New-York daily tribune., 1845-02-24
coIlir OF sEsSroNs.
Before the RECORDER, and Aldermen CozGNs and GALE
VI. e. PATERSON. Esq District Attorney.

Before the RECORDER, and Aldermen CozENs and GALE
" C. PATERSON Esq, District Attorney.
THE CASE SAMUEL ADAMS, of Ohio, on trial on a M
Gcnct Tor obtaining GOODS 30 the amount of over St3C0O
by talsc preience from Messfs Suydan sage y Co was
resumed.
Ills Honor the Recorder delivered ;hc opinion Of the
Court the question of jnsicton, raised By defendants
Counsel! anu fully and ably argued last evening. He
stated hat after careful an examination OF ilc subj ct
~ tie limited time permitted would ai0rt-as the term Of
the Court end at !2 o'clock o-nght-iha he did not
deem be in the power OF the Court TO arrest this case,
and take from the jury That the coarse pursued by the
Court will therefore be merely advisory The facts OF this
case were that certificates, alleged To be false drafts were
commenced IN Ohio, and consummaed in New York, where
the accep,anc.s perfected by the act OF MeSSs Suy-
dam. sage & Co. and the money thns obtained In New
York 4 fraudulent paper mace III Oho i Hc question
then was when and where tie offence committed
Was IL c9Bsipatsd III 0io-or was it commenced there
aud c0HN1Hu.si hec and how far the case comes within
the Jurisdiction uf this Court. His Honor ten proceeded
to state that ie OF libel had been established
that where the libel published, there the offence
c0Sunnatcd, and tie trial 10 be hdso in cases OF
thrclting letters, aud In ci murder, where the
oGeEcc counnatcd in the publication of tie letters
or where the dcIJh occurredtiere the yenue to he
laid for the ;ria IN false prcence-i is conSulnma-
ted where the money IS obtained. His Honor then
into 4 learned argument on the law and the Courts action
the relative >oNeregnties OF the Statesthe right
trial OF cscsuIdcr them OF ,iis mixed character &c
and Ills Honor finally concluded by stati it DC the
opin ON majority of tho Court rnsef and Alderman
IIasboGck) that this Court hat not Uracti0a IN this
cascbut that of his colleagues (Aderman C0zzens)
entertained Il different opinion.
Ills Honor stated that he had this morning conferred
with judges Oakley, jones and Nlnderpoel. who had u
stated heir opinion that this Court tad aot jurisdiction in
.hs case.
The District Attorney, after comforting with his aSsC-
ciAe Counsel. proposed the Court 10 withdraw jueor
ard 10 carry up the to the supreme Court, Ia
TO be nac Tor the decision Of that tribunal.
TO this Mr.. StGnsbUry. of the Counsel OF the
cuse objected and sid they here be tried. ard
Insisted o being tried tor hc offence charged against them
Ia: they demanded that this prisoner should be tried Tor
this otelcc and either acquitted convicted by ibis jury
That this trial could be completed today, as tile Counsel
for defence could through their testimony and
would waive tile important right up this that
they would present this subject Ia all its importance and
detail, to the Supreme Court when they brought sut
here for false Imprisonment, and when OHIO would vnd
cate her jrisdctOa ana tie seizure OF one OF he.
citizens upon tie soil OF her State, tIvc from
Justice, and bringing him here for r, would BE- properly
tested by the highest tribuila Of this State. After
suatiOn between the respective Counsel the District At
Urcy stated that he would propose that Juror should be
WITHDRAWN that the Counsel for defence should pu in
-peeiaplca ur.dctlon 10 which the Counsel for the
prosecution should terpose statement OF facts, 10 which
statement Of facts the defendants Counsel would deinur
and thus the C:se could b." carried To the Supreme CONT
on question OF jur!s ctiyn. That the District Attorney
woult then noNe prosegu this Indictment npd
hold ;he defendant, At present. 10 bail the other In
dicme; appear and answer ne should ever be called
upoA before this Court for trial That due notice should
b. gwen 50 called upon be tried and advantage
taken defendant y tile forfeiture of recogiZInce &c
This being agreed both sides juror Withdrawn
and the terminated, ard Tie jury discharged
the term.
Decentralization kelsey colored Indicted for grand
larceny John c. Edwards also indicted for grand larceny
Robert johnson, colorcd for stahbg James Beckett and
He;ty Ann oseph c0lore for sabbng Henry HwsDroOk
,eyeriiy discharged the witnesses The prose
ction eond not ouGd testify against H. and they
had Ecen long time in ri.On Tie Court then adjourned
FOR tile