Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1846-04-07

fully accord 10 him, endeavored 10 make good his
case ard 10 obtain a verdict against the accused
He was followed by The counsel for the defence, as
follows: WIN. Nj. Oveuon, Andrew Stevenson
Samuel Taylor, and John w. Jones, EsquireS
ANY continents from US upon the legal ability
thrilling eloquence, and powerful appeals dis'
played by these gentlemen, might be looked upon
with dis.rust But we discard our own feelings
and refer 10 the evidence Of the crowded anu az
rentive audience, who hung Tor hours upon the
words OF wisdom and eloquence, for The hiehes
and most truthful compliment 10 The speakers
We refer 10 the tears that stole unbdden down inc
cheeks of many manly form, as the best indica'
ton lhatthe counsel had done their whole duty 10
vindicating the truth, and in placing in their pro-
per light The high motives which had forced their
client 10 pursue the natural law OF se!i-deience
With The exception of our able young friend
OvertoD, whose bearing on The occasion gave IN
errng promise o! future distinction in the legal
world, the counsel OF The accused were men OF a
national reputation. They had FLIED Offices Of
the highest trust-lhey had won laurels in the
National or State Councils But We venture 10
assert that never did they feel purer or more heart
felt satisfaction than on The present occasion,
when their noble efforts were sanctionedby Jury
of twelve men, representing The country. The
case was closed by the Commonweal,h'sA Attorney
on Saturday night, at 8 o'clock, and The jury IN
stantly, and wilhou. leaving neir box, rendered i
verdict o. mot guilty"
We deem il proper, in orier 10 remove all ms
apprehension, here 10 state tina; though the trial
tool. place in Chesterfield county, always known
70 be steady and Jealous supporter Of Demo
cratic principles The counsel for ne accused sedu-
lousy resisted Inc introduction OF any evidence
which would lead to The Investigation OF inc
causes oflhe controversy, or which would IN the
least involve political considerations. They de-
sired that the case should rest upon It's own
merits-that The decision should be given upon
high moral and legal considerations and no other.
No one could observe the honest and intelligent
juiy, who sal 10 the cause, and Tor one momen'
doub', that they decided the case according
10 the law and the evidence, under their solemn
obligations 10 do their whole duty.
AS soon as the acquittal OF T. r., Jr., was an.
nounced. motion was made By The counsel Of
Messrs. Washington Greenhow, VIM. Scou and
P. J. Archer, who had been indicted as pTinci-
pals in the second degree, that as the principal in
The FIRST degree had been acquitted, a nolie prose-
oui.should lie entered for their clients. In add
ton to the counsel named above, James Lyons
and Holden Rhodes, Esqs., appeared for these
gentlemen. Alter brief explanation OF The
principles OF law, by which, after The discharge
OF principal, the aiders and abc,tors should be
necessarily acquitted, the Attorney for the Com
monwealih signifed his wish 10 acquiescc IN
any opinion the Court should arrive al. Judge
Clopton, 10 whose industry, impahiality and ldel-
,y We bear willing tribute, a; once directed the
Clerk 10 enter a nOAe preseqnii stating, al The
same time, that he had seen nothing in The iull
and laborous investigation, which would Jus'iiy
the tainles, suspicion, that these gentlemen had
done anything which would render doubtful their
instant acquiltal, after The verdict which had jus.
been rendered by the Jury They were then dis
charged. II j, proper 10 state here, that Messrs.
w. Greenhow and W. Scott had voluntarily sur
rendered themselves TO the legal authorities, and
remained in confinement for several days, until
they were Sc! loose BY the law. Mr.. P. J. Archer
had given bail in the amount OF $4,000 for his
appearance in Cour;.
A friend, who, is, perhaps the best reporter IN
the State, kindly rendered Us his services, and has
ull notes OF The evidence and arguments Of this
most interesting trial. We may hereafter furnish
oui readers with the whole evidence and arsu.
ment. All lha, we desire is, 10 do justice 70 The
motives o. the living. 1t is Tar from our wash 10
jis,u The ashes Of the dead. This was The course
pursued by The counsel Of I. R., jr, on The trial.
This has been, and shall be, our own course.
In Justice 10 all parties We shall at an early
dayrspub!ish, without comment, all the articles
in the Enquirer and stsr, which led 70 The cor
iroversy. They have already been published in
regular order by The Republican.
Il NAV not te amiss % STATE, that our JUNO!
partner knows nothing OF what is above written.
He s now ab>en, from Inc city, 10 spend few
DAYS in The domestic circle. He will soon return,
10 resone the active Iabors which have been SO
long and SO painfully interrupted
Since writing the above, we have received the
following, which We publish with great pleasure:
IN the Circuit Superior Court n CtestnfsM:
The Commonwealth,
rs
Washington Greenhow, William Scott and
Peter J. Archer.
BY TUE COURT
These parties have voluntarily surrendered
themselves for Trial; they stand indicted as prin.
cipals in the scccrd degree; he offence which
they have committed, il any. is accessorial only
in lis nature The principal in the FRS, degree has
been tried, and upon iul and fair investigation,
has been acquitted by The appropriate tribunal;
the even and proper administration oil justice can
find no vindcalion in inficling pnnishmeni The
principal in the second after the acquit.al OF the
principal in the first degree. II is true that the
nrinciDal in The second degree may legally he
punished without The conviction IL he principal
in the first degree, 10 cases where The principal
in The frs, degree has died or eucs6 justice by
flight. ard his guilt shall clearly appear upon The
trial Of the principal in he second degree and IL
cases where he evidence may establish the ou'i
If the principal IN The second degree. independ-
enIy OF that OF The principal in The f'si degree.
Uoon the trial OF the principal in Ike first de-
gree lust had before me-, | have heard Inc
whole evidence applicable ~ The case Of these
defendants and i, does no! prove any hing tend
inc 10 cast the shadow of suspicion, that they
have done any act which wonld make prosecu,,
lion acains. Them as accessories, either required
lor or permitted by, The purposes Of jns'ice. a
mile prosequi must be entered, and The defend
ants discharged.
The above contains The substance OF what
said on directing the prosecution agains! The de-
PENDANTS TO he dismissed.
HENRICO COUNTY.
MEETINGS on lEsTsRDAY.-Both parties held
meetings al he County Court House On yesier-
tay. The Wings made considerable sir-'he
court adjourning TO give them room After
much talking, deaouncins the Democratic party
tor having passed the Sab-Treasury through the
House oil Representatives, and accusing Inc Ad-
ninislratiun of an intention TO involve The coun