The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1843-10-22

zances Estreated "A Bench Warrent issued
for his apprehension.
Yesterday was expected to be sentence day In the Court
OF Sessions and host OF lbellers were expected to re.
ceive the judgment OF the Court and hence the Court and
all its avenues were densely crowded After the audito
~ had been kept time in waiting, until half past
men Mes,rS' Tiliou' puanine. woodruff. and Marlin
took their seats the bench and old Hays with
than ordinary gravity called for silence and directed all
persons TO be seated As the latter requ.ion
with which compliance impossible the part Of
many of spectators unless they had squsted the
floor laughter wasthe response to the command.
The CLERK then soemnly called for the Appearance
Michael Walsh to receive the sentence of the Court on
the for libel which he had been convicted
but Michael Walsh was non est inpentus. A person
named Cummings was also called, who did not appear
The RrcoRDrR, after long pause observed that as he
of George Wilkes there might possibly have arisen
some in respect to the intentions of the
Court as to the timest which the Court had determined
pass sentence on Walsh and therefore other business
would be disposed Of If there any ready in the
Mr.. WAITING enqured if any gentleman of the bar was
prepared to make any motions
Mr. WAaNER replied that re had several motions to sub.
NIT and the first to which he would call the attention of
the Court was the case OF Richard Sutton, who
mitted on charge of conspring with Hamilton and Ber.
gen to de!rsud the Atlantic Company of large
sum oil money Thetwo last named defendants had de-
INJURED the Indictment and the demurrer had been
tanned by the Court and therefore indictment existed
against sutton who had lain three months in Jail in
sequence OF his inability to procure the large amount
bail which had been fixed by the committing magistrate
The REccRpkR remarked that Sutton had not demurred
and therefore the Indictment was good against him
Mr. WARNER replied that the Indictment Charged con.
spiracy, snd single individual could not be guilty of
such an offence.
Mr. WHITING, the District Attorney replied this indct
mens were frequently preferred against individuals for
conspiracy with persons unknown.
Mr. WARNER urged that the District Attorney was not
expected to move again against Hamilton and Bergen land
hence he hoped the Court would no. keep his client
germ Jail.
Mr. WHITING replied that the indictment was good
against sutton and he would be tried and that
feet reply to the application.
The REcoRpHa refused the motion discharge the mr.
soner OF 70 interfere with the amount Of bail required
Mr. WARSEE next applied to the Court to an or
sum of sos The facts simply theset-The client of
the learned gentleman arrested at Newark
on 10 this city and tried for paricpancy in the robbery
OF the schooner ArendR, at the Quar- station but
on his trial he was acquitted by the ury and the
ton was now made fer the return Of the OF sos
which was found at his house his arrest which he
by various adsvs the accumulation of the
industry OF Wright wife for several years. and not any
part OF the monty stelen from the schooner
Mr. W6'rso intmated that the stolen money had not
an Been recovered by several hundred dollars and that
ms might be the produce of the stolen money, which
might have been exchanged. Besides was given up to
the suffering party, who had Unidentified the Police OFF,
GERS.
Mr. WARNER said his affdavits showed that this cep,d
not have been part the produce money stolen
rom the schooner as wfghts wife had possessed much
The RrcospEk said the Court mad no power to make
such an order on the Police officers het craved by the
counsel for Wright Such order the Court could make
Mr. WARNER said he stood in the same position as that
which he should have occupied when the jury pronoun
ced h client not guilty, at which time the money
ought to have been before the Court and under it's
control.
The RrcospEn reiterated his decision that the Court
had no jurisdiction in the matter; and he added that
Wrights remedy was in civil Courts
Mr. WARNER then made another application 10 the
Court on behalf of William Rush worth who stands in
dcted for grand larceny az an sccompce with the per
son who picked the pocket OF the porter at the Long
Island Bank Of ooo-the facts connected with which
If S.ss> NH
berry was committed year ngo and the prisoner.
kushworth. was bat arrested few months since,
stolen notes, the value Of which was 81 600 10 a
Mr. Shaw Of this city, previous to cricket match here
on which he was betting Rushworth was committed
sum was fixed at $4,000 which he was unable 10 pro-
cure without the deposit of collateral security This he
gave and had been ready for trial and as the
trial had been called on he applied to the Court to
discharge his recognizances that might the
property which he had deposited. The aidavits set
forth that Rushworth was respectable citizen of Pha
dephia and great variety of other facts were stated
The Court, after hearing observation. Irnm Mr. War
ner and the District Attorney denied the motion it'll the
understanding that the should be tried early the
So would be granted unless good reason should
be shown for the delay in bringing the case to trial
Mr. WHITING applied to the Court endorse mol pros
Clerk Of the Mayor of this city Who il will be remem
neTed was tried for enbezzement servant but on
the tral the Jury could not For the defence on
that occasion, question OF law raised, whether
Ahern was servant in the intent the statute and on
this the disagreement Of the Jury mainly rested
question has been since grsvely considered and as tbe
District Attorney satisfied its validity he deemed
unnecessary again to try the case and hence his pre-
The Court received the motion but gave DO decision
The RECORDER next called George Wilkes (who ap.
peared to answer, and remarked that this defendant
some year since, indicted for being the editor or
proprietor OF an obscene paper called The Flash or
The Whip" Wilkes was arrested and imprisoned for
some time; ultimately he into Court and pleaded
Judgment he ca in
consideration that the defendant to participate
IN inc puoic:.on OF those obscene papers, the Court
he had Withdrawn from them. But the motion Of the
District Attorney few days SINCE the Court directed
morning the Court had received on behalf of Wilkes four
or five stdavits which tended to exonerate him from
to the present. though the Court distinctly
the District Attorney when moving for the bench war
rant to state that Wilkes had been engaged in the vio
ation oil law in connection with the press thst
fact could be established There had however been
adavts received the part OF the to esta
6lish it, while on the contrary there had been four a
davits received showing that he had abandoned the Obj.
scene papers, and had no connection with them
The same reason then which existed at the time that he
pieaded guilty alter his imprisonment the suspension
oil the sentence existed for nothing to the contrary
was shown and therefore the Court would take Wilkes
might be handed in by the District Attorney to shew the
alleged particpancy, and Wilkes must appear be-
lore the Court on the first Monday ohe November term
WLxRs-If the Court please favor is now granted 10
day.
The REcoRpER observed that he had omitted to state
that during the past week affidavit had been received
from Mr.. samm in relation 10 Wilkes it was ante
cedent TO the application of the District Attorney, and
was informal In Its character That paper brought
before them when there proceeding before The
Court, and when there could be action upon the sf
davit, which he repeated was informal and incorrect.
MI WHITING explained that he had presented afi-
davh because the statements he made in Court the pre-
vieus Jay not only denied by Wilkes, but
even admitted 1t was understood that Wilkes the
reporter Tor paper called the Subterrsnean which had
been before the Court In that there profess
ed to be reports of trials protesting to have taken
place IN that Court but II was evident to all who
read them that they reflected on the character of
individuals. For that paper Wilkes admitted that he was
the reporter and also that he gave those reports and
was stated in the affidavit OF Slsmm printed COPY of
which he had seen, hat Wilkes the Subterra
nean and was the author Of many oil the scurrous at
ces winch spPeared in IT, He had not the interior
OF the afidavits presented to the Court on behalf of
wilkes but the endorsements did not show that he de-
MED that allegation.