The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-11-02
Court or Oyer ana Terminer.
Before Judge Edwards and Aldermen Ingsrs0u ans

Before Judge Edwards ana Aldermen Ingsrson and
Jackson.
Nov lat the assembling Of the court this morn
Ing. In the case OF Charles Il Carpenter,
The Hon. JUDGE EpwARDs addressing the jury, said
penter stands indicted accessory before fact Of
the crime OF passing counterfeit money The sole Is
sue which yon have tn try Is, whether he Is guilty
nnsent Of the charge aud the issue Is to be tried
the evidence, and the evidence alone Whatever has
been introduced here stated by way OF alton
recriminston. and which has not been proved, or
infersDtia to the case, you will stirey discard An
accessory before the fact is one who being absent
procurts eounssis, aids or sbsts the commission OF
felony the guilt Of the accessory presupposes the
guilt Of the principal and the law IL, that before
the guilt OF the accessory can bs inferred, the
guilt Of the principal must be established Evidence
Of that guilt has been produced here tho question:
then for the jury Is whether the accessory guilty
not and, In considering that, they to consider
whether the testimony for the shows that
he Is and II IL does that it Is credible OF the two
witnesses Young and Andres mere culsrly Young
the jury to decide ss to the degree OF credit
which be given to them In the first place does
the evidence OF this witness Young, II 1t be received
establish the guilt OF the prisoner His Honor then
stated that part Of Youngs evidence connected Car
penter with the alleged transaction and continued his
observations On the part Of the defence 1t Is not
tended that the evidence, true docs not establish
crime but Is commended that 1t does not estab
lh the specific crime with which the prisoner stands
charged IL Is not sufficient that the prisoner is guilty
OF some offence they must believe him guilty Of the
particular charge laid in the indictment Now, 1t Il
we settled that 1t 10 not that the accessory
who aids. counses, and sbes, should have Immediate
communication With the principal this Intervention
be done by third person The rule Of law said the
learned judge. which shall lay upon this point is
Young At the request Of Carpenter, offered Andres
the counterfeit money, for the passing Of which An
dros was convicted and requested bin 60 purchase H.
and IT, In pursuance OF such request Audros agreed to
purchase It, and If Carpenter afterwards furnished
Dung with the money with the that 1t should
be delivered to Andros to DO passed; and Nor tho
which he had entered into with Andres at the
request Of Carpenter, and In his behalf, Csrpen-
ter was an accessory to the crime OF Andres
and the fact that Andres was to pay Young and
Young was to pay Carpenter, would not alter the cha
racter Of the transaction But tbere WAS an absolute
sae by Carpenter to Young. irrespective OF any
rangement with ADaros and the transfer from Young
to Andres Was sepsa aud distinct trausaction ar
dros II you do not come TO the conclusion that Car
psnter accessory under the rule have laid down,
II will lot be necessary for TO proceed in your de-
b,Istons any further but II you do nsider him an
accessory you win then have to how far the owl
dence may be relied upon. The learned Judge then
In respect 10 Young and ndros said they stood ia the
light OF aecomploes, which makes the law LOOK with
suspicion On their testimony. 1t Is undoubtedly set
tied that jury may convict the testimony Of
plice but disoreet jury should do and 1t
is the duty Of court to advise the jury that they
should not convict on that testimony aIonethat they
should not convict without some corrobsratvs tsst
mopy. There may be cases where "a jury may convict
upon the testimony OF an accomplics-fOr instance.
where young man II moral and upright oharaeter bad
been seduoed into crms and though he be an accom-
plce still the jury considering the circumstances
under which he had been led to b. guilty deem nj,
moral Of truth sufficient to entits him to belief
But these witnesses here do not appear In shat light
His honor gave succnct and perspicuous view OF the
tetmoDy Of the several witnesses bearing upon the
main facts Of the and concluded his very fair and
impartial address by telling the jury that it for
them TO decide whether these witnesses, the one
hand be mistaken or whether, on the other they
perjured the evidence OF the other witnesses in the
for the prosecution be- true thea whether IL goes
TO corborate any Of the substantial facts sworn TO by
Young ssd Apdros. IT. in their minds 1t proved ths
gult ~ the they should find him guilty aud
II It did not they would pronounce him innocsnt.--
They would TAX. the Ia from the court for which It
rsspou-ibie and the jury would give the verdict,
sing the evidence, their responsibility
The Jury retired at 20 minutes to IL o'clock, aid at
the rising 81 the court 1T O'Clock had not to
sny conclusion. IL vas intmatsd to them that up to
O'clock his honor would attend TO receive their
diet
NrK o'cLocx.-Ths jury have net agreed Beds and
rsfrss mentS Ssrs ordsrsd th--- See shs night.