Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-09-30

BY Ns'h-P.rfest,y Innocent Of inproper eondus,
vim MTs o.. confession If guilt was made ,h'o'
i7'', i2'p"ra ny the expression of the prisoner.
'onnieoaoec Dbo', reecliesi expressing a willing.
o's' to ksep the secrst nor to pari as friends
on' rave his hand The wi,nes. stated that after he
z" Lcuie DO sent fer the Doctor, and then pursued
Potter wi,h Es sun, but becoming very wesk from,
loss OF b'ocd. he wrs compelled to return home.
Mr.. Pot es new addressed the urt at considerable
length at the elose OF which he bsi Nv stated the
,mony upon which be relied for h in life aion. Th,s
tesmcny consisted In comics ion VI suii, on the par
OF Mira Potter, to bim'elf aud to ,undry persons after
wards The jugs declared uat 20 .ueh les sin. cpy
would be received, as il was iegL. The wife Garnet
give testimony aff-e irg the husband but more e.pe
emily would her cone sioo' and generations b. rel
CO. as irregular and inadm ssatls. The Cturi ,ia ed
that The wi could no, DO examined. by eonsen,
" her testimony was designed TO publish Der ia
my. Nj Potter hoped ihs Couit would adcai, te,tirno-
ny ne 10 the neral merits Of tho Transaction. bu, IN.
Court adhered TO is refual may be proper 10 state
here that Fri nj Of Mrs.. p. reqne.t.d the Court to
near me AID the Counsel for the prosee uon,
also expreniy stated willingness 10 the in alton
The LAZY herset-Thsy though, il due to tho reputa
'ion OF the lady, as the proner hd b-en allosd In hi
speech 10 bring tbs matter before the Court; but the
Court would rot hear hs eviisrc.. I NAV he IN az,
Of justice also ere tina, Mr. Potter has since
denied her guilt ard given bst reasons Tor he cor
sion Wa have thus far parted from the srrs Ire OF
rerV'f het aus- thoreb il tece,saty 10 ptoner
Outstanding Of Ia. sffar.
Th- Court stated tia, IN Il. decision to reject such
testimony as al been offered, did not in ,lude - ell
tcs and ereums'anse.as might go shsw there ware
grounds 10 supset improper Conduct he PAT. Of
Potter.
S. Pbupoi wa. sworn In b-hafof NJ. Pc ,er-was
a, school near Mr.. R-b'. Taylo'.--ouse twice a.
Mr' Rcb TAylo''s--saw yen. WI e thsr.-p yer
Jaw any thing smi's 'wetn h par.ir.-,aw TO &C.
"on' or gestures. wAh nd Gated suy hing proper
w V.TYior was sworn, and gavs ev.d Gee as
10 The ma cr- OF he wound VIII, de- m unreces-
'aty 10 detail The D,e'o- b.ing ali. u 10 relate lis
cmver'a len with young Willie II wa, objected 20 by
de'end'u . Coun'el-tut the Jodyo h,ving d, cided
that he testimony OF N, wi mes, l.. X. Willie had
been Questioned in 'h- nna,ion his mr. sesu-
70 claimed the evidence OF ~. Tay,er 10 thew ,b>t
se Wins lad been eoosiseu, 10 h' story. Dr.. T.
non re!t HE ecnverea ion with ycurg Willie; which
WIS substantially the givin by The wi,ur., 10
the Cour'. v raj ge",lru ,e,,ifi.d TO the neral
ana correct CONQUER 81 ha yong man. Tho defend n
Count. " Wv
We do no. Of courts pr-'end TO hsv. rs ained every
,ue al eums'aneo whi,b 'ran'p,rsd on The trial, no.
10 We s's'm to be nicely accurate in what we have
sven, but the above Is substantial sta ement o. the
rial.
Friday the pris,nsr va, brouyh, into Court %
e csvs his sertercr. An srgumen, now ,rose upon
paint OF law. Tor he t.llowing sslement If which ",
are ind bhd 10 member OF h. bar.
"Se w'u for the prose sutton, iovk Ike following
dis'ins ion
"lO hi. n'ic,meni here are two soun's. tho on,
charges Defendant urder III Sa,u e, he her as
a Common Law.
elm this case /, 10 ceer that The ss,n,sry provision
OF lie ale, IN relation 10 NAMING, has no, spssiret
the fence OF which The defendau, is ohav,d ro,
was INTENDED bat such provision should rSsul, by
imp ci',n. The terms OF The e,stuie arc GTbat II
any person or psr.ons. shall Of malice aoreihoueht
uulawftliy Gu; ou dabie he ton que or mt OF an
eye Of any Per'oD wi h inca, to murder, aim or dis
bgure, The person or pe,ons CT ndiny, their coun
'eors, bet crs, and aders krowir o. and PRIV 10 b
offence, az Aforesaid, shall fJr he rst Hoae, land in
The Poty tr Two honrs, have both lie ears sailed 10
tho Pill ny and Gu, tH, and receive SO lsshe, ON tn
bare bak." The record sec ION OF the same s,a,ut4
enash, "Thstn any p-rson, or persons shall Cd mr.
pose, uniswtuJ, sas or sh 'he uo'., bic or GU, n
o'e or lip, bite or cut of ear disable any limb or
member, IL any other person, with in.entn .,,-Au
persors 90 eff ndng, are ct to xix m1a,hs' m,r;
sonmen', end 10 tie II, ed a, The di,cre ion OF the Corr
are said 10 provide for this of nee, are genera words
following specific term, ard by the nvarsbie rule. of
soD'rue ion they arc qualified and RESTRAINED by heir
an'ecedenh, and can never extend, By npica: CD 70
offences OF greater magnitude. TIE onsnses deserib
ed in The ST section With ,b,r punistmeIt x ed and
determined, Garnet be cha ged by the general terms
above referred c, Tor tina, wUull be sonrsdis,on in
th- statute IL e; ye', tia terms are entirely general
Then is 1t not reasonable 10 sLppI,e shat The sa.ut
never son'smpiaied an otfsnse Of greater magnitude
than al ths rect together.
Again, when statute specifies and appor,ions the
punishment Of any offence, that considered such Al
Common Law, the power of our courts is thereby
abridged or restricted TO obedience thoue i'm the
else OF that respect and Difference which is due 10 the
Legislature, il is usual so TO do But when care oc-
ours, as the present. which in all probability the Leg
iae never con empiated, there is good son why
the court should not exercise that discretion of which
has been expressly deprived by statute: Tor in all
cases where the jurisdiction of tribunal to be abrdg-
"Devereux and Haywood for he Defendant respec.
lively conended that the Legislature designed 10 EN-
brace the whole subject within the provisions of the acts
OF "a and 81 and therefore the court could NOT
the punishment OF the statute"
The court proceeded to deliver its opinion. His honor
said he found himself in most unpleasant situation but
II was one in which the courts OF this State FREE
quenty placed He stated that his mind was not fixed and
satisfied ss TO the point OF law but he should
sentence according to the present leaning of his mind
He felt himself bound TO believe that the offence came
OF in lat;o..
unlawful manning, &c Therefore the court had no dis
erection as 10 the imprisonment which was prescribed in
that act-he said that his opinion different upon
this point of law he would certainly have mnrisoned
the offender for two years, sc. His honor stated that
he had great confidence in the testimony of Young Will
lie; that on the part of the defendant not shallow nj
proof had been oered which could be received by the
court in exteDuaion of the charge-no even an action
or gesture, wink SMILE proven TO Indicate anv
misconduct the part of the prisoners wife, that he
must believe that the prisoners suspicion was caused bv
some strange misconception, &c &C. His honor SEN
fenced Robert Potter TO pay fine of One Thousand
Dollars, and costs OF prosecution and be imprisoned for
six Calendar months and thereafter until the said 6ne
and costs be paid.
The trial was attended by a crowd of snec,ators
whose feelings appeared TO be in state of great excite
ment
In conclusions will state that Mr. Potter is indct
ed Tor manning in the same manner, on the same day
the Rev Lewis Taylor of this county and also
him in the head and thigh. AS this Indictment will he
tried at the Spring Term of the Superior Court we will
not remark upon IT. further than TO cay, that immediate
W after The commission of the offence for which he
was tried as above, he proceeded TO the house
where Mr. Taylor performed divine worship on that dav
and prevailed upon th' Rev Gentleman TO accompan,
him home; he on the way battered and manned anc
stabbed him as stated. He then carried Mr. T.vlo,
to his house and sent for physician Mr. Tavlor /.
now We learn in fair way to recover, although he bs
been considered very dangerous. We are done viii
this matter, at least until the trial on the other ndic
ment shall be over.
tOgford (M o. Examiner, Sept. 49,