New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1842-05-13
CITY ELLIG nee.
THURSDAY, May Il.

Inregar the persons employ ed by the Shsr to sum
mon the jury. the Court after stating is views,
reason To disturb the verlict tht. account
The aiday, o, FREDERICK ~ kenseu a. to iurors con
versng the Windows after they had retired contra
dred hy Overwhelming evidence, and tbs pon, also fall
IN the ground
The pr lcpal croual the motion, that Nathan z lius
ted one f tie iuror. had previously expressed opno
the gut ~ the prisoner, "a, fully reviewed by tn
Court. The remarks Of NJ Husel made at h, o"
house n October lat They casual and uDprrmed'
,ated Al unacconrane 10y discussions oae Of the VT
nes.es stated thai hr did ot believe "Mr Hustled bad d
heart NJ Hustled siG,elt under oaiL .ays 81 NJ "'o
al any time. the expression, charged upon h'' ''
were made in a careless aud loose manner, "u''' ''
leaving he slightest trace upon hi' memory ui'' ~
was sworn on the Jury D., mind was free ana un'
either or or AGAINST the prisoner and be wei" uI" nav
JURY suh pure mind. and a. unb'''se' ync-
!, b.. uo.si,e ,or any luua. being - have ne "fi'
ton, do no, show that Vi H1s'ed was Incompetent %,
there M suggestion that he was a'qua'h'u VII" Wv
prisoner: at hc had any knowledge OF IL i>c'' IN u'
Gaze or that there evidence Of any opinion except ~ 1"
two n, three e.uavagant expressions made w.ibou, mar
~ ~ Even reelection, and which are cutwcghed by the
testimony Of MI Hustled himself
A. 10 the question ta,non The order ~assuaned by
hi. Court and mus BIZ considered a, valid
Tie decision concludes IS follows: "Tha verdict Of a
Jury a1d ought to be cons derd solemR and almost
sacred events aud never the Court nigh, Judge from out
their verdict with greater decorum, acberaon, and pro
priety.
"Ths Court cannot, under the aiidav produced, di.
tub this verdict and they deny the notion under the fair
conviction that granting would be setting precedent
that woul impair did not almost virtually weaken IT,
administration Of justice ia criminal OF magnitude md
Importance
Colt listened atientively the Judge Will. reading ihr
decision. and exhibited emotion the refusal Oft
ri.l Hc~s soon afterwards removed from Court.
Cssz or Cot STOSs.-Ihis trial continued. Tie
testimony Of hn nulao, the Office o. the
Commercial Aiuertscr read Hesiate- that hc wrote
tie arcl, complained Of from verbal information aud al %
from letters which had passed between Mr. IIaet ami Mr.
Nandeo7ri Clerk Of the Sessions and Oyerapd Teminer.
lie wa, asked by defendants Counsel ii from the character
of the person who furnished the Information he had good
reason IN believe II true. The ques ION Objected
to aud the obiectisn sustained by the Court .m9r
question to Col Stone. belief also oserrulcd He
refused 10 whether the information had been de-
rived from person connected with the administration Of
public justice in this city. lie stated that Col Stone had
inquired at great length into The Circumstances of the
and required that the documents should be placed at h'
control
MI. Ketchum then addressed the Jury in an eoquent
manner for some time, aud opened the defence.
Mr.. NanderveOr Clerk OF the Court, stated that he had
usually designated the Aldermen from rule as 10 their turn
in the Sessions 10 act in the Oyer and 1euner lie hld
done so for that term ofths Court They consisted OF Aid
Ken, expressed wish TO have sme gentleman ACQUAINTED
with law TO SIT With him, important points "Ouid com"
mn lie then notified Aldermen Purdy and Benson. Mr.
Uaet wrote him note stating tia, Aid Lee wouls ke to
be ON the Bench, and requesting him to notify Lim lie
wro, ,hack an answer stating what had been done M II
wrote him second letter. stating ha, he had spoken With
Judge Kent, and it all rCht-he would please notify
Aid Lee The three notified. but AID Benson resigned
aher The second day. Mr. Nanderoou also answered some
questions the proceedings on Besnetrs trial
Mr. Vandervoort also stated tia, he had shown the
and anu.rto Judges Lynch and Noah by their Request.
Alderman Benson testified TO having been Loifed al
associate Judge or the erm but found tive others there
when he take his They did not offer to yield
80 he withdrew Tue Alderman then showed up the whole
oftle Loco-Foc. machinery. management, nc.
Judge Noah testified 10 having given the information and
.oe ed the Col Stone He had to believe
that unfair work had been eXefcel In relaon to AIS con
,enng nole proseqd in the of James Gordon Ben
nett he had been called uponby several persons including
ladies, and solicited 10 .o so
PA Cswdrey testified 70 having written the opinion de-
lvtred by Alderman Purdy in the OF Benrett syn
day. the day previous to its being given. lie was called
upon by Aldermen Pury aud Lee and requested to do
lie asked If he ha not also written the opinion OF AID
PuIdy in relation to the organization OF the Court OF ses
son, but the question was overruled.
CoURr COMMON PLEAs-lN CHAMBERS Be
fore Judge UIsHGFFER.-TaE SLAVE CAsE.-This matter
wabought for argument yesterday nj - O'Clock n,os
pursuant TO adjournment Mr.. Dresser asked for rule o.
order 10 be entered in the words following he furnished
the judge with the following po,t. IN support OF tLe
ton.
Tn PEOPLE e. REL JAMES IIrDsoN IN Jolal(o( CHAR.
LoTTE WAEAIoS, cDi0red ,rOnian.
ORDERED. That alta hmcnt in this matter, issued
against Mary Frances Brudie: but that the same be
panied with copy tins rule which IL to opeiac
slrucsn To the Sfrif not 10 serve t- saur Mary Fran
BrOdie shall forthwith, upon service of copy OF tbs
rule upon her discharge the said Charlotte Wheaton, az
shall cdn, heI 10 be brought before the Hon NJ Ushoer
It.l. llA
.,ued 10y hm IN tbs matter, Oh on before the - day o
May instant
The statute plcit ia requiring of the Respondent
lst The production o. the party named N the writ o hr6e7'
corpus and 81. iul ANA unequiYocai returnto such VIII
Sd suhC TOT refusal 70 produce Inc par
", and make iul return to the writ
H. The reur, admit, that the parry named IN ihs writ
was not removed TIL the blh instant Tie DAY OF Inc dtt gu
The wrt II does not afford a,uiccz excuse Tor neg ct IT,
bring N the body .nce II does not state, Isl WheIlert
transfer OF the custody Dnn>on such IL 10 prrNe-
Respondent from exercising authority him. he being he
agent, The return states and accountable To her I'd Nor
whether the removal hv Denn>on was Leore dfteT t
,erNicc OF Ike upon Respondents Sci. Nor wntth'i
though the might be the - L., II al sGe
great dtancc To hNer her agent tom producing ii'
body short tine short time would take to cross
over The terry toJersey City, IN New-Jer'cy and Icinr
again al which place Il i believed the woman was take"
Alter the return made 10 The wit
Ill The ,ura >e,ssve and contradictory Isl. IL dt
claes Denn>ol 20 b. a.cn, 81 Respondent and lt' acun
without her cenuol under any responsibility 10 her ~
declare, him 10 bc IN the premise, The lawful agent o
Respondents husband" and yet says hal he "i> no" 10
about tie ISSUING ot the WI OF Hfhe1s Corpus.
~ The transfer OF the custody OF the woman 10 be &
ousable under the statutes, whether prior subsequent t.
The date the writ be Tor good the only cause
states AZ the that the woman the sas OF de
poncbtS husband legally belonging 10 hm by The laws OF
the ID sulct o. FLORIDA" IL Is nor good l. Because
she MAS tree by operation of law a. she beyond
he municipal law which declared her To be sa't-sie be
Wg brought hcre Because even aFug from service
lhe escape not such a. Is provided under the : Con
auuon the return states the cllmai d0mic 10 be IN h'
l0rdorg OF tI1rida-ihe escape mus be from Cde S'd;
1910 anoher STAT.
Before proceeding To tie argument tie following tact
We're Introduced by Counsel, in support q Thee position
taseG by thSm respectively.
HUuim HTreto hcsg sworn, testified that on last Sat
uosN a. Le thinks about lhrsc clock afternoon he
"a" eAo pas slowly by hs store jersey Cy-tnce per-
sons 'rre u>idcdd n-t Il ON whb they wefe-Ouc
eo"fvi womeH-the other two WIRE wtc amer pas