Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1838-11-12

" You have nothing to fear. n's right" Daily ca.
amnles had been publishcd-base calumnics he hau
aiirht TO term hcn. Could any person after read
ing them, come into the court without suppos,ng
there had been an unfair duel and II was on that
account lie had put the question to Mr.. Scott rs to
the loading Of the pistols. Now II had been proved
by the evidence. aud over again. that the'e was
not any thing unfair. StlI however, lac was aware
as they would be told by the learned Judge. that the
fairness or uulaiiness had nothing TO do with the
main charge against the prisoners. Tho Ieaihe"
counsel reverted to the place where the quarrel be
tween the parties oi,enlted-tho Saloon, III TIC
cadilly, in which the minds ol young men were de-
banched. and The peidilion OF ihcn souls re'llea'
aud yet the magistrates, aware at Tho notorious
place he had referred 10. and hoenlorced the s'iet
letter OF The law allowed aye wlnkcd Mt. the cNis-
tcncc aud carving ON oi such accountable places
lie commended there WAS no proof OF MI. Dung hav-
ing been present when the duel took place, and ar
Gued that NJ least one person out Of the number hfs'
on the eamR,on not present at tie loading ot ming
The learned counsel, again commenting IN severe
terms on the conduct ct the public rteSs, IN giving
publicity to unlounded rcpotls. rnmots, aud ms'nna-
lions. stated that Mr.. Young was the son oi fespee-
table and Independents gentleman, who allowed In n
n sufficient competency. After repeating the nam
points Of defence. the learned advocate concluded by
calling tot verdict ot aequlttal.
Several highly respectable witnesses were then
called, who gave the prisoners the best Character Tor
kindness, humanity, munrusnruess, aud general be
ncyolcncc.
Mr. Justice Vaughan proceeded 10 sum mp the
whole case, which he SAID WIS Que of the most i'm
Potiaht and anN'ons Description Ills l"idshlp,
III teicifng to the illusions that had hcen mahc To
what had taken place out oi doors in reference 10 the
circumstances which had given rise TO the present IN
qniy sad he was sure that he jury would not al
10" lhcn minds to DO Affected by any ihIng mat
might have taken place elsewhere, but that they
would form thclr opioion upon the question brought
under their consideration solely aud enIlr,ly upon
me evidence gwen IN the ease.-lhc Indictment be
iofe the court charged four persons with the crime
OF murder. Their names were tanels Lionel Eliot,
Edward peves Btoughion, Henry Nebbe', and
John Young. The FIRST named individual was ehhrg-
cd1hat he with p'stoIlohded with powder and BAH,
fred NJ Charles Flower Mitfn, and Killed HIM, that
Bionghon ana the prisoners NJ the bar were present
on The occasion, aiding aud ahetiing Eliot, WIN
respect 10 the Ia" as affecting the matter before the
count no difficulty Whatever could niisc. The Jury
must know from their frequent attendance IN that
rnco that IN such cases as the present mere WERE
as The law designated them, principals IN HE hsi uc-
gree aud principals IN the second dogtec.--lhe
principal ia the FIRST degree was the man who fired
the shot; anu the principals III the second degree,
are those VINO IKE the prisoners ~ ,he par arc pre-
sent when The shot WIZ hi'u ana VINO, by men pre-
scncc and ooun'cnahcr, ald hSct, ana comfort as
the law describes IT, Tue piu.pal IN NE hfst deefec,
IN the act he has committed. he Juiy, however,
should be aware mat ne mere presence "i paiies ~
duel did not therefore make them aiders ana abet-
tors, for that would include all persons whose cur
osiiy or other circumstances Drought them To tue
spot. Therefore, III order TO convict the prisoners,
the Jury must be satisfied lhat they were not only
present upon the occasion III question, but th1 cy
did, by their presence ana, abei ana comfort the pan
ties TO the commission ol the oichcc chaiReh against
Eliot. they were aware that whcna dueI took place,
after sufficient time had elapsed Tor HE blood TO
cool, and where deadly weapons had been used, and
that death ensued, that the patty Who hreh the deadly
instrument was guilty OF murder ana that me par
ties who were aiding and abcttns were equally gnIy
OF murder II, however death ensued IN consequence
OF collision, aud wlen parties were III hieh p'ood
and excited, the law IN lis mercy declares mat Tue
party who was the cause OF DEAN under such Cur
cunstanccs was guilty OF manslanghlcf
Such then, being he state oil tue law wouh be
Tor the jury to say whether the prisoners were pre-
sent AT the duel IN question, and whether, by men
presence, they counicnanced ana comioiled ule
parties 10 the commission oi Inc oHcnco chafeed IL
galnst the principal IN the present case. ] mere
were some pecuilauues winch made 1t different ifoin
others that bad some under his notice one oil
them was ne number OF persons enea2eo III w. ne
prisoners at the bar, although present were no, CAT
led upon, It would appear 10 oncla'e as sccohus 'ot
there were othefs present VINO seemed 10 nave ae'co
IN that capaciiy' Tor thry measured the ground oaa-
edthe pistols and gave the necessary signals but
the question Tor the consideration 81 me jury was
not whether the prisoners were seconds At the tlme
for II The Jury believed that they went down with ne
parties engaged IN the melancholy Transaction 10
further H. then, although they might not have act,
ed as seconds, still they would be guilty OF aiding and
abcng, aud liable 10 all the consequences OF such
| a position. IT, however, they bad any doubt that
either OF the prisoners were present on the OCCASION
then they might give them the benefit OF such doubt,
aud acquIt them This was all matter peculiarly