The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1842-09-30
- tGeneral Sessions. ;

Trial of Rev 4ntons Terr en- for Perjury, Concluded
The court crowded TO overlooking TO hear the
conclusion of this highly exciting and important tria
Among number observ ed James Watson Webb and
his wounded CALI with his left foot carefully encased IN
Indian moccasin.
The Recorder commenced his charge to the jury al III
o'clock and closed at quarter before one O'Clock gong
fully into review OF the evidence of the several witness
The jury requested that all the papers that had been
read in evidence might be put in their possession Mr.
Maxwell objected this course said the jury
only entitled the affidavit Of Verren and the orr
gina letters marked b. c. D. The Court said the Jury
could not have the remainder s Of the the
by Mr.. Maxwell were then handed to the Jury.
The Jury then retired and came into Court quarter
the foreman said the Jury have instructed me to an
the Court that they have found verdict
The Recorder replied that the Court concurred in the
verdict Of the Jury and were opinion that the evidence
their patient esgaon Of this arduous and protracted
trial, )" and discharged tnem for the term
The Rev. Mr.. Verren much affected when the Jury
in and shed copous teara on the rendition Of the
Contempt of Court Webs DueL-The Recorder
asked if Ihaddeus Phelps and Charles f. Daniels were in
Court.
Mr.. GLOVER said he appeared counsel for Mr.. DAN
ies.
The RECORDER said he was charged with contempt in
refusing to answer questions put to him by the Grand
Jury The Court had been furnished with written state
peared that Mr. Daniels had been asked the question
Whether he had heard fhe contemplated duel between
Marshall and Webb prior to that occurrence " That he
answered, yes" The question was then put, From
whom he had received that information2' He replied
that For several he declined answering the
tion and among others that he be supposed to i'm
plcae himselfs He then told that any answer he
might make would not impcate be used against him.
yet he still refused to
Mr.. GLOVER said he presumed Mr.. Daniels was now
called upon to answer to the alleged contempt He con-
tended that he had right to refuse to any ques
tons put to him by the Grand Jury under advice OF his
counsel the ground that the common law recognized
therght of Witness when he interested party and
required to give evidence in relation the commission of
a felony, to decline answering any question that might
implcate himself might be said that the duelling law
was not So Mr. Glover then read the following extracts
from the "Duelng Law" ofthis State -
SEC Every person who shall fight aduel with any
deadly weapon, although death ensue SHALL upon
vcton be punished by Imprisonment in State Prison for
term not exceeding ten years
SEC. 2.-Every person who shall challenge another
to fight such duel who shall send deliver any writ
ten verbal message purporng intended to be such
or vi ho sha c,rrv or eiveF a or
such challenge message or who shall be present at
the time fighting any duel with deadly weapons either
as second, aid surgeon who shall advise give
any countenance assistance to such duel SHALL upon
conviction be punished by imprisonment in State Prison
for term not exceeding seven years.
SEC. 3-Eyery person offending against either of the
provisions in the two last sections, shall be competent
witness against any other person offending in the same
transaction and may be compelled appear and gre er
other persons but the testimony given,
shall not be used in any prosecution proceeding, civil
criminal, against the person testfying
Mr.. GLOVES continued that if the law ended here that
ing but then the Grand Jury may find an indictment in
this matter under the fifth section of the law and the wit
ness testimony may imPicate himself without his hav-
ing the benefit of the exception in the third section in his
favor and the Grand Jary may ndict him under the fifth
section. believe that is the course the Grand Jury in
provided for in the sixth section Of the law to designate
the county where the parties shall be indicted and tried
Mr. GLOVER then read as follows from the law -
Sec Off any jnhabant Of this State shall leave the
same for the purpose Of euding the herein con
intent of giving receiving any challenge herein
hbited Of aiding abetting in giving such
challenge and shall give receive any such challenge
shall cid and abe in giving and receiving the same
without this State he shall be deemed as guilty and shall
be subject to the like punishment as If the offence had
been committed within this State"
The RECORDER said the questions contained in the state
men OF the Grand jury which the witness refused to
certainly could not mplcae himself under the
ton quoted by counsel
Mr. DANIELS said the questions in the statement were
the Suggestion of the Recorder Mr. Daniels then
such questions might be put to him by
REconpEa-Mr Daniels state to tho court the reasons
why you resedo answer the questions put by the
Ars.-The first question asked me by the Grand Jury
whether was cognizant challenge ing pas
sed between Webb and Marshall in this State To which
promptly replied, not The question asked
whether had any knowledge of any preliminary
arrangements between Webb and Marshalto go Of the
State receive challenge to fght2 This question
refused to answer, resolved stand my rights and
make reply that might criminate myself No such ques
ton is made in the statement asked me.
REcoRpER-The question proposed in the statement
is from whom did you receive the information that there
was challenge between the parties
Mr. Dfthis question had been put to me by the Grand
Jury should have answered no Mr. Daniels then
expressed his willingness to 60 before the Grand Jury and
answer the questions in the statement
THAppEus PHELPS was then sworn and instructed by
the Recorder that he not bound to any ques
ton that might mpcate himsefor show gross contempt
on his part
REcoRDKR-state why you refused to answer the ques
tons put to you by the Grand Jury:
prior to the duel was asked from whom received the
information stated that received the information
from no party connected in any manner with the duel II
communicated to me in confidence, and did not feel
authorized to disclose the of my informant meant
no disrespec to either the Court or the Grand Jury
RECORDER is part of the duty of the Grand Jury
to diligently inquire into matters that may before
them and s not necessary that they should confne
they act not trying but accusing party and may
sometimes be necessary for them to examine hearsay tes
timony enable them to pursue their Investigations
Mr.P.-The person who gave me the information only
spoke of as rumor and as ii was confidential will mot
answer the question unless is ruled by the court
REcoRDER.The fact of the communication being con-
fdentially made to you, is more binding you
witness, than if it had related to burglary.
Mr. Pit appeared to me that the Grand Jury wanted
the information connecting link in the affair." and thus
hold me up as the scapegoat in the matter.
REconDEa-Mr Phelps suppose you i have no ohsc-
and that he merely to you as public ru
NOR
MrP-I will send my informant before the grand jury
and will guaranty his appearance
REcoRpER-May be he will not be required to appear,
Mr.. Phelps
Mr. PIE has not had the least connection in this affair
from beginning to end.
eREcoRpER.-You have right to go further.
$Mr P-I rest here the time declaring
dsrespect.
Here Webb had consultation with David Graham, Esq.
who stepped forward counsel in the
GRAHAM-I apprehend that it requires the tesi-
mony before grand jury does before this court and
that testimony that admissible court be de-
manded by grand jury. If Mr.. Phelps had stated in
court that he received his information from third party
not directly indirectly concerned, his examination
would be stopped by the court and the rule should
apply grand ures If the power of grand jury could
not be limited they might 60 and establish nqusi
ton into mans private family pecunary affairs,
any other matter and there would be stop the scope
ofther powers.
The Grand Jury here in and the Recorder inform
ed them that Mr. Daniels had consented appear before
them and testify to the contained in their state