The New York herald., 1845-12-15


WASHINGTON, Dec. l3, 1915
The Case Of JVal,am Rufus ERiott-Presentrnent
Of he Grand Jury affirming his Innocenee-Argu-
ed before Judge Crarford by the Counsel on either
Side-Opinion Of Judge Crauford- Discharge of
the Prisoner.
The case of William r. Elliott, indicted last sum-
mer and imprisoned for the killing of William q
Kendall, and the manning ofW r. Bailey, in fra
cas- upon Pennsylvania Avenue, was brought before
the Criminal Court this morning, sitting in and for
this county, Uudge Crawford, presiding,) in the
form of presenment Of the Grand Jury, auhor-
zng the discharge of the prisoner, upon the ground
that in the acts for which he stands indicted, he
acted in selfdefence, and that consequently he was
not liable as if guilty of violation of the laws.
Mr.. FENDALL, for the defence, said that on the
10th of this month, the presentment designated had
been found; setting forth that upon examination of
all the witnesses that could be had before the grand
jury, and full delberation upon their testimony, the
said grand jury had decided that the prisoner in the
killing OF William Zebedee Kendall, did it, while re-
treating from him and in selfdefence and so of the
manning Of Bailey. The case said Mr.. Fendall, now
stands as ~ came down Every moment, since the rend
ton Of this presentmen of imprisonment Of the defen
dan has been Illegal and unjust He cannot longer be
.snea IN prison while this presentment stands; and If
the prisoner indicted upon this nnon
the very lace Of the paper the authority for quashnr IL
acts iIis chap is, p and the act of 7oa chan
against indictments eliminating citizen in the faca r.
SUBSTANTIALLY Synonymous proofs of his ,nnocenca
herein presented. MIR Fendail therefore in bsha %
the prisoner, Ealing that since the rendering of this
prssenmsni BY the grand jury his Continuance IN
adoeen Illegal and that ms personal liberty was pri.
snege TO which he was clearly entitled and asked and
demanded Of the Court his unconditional discbarue
MI Hosss, the District Attorney, prosecuting This
cause presented 70 the Court that he had beer SO
employed m the pressure OF his ocal duties befora M;
sou a. not TO he able to attend 10 this cause az
ed since the decision OF the grand jury in the
out hs sense Of duty TO the public and the Jaws Al
should be ne eoud not assent discharge of ths
PRISONER upon this presenfment-he could not assume
fhn responsibility In this Of the case He srvusd
st me pressnment ~ss paradox upon its face-tSat h
mean, any thing Il meant that some offence had been
eommmsai ior that u there no offence In the nre
~" ~. -. resentment was superhuous and uncaiIed
~. ~ 10y tsr presentmen implied in ITSELF SONS
offence, OF Why should . man be presen,ed Iinon ,h
ists VI the Ffesthnent, therefore there ~.
Piled AFTER reviewing the laws cited by NJ r.,, o III
arc ascming then spphca,on this case tho sarna,
pio..cWor ssid tnst ne iet bound from soemn s.rss
jury At m next meeting Tuesday newt NH, VIZ s ian.
nent for murder and manslaughter against ihs ,s
mst the grand jury may hsve the Opportunity az
exPnc ny what they He, the prosecn,or ~ ~
bind himself 10 present these bills before the y,a, @
tnen next meeting With refsre nc es 10 The ca
ioeiss watkins, and reiteration Of his solemn oa
- eengsuon. IN the premises, MIR Hoban said tba
OF he case before his honor the associate lea
'ounsshor on the other side Gen Walter Jamesl
M ftsosLL submitted, that II the indictrp ents n
"s mshsiAughter OF murder were by implies
on ~ his pfesentfnent Of the grand Jury they won
ss''h'o hom the decision Of the jury therein .,