13 to the political feeling of the time and the wishes of the bosses, were little interested in this story of Cowperwood’s transaction, particularly since his relations with Butler’s daughter and Butler’s consequent opposition14 to him had come to them. They fancied that in a way they were considering the whole matter fairly and impartially15; but the manner in which Cowperwood had treated Butler was never out of their minds. Two of them, Judges Marvin and Rafalsky, who were men of larger sympathies and understanding, but of no greater political freedom, did feel that Cowperwood had been badly used thus far, but they did not see what they could do about it. He had put himself in a most unsatisfactory position, politically and socially. They understood and took into consideration his great financial and social losses which Steger described accurately16; and one of them, Judge Rafalsky, because of a similar event in his own life in so far as a girl was concerned, was inclined to argue strongly against the conviction of Cowperwood; but, owing to his political connections and obligations, he realized that it would not be wise politically to stand out against what was wanted. Still, when he and Marvin learned that Judges Smithson, Rainey, and Beckwith were inclined to convict Cowperwood without much argument, they decided17 to hand down a dissenting18 opinion. The point involved was a very knotty19 one. Cowperwood might carry it to the Supreme Court of the United States on some fundamental principle of liberty of action. Anyhow, other judges in other courts in Pennsylvania and elsewhere would be inclined to examine the decision in this case, it was so important. The minority decided that it would not do them any harm to hand down a dissenting opinion. The politicians would not mind as long as Cowperwood was convicted — would like it better, in fact. It looked fairer. Besides, Marvin and Rafalsky did not care to be included, if they could help it, with Smithson, Rainey, and Beckwith in a sweeping20 condemnation21 of Cowperwood. So all five judges fancied they were considering the whole matter rather fairly and impartially, as men will under such circumstances. Smithson, speaking for himself and Judges Rainey and Beckwith on the eleventh of February, 1872, said:
“The defendant22, Frank A. Cowperwood, asks that the finding of the jury in the lower court (the State of Pennsylvania vs. Frank A. Cowperwood) be reversed and a new trial granted. This court cannot see that any substantial injustice23 has been done the defendant. [Here followed a rather lengthy24 resume of the history of the case, in which it was pointed25 out that the custom and precedent26 of the treasurer27’s office, to say nothing of Cowperwood’s easy method of doing business with the city treasury28, could have nothing to do with his responsibility for failure to observe both the spirit and the letter of the law.] The obtaining of goods under color of legal process [went on Judge Smithson, speaking for the majority] may amount to larceny. In the present case it was the province of the jury to ascertain29 the felonious intent. They have settled that against the defendant as a question of fact, and the court cannot say that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. For what purpose did the defendant get the check? He was upon the eve of failure. He had already hypothecated for his own debts the loan of the city placed in his hands for sale — he had unlawfully obtained five hundred thousand dollars in cash as loans; and it is reasonable to suppose that he could obtain nothing more from the city treasury by any ordinary means. Then it is that he goes there, and, by means of a falsehood implied if not actual, obtains sixty thousand dollars more. The jury has found the intent with which this was done.”
It was in these words that Cowperwood’s appeal for a new trial was denied by the majority.
For himself and Judge Rafalsky, Judge Marvin, dissenting, wrote:
“It is plain from the evidence in the case that Mr. Cowperwood did not receive the check without authority as agent to do so, and it has not been clearly demonstrated that within his capacity as agent he did not perform or intend to perform the full measure of the obligation which the receipt of this check implied. It was shown in the trial that as a matter of policy it was understood that purchases for the sinking-fund should not be known or understood in the market or by the public in that light, and that Mr. Cowperwood as agent was to have an absolutely free hand in the disposal of his assets and liabilities so long as the ultimate result was satisfactory. There was no particular time when the loan was to be bought, nor was there any particular amount mentioned at any time to be purchased. Unless the defendant intended at the time he received the check fraudulently to appropriate it he could not be convicted even on the first count. The verdict of the jury does not establish this fact; the evidence does not show conclusively31 that it could be established; and the same jury, upon three other counts, found the defendant guilty without the semblance33 of shadow of evidence. How can we say that their conclusions upon the first count are unerring when they so palpably erred34 on the other counts? It is the opinion of the minority that the verdict of the jury in charging larceny on the first count is not valid35, and that that verdict should be set aside and a new trial granted.”
Judge Rafalsky, a meditative36 and yet practical man of Jewish extraction but peculiarly American appearance, felt called upon to write a third opinion which should especially reflect his own cogitation37 and be a criticism on the majority as well as a slight variation from and addition to the points on which he agreed with Judge Marvin. It was a knotty question, this, of Cowperwood’s guilt32, and, aside from the political necessity of convicting him, nowhere was it more clearly shown than in these varying opinions of the superior court. Judge Rafalsky held, for instance, that if a crime had been committed at all, it was not that known as larceny, and he went on to add:
“It is impossible, from the evidence, to come to the conclusion either that Cowperwood did not intend shortly to deliver the loan or that Albert Stires, the chief clerk, or the city treasurer did not intend to part not only with the possession, but also and absolutely with the property in the check and the money represented by it. It was testified by Mr. Stires that Mr. Cowperwood said he had bought certificates of city loan to this amount, and it has not been clearly demonstrated that he had not. His non-placement of the same in the sinking-fund must in all fairness, the letter of the law to the contrary notwithstanding, be looked upon and judged in the light of custom. Was it his custom so to do? In my judgment38 the doctrine39 now announced by the majority of the court extends the crime of constructive40 larceny to such limits that any business man who engages in extensive and perfectly41 legitimate stock transactions may, before he knows it, by a sudden panic in the market or a fire, as in this instance, become a felon30. When a principle is asserted which establishes such a precedent, and may lead to such results, it is, to say the least, startling.”
While he was notably42 comforted by the dissenting opinions of the judges in minority, and while he had been schooling43 himself to expect the worst in this connection and had been arranging his affairs as well as he could in anticipation44 of it, Cowperwood was still bitterly disappointed. It would be untrue to say that, strong and self-reliant as he normally was, he did not suffer. He was not without sensibilities of the highest order, only they were governed and controlled in him by that cold iron thing, his reason, which never forsook45 him. There was no further appeal possible save to the United States Supreme Court, as Steger pointed out, and there only on the constitutionality of some phase of the decision and his rights as a citizen, of which the Supreme Court of the United States must take cognizance. This was a tedious and expensive thing to do. It was not exactly obvious at the moment on what point he could make an appeal. It would involve a long delay — perhaps a year and a half, perhaps longer, at the end of which period he might have to serve his prison term anyhow, and pending46 which he would certainly have to undergo incarceration47 for a time.
Cowperwood mused48 speculatively49 for a few moments after hearing Steger’s presentation of the case. Then he said: “Well, it looks as if I have to go to jail or leave the country, and I’ve decided on jail. I can fight this out right here in Philadelphia in the long run and win. I can get that decision reversed in the Supreme Court, or I can get the Governor to pardon me after a time, I think. I’m not going to run away, and everybody knows I’m not. These people who think they have me down haven’t got one corner of me whipped. I’ll get out of this thing after a while, and when I do I’ll show some of these petty little politicians what it means to put up a real fight. They’ll never get a damned dollar out of me now — not a dollar! I did intend to pay that five hundred thousand dollars some time if they had let me go. Now they can whistle!”
He set his teeth and his gray eyes fairly snapped their determination.
“Well, I’ve done all I can, Frank,” pleaded Steger, sympathetically. “You’ll do me the justice to say that I put up the best fight I knew how. I may not know how — you’ll have to answer for that — but within my limits I’ve done the best I can. I can do a few things more to carry this thing on, if you want me to, but I’m going to leave it to you now. Whatever you say goes.”
“Don’t talk nonsense at this stage, Harper,” replied Cowperwood almost testily50. “I know whether I’m satisfied or not, and I’d soon tell you if I wasn’t. I think you might as well go on and see if you can find some definite grounds for carrying it to the Supreme Court, but meanwhile I’ll begin my sentence. I suppose Payderson will be naming a day to have me brought before him now shortly.”
“It depends on how you’d like to have it, Frank. I could get a stay of sentence for a week maybe, or ten days, if it will do you any good. Shannon won’t make any objection to that, I’m sure. There’s only one hitch51. Jaspers will be around here tomorrow looking for you. It’s his duty to take you into custody52 again, once he’s notified that your appeal has been denied. He’ll be wanting to lock you up unless you pay him, but we can fix that. If you do want to wait, and want any time off, I suppose he’ll arrange to let you out with a deputy; but I’m afraid you’ll have to stay there nights. They’re pretty strict about that since that Albertson case of a few years ago.”
Steger referred to the case of a noted53 bank cashier who, being let out of the county jail at night in the alleged54 custody of a deputy, was permitted to escape. There had been emphatic55 and severe condemnation of the sheriff’s office at the time, and since then, repute or no repute, money or no money, convicted criminals were supposed to stay in the county jail at night at least.
Cowperwood meditated56 this calmly, looking out of the lawyer’s window into Second Street. He did not much fear anything that might happen to him in Jaspers’s charge since his first taste of that gentleman’s hospitality, although he did object to spending nights in the county jail when his general term of imprisonment57 was being reduced no whit58 thereby59. All that he could do now in connection with his affairs, unless he could have months of freedom, could be as well adjusted from a prison cell as from his Third Street office — not quite, but nearly so. Anyhow, why parley60? He was facing a prison term, and he might as well accept it without further ado. He might take a day or two finally to look after his affairs; but beyond that, why bother?
“When, in the ordinary course of events, if you did nothing at all, would I come up for sentence?”
“Oh, Friday or Monday, I fancy,” replied Steger. “I don’t know what move Shannon is planning to make in this matter. I thought I’d walk around and see him in a little while.”
“I think you’d better do that,” replied Cowperwood. “Friday or Monday will suit me, either way. I’m really not particular. Better make it Monday if you can. You don’t suppose there is any way you can induce Jaspers to keep his hands off until then? He knows I’m perfectly responsible.”
“I don’t know, Frank, I’m sure; I’ll see. I’ll go around and talk to him to-night. Perhaps a hundred dollars will make him relax the rigor61 of his rules that much.”
Cowperwood smiled grimly.
“I fancy a hundred dollars would make Jaspers relax a whole lot of rules,” he replied, and he got up to go.
Steger arose also. “I’ll see both these people, and then I’ll call around at your house. You’ll be in, will you, after dinner?”
“Yes.”
They slipped on their overcoats and went out into the cold February day, Cowperwood back to his Third Street office, Steger to see Shannon and Jaspers.
收听单词发音 |
1
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
rumor
|
|
| n.谣言，谣传，传说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
con
|
|
| n.反对的观点，反对者，反对票，肺病；vt.精读，学习，默记；adv.反对地，从反面；adj.欺诈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
subtlety
|
|
| n.微妙，敏锐，精巧；微妙之处，细微的区别 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
machiavellian
|
|
| adj.权谋的，狡诈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
verge
|
|
| n.边，边缘；v.接近，濒临 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
bankruptcy
|
|
| n.破产；无偿付能力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
pro
|
|
| n.赞成，赞成的意见，赞成者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
indicted
|
|
| 控告，起诉( indict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
larceny
|
|
| n.盗窃（罪） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
amenable
|
|
| adj.经得起检验的；顺从的；对负有义务的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
impartially
|
|
| adv.公平地，无私地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
dissenting
|
|
| adj.不同意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
knotty
|
|
| adj.有结的，多节的，多瘤的，棘手的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
sweeping
|
|
| adj.范围广大的，一扫无遗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
condemnation
|
|
| n.谴责; 定罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
defendant
|
|
| n.被告；adj.处于被告地位的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
injustice
|
|
| n.非正义，不公正，不公平，侵犯（别人的）权利 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
lengthy
|
|
| adj.漫长的，冗长的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
precedent
|
|
| n.先例，前例；惯例；adj.在前的，在先的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
treasurer
|
|
| n.司库，财务主管 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
treasury
|
|
| n.宝库；国库，金库；文库 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
ascertain
|
|
| vt.发现，确定，查明，弄清 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
felon
|
|
| n.重罪犯；adj.残忍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
conclusively
|
|
| adv.令人信服地，确凿地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
semblance
|
|
| n.外貌，外表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
erred
|
|
| 犯错误，做错事( err的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
valid
|
|
| adj.有确实根据的；有效的；正当的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
meditative
|
|
| adj.沉思的，冥想的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
cogitation
|
|
| n.仔细思考，计划，设计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
constructive
|
|
| adj.建设的，建设性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
notably
|
|
| adv.值得注意地，显著地，尤其地，特别地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
schooling
|
|
| n.教育；正规学校教育 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
anticipation
|
|
| n.预期，预料，期望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
forsook
|
|
| forsake的过去式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
pending
|
|
| prep.直到，等待…期间；adj.待定的；迫近的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
incarceration
|
|
| n.监禁，禁闭；钳闭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
mused
|
|
| v.沉思，冥想( muse的过去式和过去分词 )；沉思自语说（某事） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
speculatively
|
|
| adv.思考地，思索地；投机地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
testily
|
|
| adv. 易怒地, 暴躁地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
hitch
|
|
| v.免费搭(车旅行)；系住；急提；n.故障；急拉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
custody
|
|
| n.监护，照看，羁押，拘留 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
emphatic
|
|
| adj.强调的，着重的；无可置疑的，明显的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
meditated
|
|
| 深思，沉思，冥想( meditate的过去式和过去分词 )； 内心策划，考虑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
imprisonment
|
|
| n.关押，监禁，坐牢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
whit
|
|
| n.一点，丝毫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
parley
|
|
| n.谈判 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
rigor
|
|
| n.严酷，严格，严厉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |