The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-01 00:00:00

these secret societies. Can you desire to have
stronger evidence than the very secrecy of their
proceedings, under the sanction of an unholy oath
These men take the witness stand, and on their oaths
declare that they dare not confess the nature of their
society's oaths, for fear it should expose them to a cri-
minal prosecution ; and yet they expect to obtain cre-
dence from an intelligent Jury ! The witness Willson,
who kept the ferry, not over the River Styx, but over
the Niagara, and sailed not Charon's brat, but his own,
could give free passage to the felon Lett,
that he might burn and destroy the property of the
peaceable inhabitants ; that he might murder the
lamented Usher, that he might destroy the monument

of Sir Isaac Brook ; tht he might set fire to the steam-
boats and destroy the lives of innocent persons. But
alas ! that celebrated Captain-General has been lost
to them, and they have bitterly fat the sting of
their mortification. These are the witnesses—

tbcFe are the constituent pirts of that gallant znd
virtuous combination of heroes, who come forward

to t. ke away the life cf an innocent man, thinking to
claim belief from an intelligent Jury. I shall pass over
at a glance, all that which has not an immediate and
direct bearing upon the point at issue. They all show
is desire to prevaricate and conceal the truth. Take for
example the first witness, Wells. Did he freely and
fi-ankly give you the honest truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth? He stands utterly impeached and

convicted of direct perjury.
The Court asserx.bled at two o'ellck, after the recess
for dinner, and the number of ladies present was cousi•

word more before I leave this subject ; for another
opportunity may not occur to vindicat^ the course of
our State. It is false that the authorities of New
York have been delinquent in this matter, in refer-

derably increased.
Mr. Spencer resumed his argument, and his exami-
nation of the evidence for the prosecution, which he
said he verily believed was a wicked combination of
wicked man to promote a base and wicke3 purpose. He
believed it was only necessary for those men to put forth
their order and it would be obeyed, and it was his so-
lemn conviction that that dangerous combination along
the frontiers of which be had spoken, could furnish des-
. perate men for any purpose, be it even to hang MiLeod.
But if the British and American Governments would

cnce to these transactions ; the authorities have done
all they could. Governor Marcy issued his procla.
mation, he went personally, and it will be observed
that the information of the acts of the in6ur-
_

only see these things in their proper light, there would ba
no ❑ecessity to go to war, for that combination consisted
botof the scum of the earth. The arned Gentleman

gents arrived at Albany about the 16th of Decem-
ber, and there was but scarcely a week before this
catastrophe occurred. I stand boldly here and say
that New York has done her duty, and her whele

minutely examined the evidence for the prosecution,
and the character of those who gave it ; and he expressed

duty in this case'. Her Sheriffs, her District Attor-
neys, and her officers have done their whole duty, and
the very time the excitement took place, and was
quieted. but for the foul and fatal deed, all would have
gone off pcacef*lly. There was-no neglect of duty in
the State. So far from this, there is no proper and
just cause of complaint either against the Goverment

of the United States or of this State for neglect of

duty, or attempts to pu.t down all interference on the
part of our citizens. N9T, gentlemen, I will leave the

Judge Gridley hare intimated that the Court would
adjourn until to morrow morning.
TUESDAY, OCT. 12, 1841.
The Court re-assembled this morning at a quarter to
eight o'clock, at which time many ladies were in attend-
ance, and the Court was completely filed in every part.
As soon as the Jury had been called, and the Court had
properly opened, the Attorney-General resented his ad-
dress to the Jury in which he was interrupted last night.
The Learned Gentleman closed his remarks at
half-past twelve o'clock, having spoken since eight.
o'clock this morning, besides one hoar last night, making
in the whole fivehours and a half.
The Court then took a recess for dinner. At one
o'clock the Court was again organized, and the Caurt
room became tiled in every part ; the audience was
much greater than at any other time during the trial;
a great number of ladies forming a part of it. When
the Jury had taken their scats, and silence and order
were enforced in the Court,
Judge Gridley proceeded to charge the Jury. He
spoke as follows :
Gentlemen of the Jury—l congratulate you on your
at length arriving at the present stage of this long-pro-
tracted trial. After your patience having been drawn
upon for six days in listening to the trial, and a day and
a half in listening to the argument of Counsel, you have
at last arrived at that period when you are called on to
discharge the last and deeply solemn duty which devolves
upon you. I congratulate you also. upon the auspicious
circumstances under which you approach the perform-
ance of this duty. We know, it is true, that a deep and
pervading interest is felt in this case throughout
the entire land. We are also aware that a portion of
the public press has, from the commencement of this
controversy, teemed with inflammatory and passienate
articles. We have likewise heard of popular commotions
in various parts of the country, and in particuletr in the
county where the indictment against the prisoner was
found. Still, though these disturbing influences may
prevail elsewhere, we can at least say that they have not
entered this solemn temple of justice. If the waves of
excited popular feeling have swept along in other quar-
ters, they have not reached the portals of this building,
consecrated as it is to the faithful administration of that
justice to which the people and the prisoner alike appeal.
During the proceedings here, it may also be remarked,
we have seen attentive auditors in the persons of loyal
subjects of Great Britain, who not long since were in arms
in defence of their soil ; and, on the other hand, we had
the presence of more than one distinguished actor in the
scenes of blood and suffering connected with the recent
abortive attempt at revolution in the Canadian pro-
vinces. Yet although these individuals, as well as others,
who have been present, must have been deeply interested
auditors and spectators of what has occurred, not a sin-
gle murmur has been heard—not a single ebullition of ex-
cited feeling has escaped. All has been quietness and
rood order, and a signal proof has bean given that here
is a spot where justice can be purely administered, and
that here, if no where else, the decision of an upright,
intelligent, and honest jury, will be eel:Doe/ledge(' sove-
reign and supreme. It is under these auspicious circum-
stances that I invite your attention, Gentlemen, to the
questions connected with this great and important case.
Allow me to offer a simple additional passing remark,
and it is this—in order to appreciate properly the ques-
tions on which you are to pronounce your judgment, it
will be necessary that you should keep your minds en-
tirely unembarrassed by the consideration of other mat-
ters which have in realit7 nothing whatever to do with
the merits of the case. The counsel on one side and the
other, as it was their duty and right, have presented
such arguments, anddiscussed such topics as they deemed
likely to serve the interests of the parties whom they re-
present. But the tribunal which tries has also ditties to
perform altogether different from those incumbent on
the advocates entrusted with the interests of those who
are placed_ at its bar. The case of this prisoner, Gen-
tlemen, I may simply say, is to be tried like that of any
other person indicted for the same offence. The first
question is, has any murder been committed ? And the
second question is—is the prisoner at the bar guilty of
that murder ? On the first question, Gentlemen, the
Supreme Court of this State, as you have already learned
during the progress of the trial, has decided. Their
authority is binding on you and me. We are sitting here
to dispense justice in the Circuit Court, and roust be go-
verned by the decision of that superior tribunal which
has sent down this issue to be tried here. That is
no longer an open question, but an adjudicated one, and
with it you have no concern. The circumstances out of
which the indictment originated are briefly these :—ln
December, 1837, a body of Canadian refugees and Ame-
rican citizens occupied Katy Island, fortified themselves
there, and opened a cannonade upon the Canadian main
shore, where some 2,500 or 3,000 men were assembled to
protect their territory. Aid was afforded to these occu-
pants of Navy Island by certain individuals in Buffalo ;
and one William Wells, the owner of the steam-boat
Caroline, for the purpose of promoting his own in-
terests, as he swears before you, had the steam-boat
cut out from the ice when it lay in Buffalo creek, and on
the morning of the 29th December, the fatal day, that
boat made her first trip from Buffalo to Schlosser, touch-
ing at Navy Island ; and that after that, on the same
day, she made two trips to Navy Island from Schlosser ;
that it was instrumental in conveying armed men, arms,
provisions, and one piece of ordnance to Navy Island.
Further than this, it does not appear that the Caroline
was instrumental in promoting the interests of the oc-
cupants of Navy Island. Now the Colonial Association
in Canada saw fit to regard this boat as a portion of the
armament of the insurgents, and resolved to destroy her.
Sir Allem M'Nab, the Commander of the Provincial
Forces at Chippewa, ordered volunteers to embark in
boats, of which five reached the Caroline, and from them
she was boarded, whilst her peaceful occupants were
asleep in her berths, and With cutlasses, boarding pikes,
and fire-arms, the attacking party chased the persons on
board, wounding some, killing one, and whether others
experienced the same fate we know not—and then hav-
ing set fire to the boat, the attacking party sent her over
the " Falls." This is a brief history of the transaction,
so far as it is necessary for you to consider it for the
purpose of understanding and disposing of this case. The
acts I have described are hell by the prisoner's counsel
to have been excused in the individual performing them,
for the reason, first, because those acts were authorised
—and secondly, because done in self defence ; and again,
because the whole transaction has already become the
subject of recognition between the two Governments, so
RS to deprive this Court of jurisdiction over the offence.
These arguments have been laid before the Supreme
Court, and that Court, after great research and de-
liberate consideration, pronounced that this act
of the killing of Durfee, although performed
in the prosecution of an enterprise like that I
have already described, was murder ; and it follows
then, Gentlemen, that all who were engaged in
it are guilty of the same offence ' - and it is not ne-
cessary that the arm of 11I'lecod should have struck the
fatal blow to render him guilty. Enough that he was
engaged with others in that enterprise. This question,
then, is to be excluded from your consideration. It has,
it is true, been dwelt on by Counsel on both sides, in
their opening addresses, and during the progress of the
trial. I refer to it, however, to inform you that it has
been already adjudicated on and is set at rest. Then
comes the question—the important question on which
you are to pass—is Alexander M'Leod guilty of that
murder ? The Counsel for the people have presented
many witnesses before you, the tendency of whose tes-
timony has been to show that the prisoner is guilty ;
and in order, Gentlemen, that you may understand and
appreciate this testimony, I shall briefly place it in re,-
view before you. I shall divide it into two classes—the
first branch embracing the direct and circumstantial evi-
dence other than that arising from confessions connect-
ing the prisoner with this charge—the second class of
evidence will consist entirely of confessions. The first
' witness, Gentlemen, who has testified before you, is Gil-
man Appleby. He is the only witness who was on
board the boat at the time of the attack. lie was the
captain of the boat—he slept in the gentlemen's cabin—
he was awoke a little before midnight, as he thinks, by
information that there were boats approaching; he arose,
and, partially dressed, made his way up the stairs, till
he found his farther progress arrested; he retreated,
but again returned, and had opened the door about a
foot, when it was violently pushed open by some
one outside, who then made a plunge at him with a
sword, which glanced along two of his vest buttons
and struck against the metal button of his panta-
loons ; he was considerably
excited, but in that mo-
mentary glance he saw the features of the man thus
attacking him, and' his impression then was that the
individual was Alexander INl‘Tacod ; but with all com-
mendable prudence and caution—for which I honour him
—this witness says that amid "the agitation of the mo-
ment, and in that hasty glance, which passed in the
twinkling of an eye, he cannot say that it was M'Leod ;
he had once before seen the prisoner at Buffalo, and it
struck him at the time that his appearance was similar
to that of the individual who thrust at him, but it was
only one hurried glance, and he immediately replied to
the question of Counsel, when on the stand here, that
he could not say that it was Alexander M'Leod. The
next witness is Samuel Drown. He resided at Chippewa,
and was engaged in tending bar for one Smith, who kept
a tavern there, and he says that he went up on the
evening of this transaction to what was called the " Cut,"
and up the Niagara river ; that he was at the entrance
of this " Cut ;" that he was at the beacon light ; saw
the boats passing into the " Cut," and then he thinks
recognised M'Leod amongst the party embarking in the
boats ; it was dark ; but the witness expressed the cer-
tainty of his belief that he then and there saw the pri-
eoner. He says he went from there to Davis's Tavern,
where a portion of these
persons came, and there, by a
• light which shone from within the bar-room, or by a
light out on the " stoop," although he cannot remember
any light hanging out there, he professes to have seen
then again Alexander M'Leod. He then says that next

his surprise that the law officer of the Government who
conducted the prosecution had not abandoned the
ease without asking a conviction on such testimony.
The Attorney General at nine o'clock commenced
his closing address, and spoke as follows :
Gentlemen of the Jury Worn down with the
labours of this case, I am called upon at this late hour
to bear up, not against the intrinsic merits of the
case, but against the powerful eloquence and the
great personal influence of the counsel for the
prisoner—to bear up this case under my own fatigue,
and exhausted as you are by this trial, which
has been of so great extent, against false issues
and extraneous issues, which the ingenuity of counsel
has too successfully succeeded in placing before you.
During the progress of this case, and the summing up
counsel for the prisoner have complained loudly of t r e
manner in which the prosecution has been conducted
as if there had been something harsh and improper
on the part of those whose duty it was to conduct it
before you. Wo Lave been accused of concealing
from him the names of the witnesses. Gentlemen, I do
not feel that that. charge is properly brought against
us. For one, I can say, it is not properly brought
against me. As to harshness in the case, I owe it to
the position which I hold, to say, from the outset—from
the first moment that the prisoner at the bar was or
rested at Lewiston, to the present moment in which Ism
addressing you, by the direction of the Executive of your
Stale, as well as those in whose more immediate hands
the prosecution was—every attention has been given to
the prisoner, and there has not been loft the shadow
of a shade of ground for the enemies of our Snot,
here or elsewhere, to charge us with having tarnisl.ed
the name of the State of New York in the adrninis•
tration of justice to the prisoner at the bar. Gen-
tlemen of the Jury, I belicvs it not. Ido not believe
it. So far as my knowledge extends I can say it is not
so. If any such thieg has been done it has been dune
without my knowledge. Something has been said here
of the mob at Lockport as connecting itselt with
the merits of this case. I would not base men-
tioned this, but that it has been trumintel forth
that in this State we are so wild and regardless of
law that we are ready to assassinate a judge on the
bench. I stand not here to apologize for any ap-
pearance of violence at Lockport, but the circum-
stances were not as they have been exaggerated
here this day, and as they have been represented in
the public prints both here and in Europe. Gan-
tlmen, the prisoner was, by a Judge, let to bail
without a precedent and the people, who were
somewhat indignant at the outrage which bad
been committed at their very thresholds, were son e-
what excited. They did not do viclence to any ace ;
they insisted that those who had become bound should
cancel their bond, and that was the whole. Now,
Gentlemen, what progress have we made in this case ?
May I say, Gentlemen, that we have proved that the
Caroline was destroyed, and that Durfee was murdered ?
I confess, when the Counsel for the prisoner attacked
so violently the testimony of Mr. Wells—the
first witness who was called to prove the de-
struction of the Caroline—l began to be alarmed
lest we had not proved that the Caroline was
destroyed, and that Darfee was murdered. Gen-
tlemen, I do not think perjury is quite so common
as the counsel seem to suppose ; but, Gentlemen, it is
a common thing to swear to a little more than the
witnesses know. M'Nab, in his testimony, not that
he intended deliberately to perjure himself, but
he was willing to swear to more than he knew.
Gentlemen, the life of a man may be taken
in lawful self defence, or it may have been
taken by some individual in the protection of
his own life. Yes, Gentlemen, it might be taken
by some one in the patriotic defence of his country. On
that point I will go as far as the Counsel for the pri-
soner, and I would not restrict it to one individual
alone. But does the testimony here make out a lawful
taking away of life ? Gentlemen, it does not approach
it, though an attempt was made to put forward testimony
in the nature of a defence. The Learned Gentleman
here read an extract from the diplomatic correspondence
which has taken place between the Bribish Minister and
our Secretary of State, in which oar Secretary lays
down the position that the affair of the Caroline was
unjustifiable even in a national point of view, unless
there was strong necessity for instsent self defence,
leaving no choice of means nor moment of deliberation,
a necessity which the Government of the United
States could not believe to have existed. The
Learned Gentleman resumed :—Gentlemen, this
has been extolled as an act entitled to be ranked
among the glorious achievements of men. Yon well
recollect the description of this boat ; it was a ferry
boat. It was so small that a persint could step
out of a row boat on to her deck. Was it then so ter-
rible an engine, as would warrant such extraordinary
services? The persons on Navy Island might have been
stared out ; but this fact, though it may have been a
sagacious one, was one of barbarian cruelty—it was one
which nothing but the rigour of war would justify. If
our citizens were on Navy Island, they were no longer
our citizens, and if they had been butchered or hung,
there could be no appeal to our laws ; but when
they come within our lines, God grant that we may
be always able and willing to protect our citizens.
I can add nothing to the able opinion of our Supreme
Court, which I read to you in my opening. I can only
say, that Great Britain herself has decided that ques-
tion, when she refused to our Government to deliver up
Greeley, when he was taken at Madawaska for taking
the census, on what may be alleged to be British
ground. When ho was arrested for that act, and
thrown into prison, and our Government complained
of the impropriety of the act, what was the
reply of the British Government ? " We can-
not interfere—our laws must be respected." That
answer, so far as the law went, was conclusive. But so
far as this was an act of war, that question had also
been disposed of by Great Britain. When she *seized
our citizens taken on her shores, she tried them in her
civil Courts, and she condemned some to be executed
and some to be banished. Yes, Gentlemen, our citi-
zens have been thus treated, and the wires and children
and brothers of those men have kneeled to the Govern-
ment atWashingtom again and again, imploring that some-
thing may be done to procure their release from fo-
reign bondage ; but they have been told that we could
not interfere. Shall not, then, the same laws which
bind us from interfering with those who tres-
pass on their soil, be equally imperative anc,
biading when the sides are turned, and their
citizens trespass on our soil ? During this
discussion, Gentlemen, your attention has been
directed to some few instances, supposed to be
analagous to this case. I will not detain you at
this late hour, but I cannot allow an occasion of
se much interest here and elsewhere, to pass without
one word with reference to these instances which are
cited. We are reminded of the case of Florida ;it was
a protracted system of aggression and annoyance conti-
nued there for more than three years. No two cases are
more dissimilar ; at last Gen. Jackson followed the fugi-
tive Indians out of their territory ; and what then was
the result ? there was no case so extreme as that, yet
by the very extremity of necessity, in protection of our
own rights, as you remember, gentlemen, a committee
of both Houses of Congress, to whom was referred the
subject, reported against the conduct of General
Jackson ; although the majorities, were his political
friends, yet they reported that the act was illegal ; he,
then the (hullo..' of the nation, covered by fresh laurels,
committed this deed, which that committee were com-
pelled to declare an unlawful act of aggression. Wby is
that brought forward here ? Again you are referred to the
case of the Leopard and the Chesapeake ; if 1 should se-
lect one case to maintain the decisions of our Court, it
should be that ease ; a gross outrage was committed by
that vessel on our crews ; the Government complained ;
England disavowed the act and the individual was pun-
ished. One word more ; although lam conscious lam
trespassing on your patience, permit me to say one

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 1 1841.

morning, Gentlemen, between daylight and sunrise, he
heard some of the men in the tavern talking of M‘Leod's
being wounded, and was over on the opposite " stoop;"
the witness looked across, he said, and then
thought he again recognised M'Lood ; he says he
wont over to see whether INPLeod was wounded ; he
eaw no one apparently wounded, and did not see M`Leod.
He was then inquired of in relation to the degree of cer-
tainty with which he could say that the man whom he
saw was Mifseod, and he said in reply that " he saw a
man whom he called M`Leod." Another question was
put to him, and he then said, " I mean that I am as sure
it was M‘Leod, as that he now sits before me." This is,
Gentlemen, his testimony. He submitted to a long cross-
examination, and how far it went to shake your confi-
dence in his statements, it is your province, Gentlemen,
to decide. There is, however, one consideration which
I will submit to you ; it is this, that when you are to
judge of the credit to be attached to the testimony of a
witness, it is right and proper that you should observe
his manner on the stand—the degree of intelligence
which he exhibits, the amount of power of observation,
and accuracy of recollection—and having done so, you
are to decide whether his answers satisfy you that he
is honest, and iu the whole whether his statements are
of such a character, when taken all in all, that you can
rely upon them ; and if not sufficient to satisfy you al-
together, you must decide in how far you should allow
what degree of confidence you must repose in his testi-
mony, and that you will bestow on it, and no more. It
is argued by the prisoner's Counsel that the degree of
darkness which prevailed there, and as testified to, was
such as made it exceedingly rash for this witness to pro-
nounce so confidently that he was able'to recognise
M‘Leod as well there as here to- clay. it is also argued
that he stands before you impeached as to his character
fur truth and veracity, and to sustain this impeachment,
witnesses have been called and have appeared before
you. One Mr. Bates has testified that he lives near
Canandaigua, near the residence of this witness, and he
says that he heard him speaking on this subject, I think
at some former period when subpoenaed ; and among
other things he said he knew nothing in reference to this
matter that could do M‘Leod any harm or any good.
The statement which he makes of what he said, is some-
what qualified. It is remarked on the other hand that
witnesses who are subpoenaed, frequently make careless
observations, and that this person being * poor man,
might wish to avoid attendance on this trial. This is
very true that persons often make careless remarks, and
had Drown made such a statement in presence of any
one who could have excused him from attending here,
then the plea of Counsel could have been entitled to
greater regard from you. If in truth, the facts which
he has here stated, were remembered by him at that
time, then they were all facts material, and he could
not have said consistently with truth, that he knew no-
thing of sufficient importance to harm or benefit the
prisoner. This, Gentlemen, is the extent of that in-
dividual's testimony. You ara to take it into your con-
sideration, and are to exercise your judgment in refer-
ence to the effect it may have in detracting from your
confidence in the evidence of Drown. I may add, that
in order to restore your confidence in Drown,
Bates was questioned, and in reply stated that
that individual's character for veracity had latterly
improved ; that formerly he had been an intem-
perate man, but was now reformed. The next wit-
ness, Gentlemen, is Isaac P. Corson. He is a native
of this State, a carpenter by trade—he had been at
Chippewa in prosecution of his business—be testifies
that he was at Macklin's store on the after-
noon of the 29th of December, 1837 ; and he there
saw Monier, Usher, and the prisoner—that about nine
o'cloCk,'he saw the prisoner passing out of Davis's—
that he also saw him next morning at sunrise with others
on the " stoop"—that he was at some little distance—
that he could see only his head and shoulders—that lie
was 'telling of his exploits—and saying that lie had killed
a d—d Yankee—that he saw him again two or three
days afterwards—that he then said he would like to be
on another such expedition and burn Buffalo. This is an
analysis of this witness's testimony, which is spread over
several pages of my minutes. You will recollect, Gen-
tlemen, this witness's cross-examination, and will judge
how fa; that weakened the force of the statements made
by him on his direct examination. There is, however,
one point which demands your particular attention. This
witness was inquired of as to who else were present
when he heard 111`Leod fiourishirg and boasting of having
killed a Yankee—at first the witness could not recollect
any one—at length he said he could name one Caswell—
he was then asked whether he was present at this trial,
and he said yes—he was then asked when it first oc-
curred to him that he saw Caswell there, that morning,
and he confessed that it was that very moment—the
cross-examination was protracted, and in the course of
it came out that he had 'conversed with. Caswell as late
as the morning of the day on which he testified on the
stand before you—that they talked of the affair of
the Caroline, and that Caswell informed him that
he was there that morning. It may be that that
was all true, and that it really did not occur to him
that Caswell was there till the moment that the
question was put to him. But you are to judge of that.
The next witness is Charles Parkes, bar-keeper at
Davis's tavern—he testifies. that the prisoner went to
bed at Davis's tavern early in the day, and got up be-
tween eight and nine o'clock in the evening—that a gen-
tleman called for hira, and he went out—that half an hour
.or three quarters of an hour afterwards he saw him be-
tween Davis's and the Chippewa Creek—that a good
many people were on the road—that M`Leod went
into one of the boats—that at about sunrise next morning
he saw him at Davis's—that he again saw him a few
days afterwards in the officers' mess-room, and there
heard him say that he had killed a d—d Yankee, or
something like that. At the close of his examination
this witness was asked whether lie could say with consi-
derable:certainty say that he saw 11I'Leod at the "{:pit."
and he said he could , he waif asked further, and said he
had no doubt of it. He also states that it was pretty
dark that night, and testifies also to other things, on ac-
count of which the counsel for the prisoner contends you
should take his testimony with considerable grains of
allowanCe ; he testifies as to his knowledge of MeLeod,
and among other things says that he once went to see
him in company with a brother-in-law, whom he
accompanied as a witness in case his evidence would
be necessary—that money was paid to M`Leod ;
but that although he went as a witness, he cannot
recollect the amount of the money paid on
the occasion. It is also argued that this witness tells a
very extraordinary story in relation to the manner in
which he has been induced to appear here ; that he
started from home to make certain purchases in Buffalo ;
that he suspected some one who accosted him en the
way with the design of arresting him to ensure his at-
tendance as a witness on this trial—that he returned
home—again set out and was arrested in Buffalo before
he had time to transact any business—that, further, he
was ignorant of the laws of this State, and was so
frightened by the alleged representations of Mr. Haw-
ley, that he (Mr. H.) had power to enforce his atten-
dance here, that lie consented to come. All this may or
may not be the truth. This witness also testifies that he
was' solicited to come here by persons religiously op-
posed to bearing arms. Now, Gentlemen, I have no
opinion to express on these matters. You are the sole
judges of this testimony, and with you I leave it. The
next witness is Caswell—he whom Corson spoke of,
and he testifies in substance that he also saw M`Leod
that morning at Davis's tavern. Then comes Quimby—
.he is the witness from Pennsylvania—he testifies that he
resided some two miles from Chippewa—that he was
there on the 29th with a load of hay, which he sold to the
government—that he did not get paid for it at the time
of the sale—that he remained till evening, and in the
course of the evening 'saw the prisoner at Davis's
tavern—that he remained there from nine till ten
o'clock—that he then started for home—stopped at
Pettis, about a mile off, all night—that he then
turned back, and was again in Chippewa between day-
light and sunrise ; that he went back to get payment for
his hay at the Commissary's Office • that he was going
there when he saw M‘Leod ; that fle saw him on the
" ridge," and that he there heard him boast of his ex-
ploits on the Caroline, and heard him declare that there
was the blood of a Yankee on his sleeve. He is ques-
tioned then as to whether he expected to receive pay-
ment for his hay at that early hour, and whether there
were any persons in the office, and he said there were not;
that he wished to be there in good season, but did not,
after all, get paid, and finally went home. But, Gentle-
men, it seems, according to the testimony of Mr. Lott, of
Lottsville, Pa., that on one occasion this Quimby came
with another person for the purpose of making an affida-
vit before Mr. Lott, who is a magistrate, and that that
gentleman refused to take the affidavit, because Quimby
was unworthy of credit; that he went to another magis-
trate, by whom the affidavit was taken and sent on.
Lott says that he resides in Lottsville; that the repu-
tation of the witness, Quimby, while resident there,
was very bad ; 'that he was not to be believed on oath;
and that in informing the prisoner's counsel of his
character, he (Mr. L.) had no private motives of ma-
lice or revenge to gratify. Now it is said, and it is
true, that ordinarily a witness to invalidate • the testi-
mony of another, should be called from the neighbour-
hood. But you are the arbiters of this question, and
in your hands I leave it. The evidence of Seth Hun-
man, for whatever it is worth, is also before you. when
examined before, he said M`Leod was not seen by him
that morning; he now swears he was. You will give
this the credit y-ou deem it deserves. Justice F. T. Ste-
vens is then called and sworn. He testifies that he was
present on the night in question, and that he saw three
boats go out and return, and he distinctly and posi-
tively swears that he saw M`Leod disembark by the bea-
con light. That is a statement which is not contradicted
by any other witness, and is, on the contrary, hostile to
the statements of all the other witnesses on both sides.
It cannot be true. He was dismissed from the stand
without cross-examination. He has testified to what is
a deliberate falsehood—a falsehood for which the palli-
ating plea of the probability of 'mistake cannot be of-
fered. Leonard Anson is the next witness. He swears
that he saw M•Leod at the bar in Davis's tavern—that
there were others there who took part in the expedition
against the Caroline, each boasting as to who had com-
mitted the greatest crime—that there he saw M‘Leod
draw out his pistol, and declare that he had killed a
d—d Yankee, and that he pointed out the blood
on the stock of the pistol. This, it is contended on
the part of the prisoner, is an , improbable story—
that he could not have seen the blood on the pistol ;
and other considerations have been submitted to
you in relation to the testimony of this individual
which it is unnecessary for me to dwell upon now.
You are the judges of their weight, and the atten-
tion which should be given them. These are, I believe,
the only witnesses belonging to the first class of evi-
dence ; that is, these are the only witnesses, who
testify of their own knowledge, as to facts unallied
with confessions, which go to connect M`Leod with this
enterprise. And the prisoner's counsel contend that
some of these witnesses have been impeached, and that
others have appeared in very doubtful circumstances—
that the darkness of the night was a very good reason
why no very great confidence should be placed in the
statements of those testifying so positively that they