Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1841-10-23

pistol. Il killed one id Yankee, and here
The blood Of hum" Did not hear him say an
hing more. There Il kind Of dispute b
tween them To- who dId IL bat none Of the
disputed what Mcleod said. Nonc of them e
pressed any surprise al his saying he was Their
Knew Of the destruction OF the Caroline from h
sentinel, who said they had cut out the boat an
sci her on FIRE Was thea driving a team.
there was none Of my bushes gong Am
citizen of the United States, and born IN Alban
county. Am now engaged at my business en-
work for Mr. Porter.
CrosS-erdmined.- Have no connexion with tn
people on this side who hostile to Canada
HAVE no feeling about II except what other 4
merIcan ciiizeus have. Was IN this maj
Ter before Squire Bell. Then lived a Lock por
When | went over from Smiths to Davis's IL wa
jas, break OF day; was at DavIs's from five to tel
minutes, and then wen, out; could rot tell hoV
many persons We're In there, probably from fftee
= To twenty hvc did not count them knew no othe
person there but the bar-iend could Tel
what any other person there SAID; went to Di
VS. oni OF curiosity to see wha, was going on
did moi speak any one, believe; they were d $
cnsslng about II; can't say what they sud; th
blood was the breech of the pistol, four O
five inches; do not know that | could swear Il
the blood Of a Yankee more than any other man
am not whether there were any lights bur
ning not.
prosecution would be here esied for the present
with the distinct understanding however, that u,
further evidence 10 the main charge would be
hereafter introduced, The counsel tor the People
intending 10 confine himself to a hare rofutatiou
OF such portions Of the prisoners evidence ma
be necessary.
THE DEFENCE.
The case for the defence opened by Mr
Spencer, follows:
Gentlemen IF the Jury: will endeavor 10
open this defence in the manner which has Jus
been suggested by his Honour tho Circuit Judge
because II Is precisely the way which every
defence should be opened, and from which tho
jury can best appreciate tho evidence to be bro'i
before them l need scarcely say that this is g
Case of no ordinary character and Importance
1t is the frs, Of the kind you have tried, or
in all probability will be again called on to inves-
tigate. A solemn duty has devolved upon YOU,
aud have the smallest doubt that 1t will be
fully and faithfully discharged.
The defence which we intend 10 make is two
fold, and will place 1t before you IN It's double
aspect, thus carly, IN order that the Court may
be prepared 10 direct our conduct of the as
Iiig tfItun prupvr. first ptace. tueU, we
Will inquire whetN or any murder has been com
United at all and, secondly, whetheF,i if that ques-
ton be answered IN the affirmative, whe thcr
Alexander Mcleod was one Of the murderers -
The first portion Of our defence, shall con-
duct with all Difference TO the opinion Of the Su-
preme Court. which the learned A torney Gene.
raj referred 10 fully in his opening. We are no
strangers 10 that opinion, nor to the questions
presented the argument which drew forth that
opinion. and II the learned gentleman opposite
really snpposes. as he said, that the Counsel of
the prisoner sustained a rebuke, " ben that opn-
100 ,Yas deli cred | avail myself of this early OPP
purtunify 10 say that the Counsel have never felt
the justice # that rebuke. and it yet remains 10
be shown that the opinion administered any lust
rebuke There some things In that oplnlon
which, when first heard them within this very
circle, that fe! upon my ear little strange,
but there is also very much of that opinion to
which listened with great pleasure. That doc
ument Is ably written: it contains the evidence
of great research and profound legal learning, nd
a present the sound law Of the case. But
whether i, be the sound law OF the case not,
and whether the learned Judge who presides
this trial Will regard II, know not, but
feel bound to conduct this the broad
grounds OF what consider The true principles Of
law a applicable 10 it.
We shall then, in the first place, after few
more facts shall have been made to appear In ev
tdence before YOU, INSIST that there can be such
fence that ct murder proved as growing out
Il the destruction Of the Caroline Aud here
allow say that. in The whole coarse of my
reading flinlted admit II has been,) and in ali
nv experience, ! never knew of similar case.
1t IS for the first time, that we see an IndIvid
ual, acting under the authority, and by the orders
,f the government whose subject he was, has
been put on trial for obeylng these orders. This
IL indeed renal kable occurrence almost al the
end Of the first half OF the nineteenth century.
AZ the COUNSEL of Alexander M~Leod, then, !
shall have occasion to contend that there can be
M snch thing as murder charged against any OF
the persons Who formed the expedition sent to
DESTROY the Caroline; and let me here add that
the uues,i n as To whether that iusiifi
able proc dure moi on the part OF the British
Provincial Government cannot be entertained
by you.
The facts gentlemen, TO be adduced. will show
that this party which made the attack on the Ca
roline, consisted of the crews of seven b1ats-six
OF them containing eight persons; and one contal
ming nine.-and which were made up OF British
Provincial soldiers then duty at Chippewa, or
British Naval officers then duty at Chippewa,
L.. u NJ =. tho III