The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-09-13
Trial or the Aston Place Rioters.

M ut an early hour and before the court opened
oil the lohbiss crowded The vsiters looked like
iDerrsed spectators and c.ught eagerly Ut every word
wbich fell from the lips Of tho judges counsel
either side snd on oss or two occasions, when
rand was to be performed, than dozen willing
messengers were at hand on the instant.
rHE DAv CALENDAR
The calendar for the dsy exhibited ut the deor Of
the court room. vas ~ follows:
NAMES of pctt"dants Indication
f. T. e Jndsou End others. Rfet.
Issish Ry pdcrs.. lDciting riot.
Robert Miller, Jas. Long, jas
VIM sparks g &. Tapp:n, :Tihi o..
vim e Alien. T ii ii,.td:ld.. Riot.
Josiah Shea Chas Bartlett, John
Squire. Tbos. Mcguire. Riot.
yotsh Long. RIOT
ISAIAH ~ nders. Assault xud Battery.
The first case on the calendar being thnt IN which
ten ofrhe persons accused Of riot Indicted to-
o.ing 's the TIL. ~ the csse NJ ssef sn the
endorsement az the Indictment
The . ps"p'' "' Sa G. q Mex S, Y.rh'''
Thomas Bennett, John Norris.
Jas rstrhews Hugh McI.aughlin,
Ale xsUder Hossark, Thomas Green,
Dsuiel 4 Adriance' James O'NrI
The coun.e, for the reopsiu this are John Me-
Keop the District attorney and his assistant jonas
b, Phillips aided bv las II whiting.
The counsel Tor the pri .onsrs Jas. NJ Smith for
Judson: ! h Scol-s for O'Nrii Mason aud X Bus
teed ter Dcue,ass and "a j. Cornell. for .arisncs
Athe pri' onsrr apresr except Green, whose resog-
nizRncp H. declared forfeit
It soma time afr er the court had been formally
opened Def sufficient order could be- procured &c al
low counsel 70 proceed with the case When at length
order established the court and bar arranged
for the trial. presented rather formidable appearance
The counsel for the People three In number arrsyed
facra tire court The counsel FIR tbs aecu ed Ave In
Dumber seated themselves at table facing the jury
seats The ease opened with
Arr,IcArioSs 10 PUT OFF TRIAL
MIR Smith counsel Cor v u q Juisou. one ~ tina
accued. fret addressed the court He prefaced
his remarks hy saving that he not Dir.
Judscps sounse for the purpose ormsking this
sppi'cnfion MIR Jud-on makes application first for q
,psrate trial ipssmuch he q CON on Mon OF
IN. persons with whom he IL implicated but The
81 the riot in the persecution OF his duties
reporter fnr a weekly paper OF which he va. editor
and reporter He also makes application to have his
trial potpoped drt on the ground OF the absence Of
two material witnesses. Duncan e. Pell. aud Moses
Grinn-t both Of whom are material witnesses
and without whose testimony h- canno. safely rrocsed
to trial He slso alleges. AFFIDAVIT that his oouu-
sci Thomas Warner Is sick, aud confined to his bed
at the prr,ent time.
The potion opposed BY the District Attorney,
end MIR whiting counsel for the ps,pls. who stated
that ample time had been alo~ed the defend .ut to
pr-urr~ Tor trial tn. bill ~ indio tound
the 5?d Of June last and besides that the sdsvts
which the appc ,'irns are based are detective
in tbo- pou t. which relate e. the abence of witnesses
Mar Whiipg stated that this riot occurred long
90 IN. 10th Of May the putting do~n Of which caused
the blood OF innocent citizens To inv through the pub
lie sfrsets. Nr Jusson was indicted on tbs ed OF
June lst and for the last min. days hs has known that
the trial was TO come to dsv. and YET he has not
taken any means TO procure the testimony OF those
witnesses Shalt the public business be Postponed be-
caus~ Mr. JDd-on has been guilty ~ "ach"si" Under
any circumstances ~ Is to he hoped that tho court will
pei him Ia disclose what hs expects to Prove By
these witnesses
Mr. sm,rn for the defendant repliesto tho District
Attorney aud his associate lie stated In argument,
that all had heen set forth the sndavs that need
b. srt forth for the PURPOSE Of this apple alton He
sad that u Within the kbosl-dss o the court and
counsel hire present that the re,idepce OF MIR Pel,
- also that OF VT Gripp@u. was in this city Ii Is
NJ n ma BE- M res
to disclosing what the .pdsnt Intended pro
by thee witness he could not said the counsel he
ohlig'd tn dtrclose this the FIRST apple alton
to postpone the trial He further argued that
the fact that the public excited In reference
70 this matter. was not good reason why this motion
Should not b- granted. IL wrs rather reason why
the case should not nov he tried The public wants
victms ana the fact that there y excitement IN
reference tn this subject ~ sufficient rsss-n Why the
scse 81 justice should he kept carefully balanced 1t
might BE- insoDvspirnt but 70 was ju-tths. all legal
rights sbould he carefully preterysd aud III Pc
tent jury could not BE- found In this county. ths sta.
tute makes provision for ,uch ease, by trsnserrn g
the trial To another county
Mir MoKsos. District Attorney. stated that he had
never kbo~n application for separate trial 20 be made
except at such time as he sn--ered ready to pr.-
coed 20 traln He bad stated that he present
acting 10 The capacity 81 reporter for the paper which
h. conducts tn. Grand Jury have found bill OF In
dictment against him after hrsing the evidence pro
duc.d befor. them defy gentem to put their dnger
any where persons indicted for riot had
And this sres.d the District Attorney arises of the
very nature Of the csss not being constituted BY tha
action az several persons
Qussthp by the Court Have sIbp9nss been sent 10
Nsssrr FeIl aud 6rpncllf
III. District Attorney replied. that there was no
evidence 10 fbow that ,uch subpooss had bson sent
Office TO whether he h. In tosp at the present.
time The messenger returned With the Information
that Mr. Crinneu was In town and here also yes-
tsrdsy.
Application ~ss made by MIR Buste.d. counsel for
dic'm.pt IL Was asked that the def.udsnt Douglass
might hsve s.psrste trial His counsel urged thai
HE client vas minor. and that he vas deaf
The District Attorney said that " was the drst tm'
he bad learned that bccass~ q person deaf and
minor he could not throw = brickhst
for his and st claiming that his client ought
bsye separate trial ON account Of his infancy and dis
ability frs nm deafness
Mr. scoLrs, for the defendant o'Neii moved for ,
posipopsmsnt Of trial the ground of the absence
witness, sud
Mr. ,. o, coss,.l, for Daniel A. Adrisuce, moved I
separate trial for his client
Thee application ,e'ns ell In. and the Arguments
heard Judge Ds,. after short consultation ~ith tn
Aldermen gave the following ss the
pNcisio, couRv.
The application 10 two fold. -Four 81 the defendant
move for separate trials aud two Of these
In the event q the denial Of that application NOV
to postpone the cause. from the absence % matsrs
witnesses The Grand Jury have included all the dc
PENDANTS In enc pdi.i s.nt Nth the view that the,
should be tried together for offence the propr.'
OF sbicb course is sbvous The acts of each indi
vidusi ronsfiiuts pert ~ the history OF common
trspssctios; and. TO spsbl. the Jury 70 determine
whether riot ~sis,ed. they should have detailed Il
' tbe acts on All the parties indicted Tor creating
or maintaining = riot II the def pdsu's Instead o.
being tried together should he tried separately. n
would be Necessary To r'p-st great portion Of the
same tsstimony IN ssch ~hich ~oud lead TO
uupscssssiy nsumptop 81 public time, and greatly
ipcr.ss the srp-nse Of the trial N ssy nothing ~ thu
lose snd Inconvenience 10 jures witnesss+ go There
are Therefore the strongest resspus far trying all th'
dfr dspts together aud the Court should not grant
separate trial unIees IL - manifest that IL pref
dice the ot particular defendant to try him with
the rect " there IL rsssop 20 b revc that psrtJ
cannot have fair tris-H mingpg his case With tina
ofth- Others may tend seriously to his deriment h
sfoulc have separate trial There IL nothing. how
ever ~ the AFFIDAVIT ~ the defendant hudson TO induc
the Court To vssut him . sepsrst- trial Nothns sp
from -hch the Coprt wight infer that his right
would he affect ip the slightest particular BY tryiu
him Jointly nth the feet Nor " the deafness Of tn
deter dsnt Douglass his extreme youth n
grsnting him . separate trial Whs.ever considers
tons ms, arise from his extreme youth may vel
be sdcr~ss ed 10 one jury ~ to smother
rhe metio. tn put OF the trial must also he deuie
The r.f pSspts have not shown due diligence tn
tris 81 his case hiss been delayed fr n long time in
DID " bss been delayed 50 long tn Afford ground 70
public compsIpt. II is very different from the ord
rary cisss OF criminal trials The tra,sa~son nvo vs