The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1833-06-12
REV. EPHRAlM X. AVERY.

ahnos, trery one with astonishment.
When the verdict was rendered, the COM
muniiy could scarcely believe their own
senses. They we're for time spell
bound. Their tosues clave TO the roof
Of their mouths. They felt Thar if the
iav had had its due course justice he'd
been entirely withheld in this instance.
A legal tribunal have found Mr.. Avery
no, guilty according to lao that is as the
jury understood the law. The moral
tribunal, or nineteen twentieths of the
public, find him guilty Of the crime with
which he was charged. AS We were
not drought up N the feet OF G Gsmaliel," !"
wa know little or nnthing about the law.
Dut we have eve beer inclined to think,
from what li,tlo Information we have Of
the law, tha. Pats version of it is very
correct: which is that there is "A vast
dale O difference in the eye o. the law,
between come out here Mccarthy, and
Mccarthy come ont here"
1t is not our intention 10 sis in Judge
ment, or To cast ccnsure on any one.
Our desire is TO give II correct statement
of facts, whence others may draw their
conclusions. We understand that all the
jury believe thnt Mr.. Avery was proved
guilty bu, that the proof was not SO
strong ns to preclude the possibility of
doubt, or the hundredth chance of his
innocence, agreeably to that saying Of
tho law-"It is better that ninety-nine
guilty persons should 60 unpunisbed
for thoir crimes, than one innocent man
should suffer,"-and if I correctly un-
derstood one Of the jury with whom ]
bnvc conversed since the trial, it was
this hundredth chance Of innocence,
which constituted the legal reasonable
doubt" on which Mr. Avery was acquit-
ted. From these premises, the conclu-
sion is arrived at, tha. The jury found
Mr.. Avery guilty ninety-nine to one
But the one, being tho hinge on which
the "reasonahlc doubt" hung, it was f.
nuIly turned in favor Of the prisoner.
1T appears, however, that three Of the
jury were not disposed to yield the mat
ter SO readily aud were of opinion that
reasonable doubt" should turn on an
other point than the one just named -
We learn, also--though we cannot cred
j, The fact-that the jury, after having
been cut some time, and seeing that
no verdict was likely to be render
cd, saw proper to compromise the mat
:cr on the ground tina, another trial tho
inevitable result of no verdict--would
greatly reduce the reso urces Of the
State-which, they concluded, must al
ready be. from the protraoted length Of
the trial, drained to its very dregs IN its
fiscal affaIrs--from all which, they ar
rived To the final conc Insion, that i. was
far better that Avery should be acquit-
ted, than this State, as well as the Jury
themselves, should commit suicide on
their own packets. This we think
must be libel. VIVA, would this IL
bel suppose that mattersNbeing as they
were, and the voice Of justice asserting
her rights, that another voice was heard
issuing from their pockets, and uttering
its appeal in voice rs loud as St. Johns
seven thunders-"taz, TAX, TAXES" "
until tho ominous words assuming
form and being, put justice TO flight, and
claimed for themselves "a local habi,a-
ton and n name." Why in the Ian.
guage of some classic NuIIifcr on an
other occasion 'ihc thing 10 int, nsely,
pitifully. ridiculous !"
We are not among those who believe
in tho utility Of capital punishment.-
We cannot subscribe to the sanguinary
and vindiciive tenants "eye for an eye,
tooth for TOOTH" or "whoso sbedeth
'nan's blood, by man shall his blood be
shed" These outrageous penalties are
expressly forbidden by the generous
Nnzareno Reformer aud we believe
that had the penalty of the crime with
which Mr.. Avery stood legally charged,