American Republican and Baltimore daily clipper. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1844-1846, 1844-12-24

} Try MN third time. And, admitti6p th
e principle, the life and liberty of citizens mich
q oe greatly endangered, contrary to the human
provisions OF the constitution and the laws
IS ne could not be understood as refectinr in fin
Il least, IN any thing he said, upon the action .
$ motives OF the States Attorney, but merel,
spoke in reference to the principle at issue
george X. Richardson, ESQ.,, States Attor
hey' thought that the counsel for the defence
hau entirely mistaken the hypothesis of the
case lie believed that the abducting of three
saves constituted three distinct violations Of
Tile law OF 1897. In cases of theft. indict.
menus could not be multiplied when the pro-
perty alleged to have been stolen belonged 70
the same person; but if person steal y hat
from one, pair of shoes from another, and So
on, he must be indicted for each offence sepo-
rately; but in the case of Torrey, the propertv
alleged to have been stolen consisted of tbrce
human beings upon whom distinct means NAV
nave been used in committing the ofence.-
fle referred to the law as declaring that anv
person guilty OF "enticing, persuadng, or aid
'''s' save OF scrVant"-using the singular 60
run away, shall be punished, &c. Thus clear
! iDgiy making, as he conceived, each act a semi
rate offence. He read authorities 70, tbo pr-
raignment under different indictments: and ci-
ted cases from the English Courts one If
winch was, that person having been arroicn-
cd Tor Killing two pigs under separate indrt-
mehts, and having been pnt upon trial and
iould guilty Of one, it was considered unneces-
safy to try him upon the other; and felt mn
uouDt as to these authorities substautiating hi, |
position. Ills
Mr. II. thought the objection to the indct-
meht, because OF its not averring the traverser
10 be freeman or a slave, was of no avaiI
ne offence was the same and the distinction
was only made with view to the penalty. The
party IN tins case, by the simple act of his com
ing nto Court tor trial, signifies the rirbt in
NY MN as freeman; and he thought it was
COO ."'e now TO make such a plea, after the
nhurng OF the Jury. X. contended that the
whole ground Of objection was met bv the in
1ictment itself, which declared that nnon = cnr-
lam day, "Charles T. Torrey late of the citv ,
ot Baltimore, yeoman," had comn,ittod tEo
'nehce OF which he had been found guilty. t
lie read from Blackstone and various leyicogro- r
'ners to define the term yeomaa-which dcclor- 6
~ 1t 10 mean "a person entitled to serve on i'll
icS ana TO DO other acts as other free-born CHI
CHS ana also TO designate in England a GER Il
am grade IN society. The term, he commended t
vas recognized in Maryland where no distinc- =
III, OF classes was known among her citizens
designate freeman in its broadcast sense. In
ne eye OF the law the two terms were svnonv- c.
lous; ana While the phrase yeoman was com
ION TO indictments of white persons the words
ave or Tree were used in indlcting negroes. cc
The counsel for the defence having said no. in
ing about new trial, he should rest the mat h,
n here for the present. =,
Mr. johnson said he had made the ssues m :,
'od faith, and should say nothing more hnt G'
r the precedent they would establish. He a
IL no disposition to seek new trial. for he CO
uld not hope for different result, should if w
granted, upon the ground of the omission Of r.,
term freeman, but he expressed much soil VIZ
nde IN reference to the other point as it in ly
lived the period for which his client was to ed.
lncarcerated.
Mr. }. here asked permission to digress for rro
moments, from the point at issue. He
red that in his position as counsel for Tor dea
. he would be regarded as holding opinions citi
common with him; indeed he had already -
ara that the gentlemen Reporters for the pa ver
s mad SO represented him. He spoke in
'ne teiiiis OF the movements Of the abolition
+; US belng calculated to create intestine war the
II all lls horrors; and declared himself to be yea
Doonune 20 enc doctrine OF the author of Mr..
declaration of Independence, upon the oh,,
ject. =, chal
Note by The Reporter The brief statement =
W. Johnson's speech, before the jury, in this OF
D as. published in this paper, at the time, mos
'i ho au.ioi Use s"ch an inference. What is Joyl
ID. We nros,n,a a. y, oaiiho' oe gam Sen;
mated, if not positively stated, in the cor Fit
ondence tor distant papers, -
IT. D. resurning the subject at issue, spoke Cart
lie right to put in the plea of error of in on n
nent or demur at the finding. The term Pow
nan he thought very indefinite. Thongb y"
nically the plea of a traverser to be dis min
ged from the second indictment because he State
been found guilty under one or two indict- Rev.
Is against HIM might not avail vet with n cbnre
10 the rights OF fIeemen, the law HAVING
avenged in the first Gndna If m,s ""r,a,g charg
u 10 set aside the other indictments. He thani
lillo an argument TO show that, if the Of
was committed, it was a single act. as the Pr
went together, and were.afterwards seen adver
words of ,Ho stat,'. I"oo ''a,sactloh- tlema
~ save or serVant'-was but the formal oution
used IN such cases. He urged the danger as to
'' ,' the power TO exist in the Prose- men o
attorney, to speculate with the rights of natio,
ents, as to defy The merc,GI ,ra Jones,
Inch says no person shall be tried So tile ms
o ioi tne sa'he olehce The issue was dents
'ortance to the prisoner inasmuch as the Dr.,
commended for would submit the prisoner course
years Imprisonment, while the Prosecu- G,ction
an vaor. "''io iiioafcerate nm Tor correct
and tn;
hlctardson, followed in a few statements cples
ana reference to authorities. Wishir
case was then submitted to the court. most tr
brief consultation among the judges, n j.,
Judge Brice remarked that with view 10
the subject fair investigation, the court F,pr
the week. and tbat - ne .llci, opinion Dock s