Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1829-12-17

had any pei sonal prejudice against Jones, nor
doe, the witness think he hal Anele ia n res.
pectable man, aud d serves 10 b. credited on
nsth. Theiuror (Angle) heing resent, was
sworn, and stated thai he made tie bet with the
witness as he mentioned II WAS a casual thing
which bad escaped his recollection, and he
should never have thought TO demand the
whiskey, nor does he suppose the witness
would. H. never thphg tot il. Al. or during
tie trial ; it had altogether escaped his mind
until re- m,uded of it by the witness after the ri
al and he repeated that Ne was %naitger AT he
called court nol present a any examination of
! witnesses at any lime r speCtng Ire asf, nor
| heard any statement Of the evidence from an
body that had heard It, SD far a. IL naew by
the trial
The prisoner of red another w,thess. alsr-
tina Gillian, ~hp said" was al Mr. Angie 8
house ON the diy OF the called c0ur Mr. An
gle reformed nome. i asked hun What va
| done with Mr.. Jones. lie aid he d no, slav
IL hear the ttial over. | said | wisnei hp might
he cleared he said he wished h, might b.
hung. I SAL. n Nv ran you say So, Nj. An
gle2 You know that When a man is dunn,
when he is in Il = 7ssion. his VII s u. and he
Dug : 10 be excused t"r his acts NJ A &c
sad, H. wished J II ; aud AL sue 4amnsd -
Gals o be hang. He did nitsay be md h, al
NY Ibtt W IL IL - b't pun - Wv 90
| have hea d Mr. Aagle speak Of tn %sngjrci
several lin 5. W i've fiuSe nrighhors. II
aIunys sad M. Jones ought 10 be hang. I'm
thr daughter OF Pat"rs Gillian 40 was
witness fDr JONES am ~ nay r.la ed /
Innrs rauy f lis fanny. aad bui Iule a
qu iute with hIn Aug > tie juror, was
crescent ia court denied having any sucn Coz
versation win Ni>~ Gl3idm As she i tai ed
sid tn she lad shown great am et f.,
10 es'S acauittal sue he uiat, aud defldies
that she wuaiid do any tb'og in hei power II
procure his discharge. Ms. Gillian denied
a se'tInn
L . counsel for The prisoner also presented
to tie count an aihdavi. Fin prIsonei in rel :
ton tn he TIM jurors Aforesaid when wSs
made a par oft.a T. cprd. ! - ailidt il 81
ted hat since the rendition of The Uerdici, h
had bee inio,me1 that the thre, juo1s nd.
pr vi us to their heirg i'm 'aunt led, formed.
An repeatedly expressed an opinion tat h
ought 10 be hung and tha Angle had Horeo.
yer, previousl to his ENG impanGs ed, maze
d oct that he would he hung, and expressed y
WISH that he should b. hung; that at the i'm
the sai3 tn ee jurors were so imptnnelled, h
did not kaOW, believe or suspect, that either i
said TO- Jurors had expressed the opinion n.
bove stated, or he pouid haUe challenged them.
Ate, bearing =. eVide1ce, the Superio,
Cont of law ndjoarnrd to The General Court,
the following qu. st'-n:
Ought a., yetdict against the prisoner 10 Re
Sci "A ,lde on the gfuhnd disclosed by III" ev-
Dice. resrecnne the tn 90 jurors aforesaid, OF
, ther of tn. IN or should the court proceed t.
jndement?
II tae Gene al Count the case was argued b,
Ca-pnan lahrson, for the prisoner, aud ny III
Az rney General for the Commonwt aIth
I'll -". 81 III. ,r4co mr.. CIlnEnI FREfAF
h. hy on two grounds 1t That The offence
y \ q was uot murder IN the Fl St degree, bu
urde in r. second degree oniy aud 2ndiy
That the obi c,ioas t" the Jurors ere su II rs
auid nav entitlt d the prison IN cnaiirng
hem for cause, ad he known of those objaC-
ions Ueior' they were impannelled and nav
jig acquired his knowledge aiterwa DIS, thu
proper mode o. giving hun redress by a new
trial.
The General Court was unanimously oil opt
mon that upon the facts stated the jury were
justified in finding the prisoner guilty o. muir
der in toe frst degrr" and, therefore, decided,
in answer TO the first Ia stlon adjourned by tne
sup rior Court If Law, tha' a new trial oush'
not to be granted 10 he prisoner upon The
statement # facts therein ref ffed 10,
In an wer to The second question adjourned
bv the Superior Court "fLt", the Curt va
also UNANIMOUSLY of opinion that the Suprri /
Court was not bound 10 haVp re-examtned ib"
witnesses after the verdict rendered, nor to
state the evidence uerbdtim as il was given by
the witnesses: and, therefore, that a new trial
ought not TO be awarded lot that cause.
liz answer 10 the third question, . majority of
the Court va ofopinion nat the verdict ought
MT 10 be sci aside on the ground flsclos'd by
the evidence respecting the tpree lnrors but
that the court should proceed TO judgment a
gain,t the prisoner upon the verdict-Fromt e.
opinion given upon this IN zion, urges
BrockenbIough and Sample dissentcd. Judge
Parker and Nav were opposed in sci ing asldf
the verdict. but did not concur IN an opIn'oa
expires ed by the majority, that there was no
cause Of challenge t. any of iheInrors, II the
prisoner had exercised MS rigit before they
were elected aud sworn.