Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1830-08-25
HERALD OF THE TIMES.

case with the Jury; they were sworn TO
try il upon the indictment, considerations
Of mercy, if they belonged any where,
belonged to another branch of the gov
crnmcnt: he wished then nothing more
than that they should perform their duty.
Mr.. Webstcr's remarks upon the conse-
| quenccs Of proper performance of duty,
were unusually eloquent.
John Francis Knapp was then asked
|, if he wished TO add any thing TO what had
been said by his counsel; he replied in
firm voice that he had nothing more to
say.
Judge PUTNAM then charged the Ju-
ry. The Court he said were of opinion
that the common law had not been alter
cd and that no accessory could be tried
until after the conviction Of principal.
The prisoner was indicted as principal,
but as principal in the second degree.
The difference was that the person who
gave the blow was the principal, hc-who
was aiding and abetting was the princi-
pal in the second degree. The law did
not require the principal III the second
! degree to be actually present; it was
sufficient that he were so near as to- give
aid, with view to cooperate in or help
the murder. If he were to stand at a
spot agreed upon, to give signal, (if it
were necessarily if it were performing
his part according to the original plan,
he was present These principles were
clearly laid down in the books. Ifit was
agreed that a man should 60 to a partic-
ular spot, if his heart failed and he did
not perform his part. he would not be u
principal in the second degree: because
he would not be aiding and abctting.
Il The prisoner was charged as being
principal in the second degree-that he
was aiding in the murder. If the Jury
were satisfied that he was the one who
hired the murder, and that he was acccs-
sary before the fact such as would con-
| vict him on such an indictment, they
could not convict him upon this; for it
was charged here that he aided by his
presence. They must believe from the
evidence, that the prisoner was present
aiding and assisting. Judge p. then
briefly rccapitulated the evidence relat-
ing to the conspiracy, and told the jury
that they were the sole Judges of the Gre
dulity of the witnesses. IfLayton was
believed, his testimony would go very
far to fix that the defendant, his brother,
Joseph and Richard Crownnshicld, were
three consprators to commit the murder
lfcredcnce was given TO Palmer, the de-
iendant was implicated in it. But if all
them were guilty of conspring, and de-
serving of death, till they were to have
the law metcd out to them according to
the evidence. There was no testimony
as to the part each was to perform in the
object of the conspiracy; they must de-
eide from the evidence that was given,
whether the defendant was to do any
thing more than to hire another, or whc-
ther he was personally to aid in commit
ting the murder. There was no alibi
proved at half past ten, except by the tcs-
timony of the father. The Judge re-
viewed the evidence upon the identity of
the person seen by MIR. Southwick, in,
1'rown-strect. He thought the difficulty
OF identifying persons even in broad day
light, should have some consideration.
They must be satisfied that the dcicn-
dant was where the government said he
was, at the time they supposed. If the
young men were believed, Frank was
with them from seven till near ten, but
he was not accounted for from near ten
to half past ten, except by the testimony
of MIR. Knapp, senior, who said Frank
was at home by half past ten. But was
the father correct. The Jury must Judge
of that. If he was not correct the priso-
ncr had not accounted for himself, be-
tween "near ten O'clock" and the time
of the murder. If they believed the
young men, and doubted whether the
prisoner was in Brown street, as alleged
by the government, he was entitled to
the benefit of the doubt. The testimony
of MIR. Colman was in; if they believed
Mr.. Knapp, it was not evidence; if they
believed Mr. Colman it was evidence,
and very important. The jury must
weigh the evidence and the motive which
each had to speak the truth The Court
could not assent to the proposition that it
was to be presumed from the conspiracy,
that the prisoner was nearer the house of.
Capt. White than Brown street, if it were
necessary that he should be nearer. The
fact of presence was a fact to be cstab-
lished by evidence; the presumption was
in favor of the prisoner-but he was not
there at the time, unless so proved. They
could not believe he was there aiding
and abctting, unless it was proved by the
evidence, giving him the benefit of all
doubts-with these views (and this but
a brief report of the principal positions,
the case was given to the Jury.