The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-09-26
Trial or the Astor Place Rioters.

| COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS.
Before Judge D.ly and aldermen Wood and Kelly
| Thomas Bennett, John Norris
James Matthews, Hugh Mclaughlin,
Alexander Hossaok, Thomas Green,
Daniel A. Adrancs, James O'Neill.
TWELFTH DAY.
SErr. 25.-The Court met at little before 10 O'Clock
this morning Ths arrangement Of counsel is that all
the counsel for the defence except Mr. Smith ud ons
counsel shsl precede the council for the
In their summing up. Mr.. whiting Is to precede
Judsons counsel, and Mr.. McKeon Is to follow, and
Mr.. BLArcKmAN. counsel for Thomas Bennett. the
cond defendant the list, commenced the work of
summing up the evidence to the jury He dwelt upon
the misfortune which attended his client. in having
his name coupled with that Of Judson when he had
nothing to do with that person. He claimed that his
client had by no means been identified as an active
roter; that he was not Eighth street at all the
This cause has now assumed the solemn feature,
when 1t IL about to be consigned to for Anal
dsl,berstion y is . question grave 10 its nature
to remark not only involves the question OF liberty
ofone Of these defendants. Judson at whom this pro-
eight unfortunate defendants. Unfortunate. pernlit
me to say-not that they are guilty OF the crime for
too plainly established by the evidence Adduoed In the
courfe OF the trisl-but gentlemen Of the jury you
cannot cose your eyes to the painful truth that tho
eight defendants last named In this indictment
only joined In this In order the
conviction Of the defendant, Judson This, indeed is
startling feature In this cause, which cannot b. pass
ed over without comment remark from counsel for
the defence as we'll as . matter OF deep aud earnest
consideration for you gentlemen of the jury 1t Is
the awful tragedy which Was enacted 1t the "Astor
% oS the tsnS, 70 sss to
page written In human blood-an occu rrence which Is
yet fresh In your recoections needs but little com
ment but this Ia not to bias your minds In judging Of
| the guilt or innocence Of the defendants The only
legitimate question for your consideration Is whether
these defendants participated in the riot at the Aston
Place. the night Of the 10th Of May last. You
not to ak yourselves the question IL Mr. Judson Is
good terms with his father nlaw, mott That has
nothing to do with this 1t does proper
that Mr. Bennett the father in law Of Judson should
come into TINS court and ask you ssnti.men OF the
order to satify hts great appetite for upon
poor Judson who has been more siuned against than
SHINING" We asked to be tried alone. and It
fused us the prosecution knew It would then be
known to the community that he only desired to
Wet Judon for offences committed against hts father
in-lsw Bennett In celebrating upon your verdict,
you sbould the same degree Of care of csuon and
dtcretion as though the life and death
for every defendant which you by your verdict reader
entity STAN him in the eye Of with crime Of
I the deepest dye; for which among you would not
look upon the man who Is guilty OF participating In
this Wholesale slaughter the night Of the 10th May
morally pot legally guilty OF murder and ifnot
his God {, To convict an innocent Of this crime,
would se doing an injury to him which the acts Of
puni.bment which the Law inficts upon these aefeu-
dsnts H. by your verdict you convict them because
.ns Jour Vans y, prmon ,d n S 90 an asyum
hide and protect them from the finger OF
punishment would commence after the term Of their
Imprisonment had expired then 1t IL too late
less wound has been inflicted for which there Il
balm In 0ilead; there Is no physician there.n Then
IL h. that life becomes burthen and the world waste.
/ MIR. Blapckmsp continued In q speech, Of about two
hours to address the jury endesvoring to prove to
them. from review of the evidence sdduced In the
trial that his client not cupabe Of the charges
all.dged against him. He was followed by
JonN ID. SHERWOOD, counsel for Matthews, who said
That In defending OF those accused Of riot IL
neither within his line OF duty counsel did it
corform 10 his victions as citizen to defend the
fup,u NJ he Of thare m fta
council Of defence Matthews stood the eventful
10Th with stone Ia his hand not to sssal tho Opsra
House, the constituted authorities but to defend
that which dear bis client then and less
now, bis person and his liberty He charged the de-
fence with unnecessarily and cruelty joining the as-
cused In trial; and accused them Of causing by
this act the delay which they have sought to fix upon
the defence. The defence had offered as condition
OF q trial togsther-separste from Judson-to admit
the facts which Il had taken week IN prove lie then
went into review Of the rights OF individuals at pub
lie meetings; showed that its free exercise
quence Of political freedom. and attended with
safety and that IL ought not to be abridged by such
doctrines the prosecution sought to establish He
denied that persons accountable for all that
at public meeting. and insisted position of law
let That the offence ~ riot like every other offence
consists In the intent; and that every individual "a
TO be judged by his own acts alone I'd That nero
prefebce at place Of riot not in itself constitute
The person n roter Sd That under the proof In this
proof OF the there OF poscssbs parsons
that presence at Astor Place Ia not presumption Of
q riotous intent He enforced these positions BY va
rety Of and by citing Matthew
Hale, Lord Holt. aud Lord Mansfield
mated s views to be that Il necessary In order TO
chsrg. person a rioter TO shos participation
In the tumult and that being shown he becomes liza
Mr. SnSsweob-Does your honor mean to say that
II Matthew. for example had bsen proved to have ut
tered single cry that evening that he would have
made bioself responsible for all that subsequently oc
curr.d. even after 81. arrest and conanementf
The Cot ruled.
MIR. sHrrwoop-Then We live under q wore than
oriental despotism. have seen, on the banks Of the
Nile and In that country alouewhele villages held
re.por sibe end actually decimaisd by despotic Pa
shs for the acts 81 single hut did not suppose
that we hsd adopted the Egyptian code here Under
the bloody law 81 the butcher Hsynau had pro-
claimed 20 conquered Pesth that every iphabitant
should he held responsible fer the acts Of any but
have 10 learn that 20 be subject to such
practical despotism here Mr.. y then reviewed the
fscts In the Of Matthews and insisted strongly
upon his innocence from variety OF considerations
He contended that he only acting irishmsn,
In selfdsfsnce hat the stone found IN his hand
upon him 20 he used only for his protection lis
tainted the prosecution With attempt 20 satisfy
boy while the real heads chief. Of the riot were
suffered to at large from fear Of their political in
nuence. The prosecutor might pourir ray before them
organization ever complete to destroy rhe LAYS
he might evoke from the chaos ~ night like Milton, In
his description OF creation. borriJ shapes
First the tavny Hon. spriDRiug 20 get free his him
der springs and rampant shakes his brlnd
ed name"
But the public would hold him 70 the responsibility
OF producing the heads and chiefs Of this outbreak lie
concluded by sppesl TO the jury to uphold the law
ana 70 r.bnss ,be rrosscnon FOR this ATTEMPT 10 ss
lude and cheat public justice.
Mr. Bouptror .1coupsei for Hosssck, next appeared
before the jury In behalf Of his client His points
frat. that Hossack committed no riot-he used
violence untIl after the fret firing OF the military
Secondly that the Indictment charges assault end
battery. MIR D claimed that where the prosecution
claimed assault aud battery In their indictment,
they must prove what they have set forth eiss the
accused must be- acquitted. Thirdly, that In order to
convict party Of RIOT the prosecution must establish
by preof the premeditsd action Of the accused With
two or more .ther persons In these points the coun
eel for ossck claimed that the prosecution had failed
and hence he claimed scquittai for his client
Mr. CosSriL next addressed the jury counsel for
Adriance He claimed that his client according to the
proof vas dresed differently the night Of the riot
from N. person to by the officers his client
Mr. Busrrrp. in behalf OF Geo Douglass followed;
and In his remarks ssd that In the Of the trial
motives had been attributed TO him which would dis
grace . Hettsptot The Court interrupted him ana |
sshed to whom he meant to apply the remark; or he
intended TO apply " to the Court Mr. Busteed said |