Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-10-06
SELECTIONS.
From the Norfolk Herald.
SUPERIOR COURT-NORFOLKC COUNTY
SEPTEMBER TERM.
1r,al Of Z4CH9RLaH FRIZZLE,
Indicted Tor the murder of BENNEr FENTRESS
RepOrte4 BIZ q Member ne tL. Rnr

4
| (Concludea)
zen. Iaylar, In his usual impassioned manner.
opened the defence. As the pen OF the taker of
tnese notes was ofen suspended invoiun,arily by
'he Tide OF eloqnence which flowed in copious
streams, leaving the admring audience deprived
OF the faculty o! being conscious of sny thing else
man the superior powers of the ora or il could not
OF course, be expected that any thing more than a
iaint outline of lis argument could be presented.
Inc following, however, were some of his re-
marks:l
ii he were to say that this occasion he felt
no embarrassment, he should say that to which
his heart could not respon!--ii was case which
ne WOULD acknowledge he could no. summon suffi-
cent professional courage 10 meet, but for one
.h'hs--w hich was, that he had ittry of patient,
impartial and Intelligent men, He sill admit ed
'hat ne approached the with alarm, but felt
cohhueht mat Such jury would divest themselves
OF pre)ndices, and would feel disposed TO ioin
me hue and cry which had been raised against the
prisoner, out of doors. He would confess he had
no hope of obtaining the absolute acun,,,l of the
prisoner. lie however lad no apm -hen-ions for
MS NE although the question was, whether he
should lose that lie, undergo n long confinement
In the peni'enisry. lie felt confident that the ,ry
would not Tor single moment rely on the t.si-
mony winch they had heard from Barnard. He
could not believe for moment, after the inry had
stated that the confession to Barnard should moi
operate upon their minds they could be capoble of
fesoring TO II In the least particularly il they did
II would be breach OF trust treason against hu-
manity--a crime of the deepest dye-their faith
should be preserved inviolate, aud should conse-
quently on the evidence of the other ,v;,na.
ses
1t no, his intention to Geny tia, Fentress fell
by the hand cf Frizze- he would not denv that
he shot him he would admit that he was guilty OF
homicide The deceased II il true, did die by the
hani oil The prisoner he killed him-bdt every
killing was not murder; the state of the mind
OF The slayer must always lie tax en- into consdera-
non. were our gallant soldiers who drove their
inerrinS bullets through the hearts of hind eds of
Englshmen at New Orleans guilty. OF murder |.
the husband who detects DESTROYER of his peace
IN me arms 81 his wife, and who instantly exlir-
cuisines forever the vital spark of the s,iulierer
guilty OF murder? No. gentlemen, it is the foct
and not probable nOtipts, that are to be regarded
soldiers should be crowned vi h wreaihs and gar
iah's when they have performed their duty, and
not be branded with the name of ,nurterers He
asked what were the circumstances of this case
certainly not such as would Justify verdict O.
murder EVEN telonious killing was not aEtcays
murder: The prisoner, he continued, was no,
guilty oil murder either in the first OF second de
gree and therefore could only be punished for man
slaughter by confinement in the peniteniisrv, Tor
pefioi OF not less than two, Nor more than ten
years.
! Depend on il, gentlemen, That The criminal Inv
| OF every country Is founded on principles under
stood by all men OF common sense, as well as the
most learned lawyer; all men can distinguish 4 de.
liberate act Of killing from an offence oil less ma
lisnify-there Is a material difference between
murder and manslaugh;er. When man lies IN
wait Tor Ills neighbour, for weeks, months or wears
chershing IN his heart, deeprooted des gu OF de
priving HIM OF his liie-w here with the II. lioniv
Characteristic OF Wild beast, he conceas himself
IN MS iurAlnS place, ready To spring the unNa-
~ and unsusPecins traveller, and IN this manner
robs him ct iiie-ihis is murder. Upon other oc-
ca~Ions, man receives sudden provncation and
actuated by Aloloch spi, Challenges 10 the field
to mortal combat the person vino pulls his nose or
otherwise irsuls bun; or, inspired by Passion
se'zes some more deadly weapon and lays the az
gressor b'ea,hless al his feet, although not gli.ty
OF murder, yet does act from which religion
turns with shame and regret. There are then de-
gyceS ct guilt the criterion is The iatentton-ti
mo'ives OF the slayer must be examined iiuman
laws, 1t should be enbefed have been instituted
not Tor the government OF s"gels, but OF men--or
men endied wi some good qualities, and afflicted
/ by some bad ones. WHIST j. murder; Ills k,I,iu,
with malice pTePeHSe-ii Is at with The hes
! interests OF humanity. He I'D he must caution
the jury against being led into an error. They
were not to suppose that the offence could no, be
reduced TO manslaughier unless the killing was ua-
infeHtiOnGL This a mistake. II two men
to cool, they 20 out TO ishi and one of them is
killed, this Is only manslaughcr; but if sufficient
time has in erYened to admit OF reflection anil AT
forwards one OF them is killed in duel. ihis j..
murder. IL vas not Liz intention 10 oppres- ,h.
jury by authorities they had sufficient authori,ie
IN their own hearts True II was that every man
was not end wed with the talents of a Newton
VINO could IN MS retirement investigate and devcl-
ope the mysteries Of Deity but every man pos-
se%sed in bis nlnd the power of understandi,y
plain principles He would however trouble them
with one authority; IL the case of Ro-
bert Mitchell which had been determined Nv
The highest court of criminal jurisdiction known
IN tDis state-a case in which wretci, de-
iesiabie IN every way-a sot who, having nut
TO death his friend 90 bis unre-isiing friepd-wbo
had been doing him service, and who az the
time he was slam, was in the act of fleeing from
him. and had cunning enough 10 devise plan by
which 1t might be thought the deceased had biYed
h,"'seg, was nevertheless, adjudged guilty of nun
slaughter onty. Here the general was about to
read ne case but i=eling much exhausted, request
ell w alter II. Jones, Esq. who was near him, to
read il Tor him Sir. Jones did 50 in very sppro-
pirate style. Gen. Taylor resumed the argument.
alter returning hanks 10 Mr. Jones for his assistance
lie contended that the case of Robert Mitchell a.
not so clear case OF manslaughter As the one be
lore the court. The present question did not dc.
pend upon the fact whether tie prisope, had used
/ The gun, but upon bis being ac'uated by malice.
| he jury should inquire whether there had been an
previous grudge or quarrel. They could not be-
lie'e there existed any malice; the evidence Of al
the witnesses will be found inconsisten, with any
such supposition. The prisoner and the deceased
according 10 the whole testimony, were only few
minutes before on the most friendly terms If, as
The prosecuting attorney says, q man was to shoot
another down, without the smallest provocation,
| III not hr he Of 49, .