Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1829-08-13
CIRCU. COURT.

| oh each Of the three i dictments on whic. ne
has Just cen Hied--namr'y, for nifsde IN eanor
al comm u law, in having in BIS capacity o
Fourth Auditor, and ostensibly Tor the public
| service, but falsely and frau uleniy, aud b,
talse pretences, obtained divers sums Of public
money, aud converted them TO his own pri
vale use. The cases tried were-he two OF
which the forme' juries could not agree ant
new trials were granted, viz the 300 dollar
aBd 49, dollar cases, IN which these sun,
we're Jravn from Mr.. Paulalng, Navy Agen
at New York and the 50 600 case, IN NhlcI
has SUN Was drawn from Mr.. lila, ri, Nav,
Agent al Boston. We will Low add some 8 ar
lIcnlars OF the proceedings N this case whlci
| took place the day preceding:
On Tuesday VIZ, Kew moved ne Court I,
instruct the Jury, in matter and from, as u N.
| structed the Jury in The 800 dollar cases TIN
instruction was in effect, taal if the fraudu!ent
intent and The acts sci forth ia the indictme.
were considered by tue Jury as proved by tbs
testimony, il WAS not malerial whether tie
fraud was prepeirated in his official character
| rs Fourth Auditor, or IN his prvaie capacity
but 'ha', il such case She Jury must return a
gene al verdict of Guilty.
NJ Core then moved some additional insiruc.
tons, setting forth certain proportions as
for the United states took exception 10 two Of
the items contained in these additional ,ustruc.
ions, principally On the ground that they were
abstract propositions, inmate i.l 10 the case
Mr.. Coke, Oh the other hand, ms ed that the
propositions ob'eciec 10 were material, Judge
Cranch objected TO the two PROPOSE ions IN tEa
gr"und that, IN giving them as Instructions 10
The Jury, The Court would be submitting uffic.
ally and eosnOpiine, question OF law 10 he
Jury. HE had also other objections which he
stat d. The two propositions which are as
follows, were thtu withdrawn:
THAI il the Jury shall believe that the
Fo nth Auditor had by law no authority to
direct The disposition of money in he hands
the Navy Agent that he pay ment by them
TIVE various drafts was unauthorized and in
their own wrong.
" That il the Jury shall believe that the
Fourth Auditor had lawful pow er and author
~ 10 direct the appropriation ul said moneys,
that then the Navy Agents were bound to pa,
the official drafts Of The Fourth Auditor aud
none other 4
Mr.. Key then submitted prayer for an adj
dhonai lnstrutIon 10 the Jury, 10 the effect that
the subsequent allowance OF these items in the
accounts OF the Navy Agents, lid no, sanc,i n
the draw ing of the drafts by DR. Wa kins nor
change the ira 'dulelt character oil The tramssc.
ton,
Mr.. Coke objected to the instruction prayed
tor. snd some discussion took place on the uues.
iion alter which, the Court madea verbel al.
tTation, and arceded to the pray er OF the
Counsel for The United States.
MI. Key then payed another instruction
setting forth thatthe payment Of The drafts in
Nv York and Boston did not take the offence
OUT ofthe jurisdiction of this Court, 10 this
prayer also Mr.. Coxe.ohj cted, but after some
modf alton OF the Language OF the instruction
PRAYED for, The COAT gran ed the PRAYER.
Yesterday, the case was further argued by
M. hey aud Mr. Scum, for III. United States.
This concluded little after II o'clo k. " hen
the Jury re irsd, and altrI remaining out about
NO hours brought in the verdict of GUILTY, as
above stated.
As soon as The verdict was received. Mr..
Coke moved an arrest Of judgement and new
trial, Tor reasons which he will submit, 10
day. MT lni