The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Boston [Mass.]) 1770-1772, 1772-01-16
SHAKEsPEARE.

haf6 Puih afide The L0w
SHAKESPEARE.
SsreD6st sstAssse' T fccnls to be matter Of
- Is4L ~ much ipecu alton, what is
- N1k9 become OF E6enezer RIB
Wk gGN 0rdiSn, who was convicted
S7dSSMR ofMURDER many terms
sDQEOWp0 back. The treatment of
tbl man Is 10 very extraordinary and un-
ufual, thsethis commot;on among the vari-
Gus claics OF the citizens, appears natural.
Iw |. MT take upon me ablolutely to afert
ttrte never was an infancr OF this kind in
Englifh hifto,y. The FACES of our Law
mutt b. iuppofed to be better acquainted
with thefe matters, and would never have
gone into an "a 70 new and alarming with
out fome precedent. But this, however, |
declare, that have taken no little pains in
looFing into tn progrefs of our Laws from
remote Antiquity to the Prefent day, and |
have not been able to collect in any report
OF crown CAFES, Gngie inftance where, a
man, cow eted by due couife Of Law, has
not received isntence, but is kept rotting
ir gao, for 10 many terms, at the charge
of the community, and is as likely to re-
main there as many terms more. Surely
iomething mutt be faid in yindicztion of
this condue, and we find it to be, that the
jury have gone beyond their liue, have con-
neefed Law with faa, and 70 their verdict
is different from what the court would have
choic. This, my countrymen, is dam
gcrous opinion. In my fecond number, /
confidered this point, and attempted to fhow
that it was illegal. fhall purdue the mat
Ter, and endeavour to lead this people into
a further acquaintance with this truth,
which fhoud be familiar to them all. Pre-
vIous, however. to this, intend to look
into the whole conduit of this affair, and
colTIa, if poHible, the reafons and the mo-
tives which gave birth to, and ftii animate
this extraordinary traniaction.
Soon after Riohardfon was remanded, a
motion was made FIR a nFsU trial for him.
The confederation of this motion was defer
red till the next term, when it was argued.
The jury were fent for and appeared. The
council for the pfifoner grounded their mo-
ton on fats, which they faid lhoud viii
ate the verdict. What were thelel That
on general ifue, the jury had taken upon
them to judge of the Law No. | affirm
this was not the cafe, and am of opinion
no Gentlemen at the bar, le0rnsIi in tbs dSU,
would have fetched an argument from this
quarter. They endeavoured to prove two
things; one was, that when the Jury went
out, the people over-awed them, crying
out, No Manlaughter ! Murder, murder,
Sc. this but one or two of the Jurors hezfd,
and they affirmed on oath, that it was too
contemplate to influence their decifion,
The other was, that two jurors came into
the verdict foley on this principle, that if
il was wrong, the court would not receive
il. This was made out miierably. The
ilie land the opinion of the court was,
the arguments were Inefficient, and A
NEW TRIAL COULD NOT BE
GRANTED. However, this in general
they IefolVed, that they were not 60Esd to
receive the verdict, and that thcv could not
give Judgment on fuch a verdict. Now it
Teens srigin0fs5 the cotton we are upon,
OF the jury's having no right to NEEDLE
with the Law /: And one Judge faid, the
onIy method was to lay the matter before