Martinsburg gazette and public advertiser. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1826-1833, 1827-07-12
From the Rentnckv Reoortey,

DESHiA.- we un1cfStAnI tlat GOVeTn0r
Desha has pardoned i,s son isaac. The power
TO grant pardons before conviction, though
questionable, has been repeatedly asserted and
exercised By former Governors of Ken,ucky.
| and perhaps other states. Fbe whole Of the
late term OF Harrison Circuit Couet was deyo.
ted TO this Case. Nine Jurors only were OBJ
tanned on the last day, the prisoner having
exercised to the exIen Of the law, the prlvil.
eye of peremptory challenge. The Judge re.
fused TO renew the recognizances ofhs suret'es
or again hberste the prisoner on bail, in con-
lsequence we presume OF the state OF his health
not now requiring such INDULGENCE. The Go
vernon being present when the Judge remAn
ded his son Isaac TO jail, addressed The people
in a speech of cons derabie length, and %conclu.
ded by reversing the order of the Court and
sitting his son at liberty. We are not inform
ed of any form observed by his Exceliency, ex
cept The speech. in which it is SAID, he treated
the court with great ind gritty. We hope We
shall here after obtain the particulars from All.
thentic source.
The Libel Suits.-A year ago last March, it
viii be recolleeted a publication appeared in
the Frankfort Argus, signed with the name OF
Mrs. Eliza T.. Sharp, charging Patrick Henry
Dsrby, Esq. with being accessory o the murder
Of the late Col. sharp, her husband, and CIV
ing a detailed account of sliedged incidents,
| upon which she protested 10 believe the
charge. To this publication was annexed a
shorter one, by DE-. Leander J. Sharp, designed
to support the other, and assume the respon
slbility of its PRONUNCIATION 10 n newspaper.
For this publication, Mr.. Darby instituted
separate suits against Mrs. Sharp, DE- Sharp,
and the Editors of the Argus; aud a foarth a,
| the same time. against Jeroboam Beauchamp,
| for a libel upon the same subject; all in the
| Franklin circuit court, from whence they
were removed. by a change of the veuue. to
Woodf,rd.
The case against Or Sharp. which happen
ed to stand first upon the docket, came on
for trial last week; eminent counsel appearing
ior both parties 1.-THE arguments by MessFs
Wicklife and Crittenden for the plaintiff,
Messrs. Pope and Barry for the defendant y
The defendant pleaded jaslscaaon, which was
joined, and upon that single issue the cause
was tried. The testimony adduced IN support
Of the plea if any, was too slight 10 produce
any serious impression against The plaintiff
but there was a mass OF dispositions from Ten
nessse, touching tbs plaintiff $ character. and
some of them at least, representing IT as ex
tremely bad On his side. there was q stII
greater number. ON the same quarter, and ~
several instances, from the same Individuiis,
designed to ~ednf those against hin. In this
considering the standing OF the opponents a
gainst him, he was surprisingly successful
The whole taken together, whatever effect they
might have has for or against the parties 10 the
cause, certainly exhibited many OF the witness
es, among them some distinguished characters
in q most agkzoGrd, and somewhat ludicrols
predicsment.
Tn testimony as TO chsrscter,thus c~lashing,
was such as men differently constituted. are
very apt to differ about, some credidng one
part, and some another. II was the case here,
in a remarkable degree: for the jury though
| detained in consultation two or three days.
were unable to agree as to the damages, (some
being. we are informed. for $4,000. some
for $1,000, and some for only nsunnal damages.)
snd were finally discharged WITHOUT rendering q
verdict. The triallasted from Tuesday alter
noon until the next Monday evening. The o
Their Causes were continued until the next
term Commentator.