The Northern star, and farmers' and mechanics' advocate. [volume] (Warren, R.I.) 1830-1834, 1830-11-20

1.-The dupe Of any fraud on theope side,no
| to expose himself to blame on the other;
and az an evidence of the caution with
which he sought to conduct the business,
ne stated to the Court that he was net CON
.ent, though he had certainly NO dis-
trust ofthe honor Of the Attorney Gener-
Il. to receive verbal promise ofimpunityi
| or the prisoner but required . particular
| ,nd written assurance, which was given
to him by that officer. .ssfg
| Thursday, Nov. IL. n
The court met at the hour Of adjourn-
ment. .s gl.ae
Judge Putnam delivered in most lu-
cid, manner the opinion of the court, on
the admissibility Of the prisoners written
confession givcn to Mr. CoInan, in favor
of its admission. s. s8 da
The court considered that there was no
OBJ ,ious distinction between confessions
made at the instance Of the witness before
any pledge Of impunity was obtained from
the government, and confessions made af-
ter such pledge had been given to tho
prisoner; his security fully provided Tor
and he could be no longer under any ex-
Iternal influence Of hope or fear to make
false disclosures.
| Mr.. Colman was then called to hand in
the confession, and to attest to its genu-
ineness, and the Attorney General pro-
ceeded to read it with great dellberation,
to IN audience listening with an intense
Interest. A subsequent confession detail
ing further particulars and given to Gideon
Bsrstow and Stephen C. Phillips, Esq'rs.
was next read. The fictitious letters adj
dressed to the Committee Of Vigilance,
and to Stephen White, ESQ. were next
produced and proved. ts
The counsel for the prisoner then stat,
ed to the court, that as they were in some
measure surprised by the statements in
1.-THE confessions Just read, particularly a.
Ithey were connected with John Francis
Knapp, they asked time tor consultation
as to the course to be pursued. The court
considering that the prisoner himself,
knowing what he had communicated, and
the counsel having had time to anticipate
1.-THE possible decision Of the court on this
subject, refused to adjourn, or suspend
the cause. nsq-4 A ar
Mr.. Gardiner proceeded to open the
cause in behalf ofthe prisoner, dwelling
4 particularly upon the caution with which
confessions of q prisoner should be receive
ed; and showing that it was an established
principle of law, that person accused az
an accessory, had right, even after the
conviction of principal, to 60 into the
whole subject of the guilt of such princi-
pal, and dispute the justice of his convict
=, kz,h ~. u voscacts the laxv and thu
evidence. an. b. =
Mr.. Gardiner argued this point with n
bility and learning, and occupied the court
until the usual hour Of adjournment.
If in such melancholy case as. this It 10
proper to speak of any thing as amusing,
we confess we were amused at the adroit-
ness and tact with which the learned Pro-
fession are able to rally, to beat retreat,
to proceed to the assault, or to make di-
version at their pleasure, since now the
Counsel for the prisoner, by the identical
witnesses whom at the former trial they
sought to discredit and charged with pre-
varication and perjury, undertakes to es-
tablish the great fact which they ,be0 so
obstinately contested and as they pretend-
ed disproved, viz. the presence OF John
Francis Knapp in Brown-strset on the
night of the murder.
John A. Southwick, Daniel Bray, Peter
E. Webster, Messrs. Myrick, Kinsman
and Chase, all of them on former trial
witnesses for the Government, were sew
orally examined and NEST ofthem to prove
the above fact, and that the appearance at
the time did not warrant the suspicion that
he was there with view to render aid to
the assassin. Mr.. Colman was also CALI
cd by the Government to state that no
found the club by the particular direction
of John Francis KnaPp;' he also stated
that at the time he received the written
confs ssion of Joseph he inquired Of him il
he could tell the particular spot where the
club was concealed, and he answered that
lie could not. The testimony given by
the witnesses above named did not vary
from that on former trial, except in be-
ing less full, though not less decisive. IL
was not deemed necessaryto put so many
interrogatories to them as before. az :,
Mr.. Dexter then closed the defence OF
a. ..-..~..<. o,,d occ,,nipd the court until