Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1850-11-29

more respectable and intelligent Jury than the one wac
which tried him the second time had never before seen
nnnneIled in criminal Upon this trial, the ascus
son of The General Court granting new trla WIS u
,n rho ,,n.t respect by Court and the couusei eh
pnped in the trial. To show the pains TAX oy me "
Suitable jury and how conducted myseI upon .na' ar
refer Won IN Inc statement of Sheon f. Leake, Esq gen
,an,nn well and fvorobly known throughout our oo'"
for his high honor intelligence and talents MI Leas ~
ing with me In attendance upon INC Ionr. OF a
maLes ,bis statement my request Whilst thls tria %
nnnu nm became very much concerned for Gray
discovering what thought might lead 10 Inc murder ~s
should be acquitted BY the jury, ana ar'erlineo
m be upon the look and extend 10 nm all the
b &c ;nh, he in nv power afford After the verdict
and Judgment were rendered ngninsi hni KNOWING .'a ~
applicu ton would be made TO the .reneli Lou, A. ch
IT. Indictment and grant another new trial, met alr. Ch
@ ms nf the nrsoners COUNSEL in the street and rennS
I'd TO him that il the General Court should grant new
thought the venue should be changed ano as"ea n Iva
hnmoh nir trial could be had in Fauquie he replied a
no had no doubt of it, then told him mat inoush' ''
you'd be The proper 10 send Inn TO- ana ne
rb me in that opinion Fauquier was the county
I and nosl convenient for the wltnesscs-anu IL was
rge and populnus county, and tne our i ,ao ~
Iuard in the populous village OF "arrenon gray SON. III
,e event Of his acquittn would be PROTECTED from
the citizens Of the place. This was my man motive ol
,cndnp To send Grayson there for trial H. unaef iess
IMPRESSIONS given to the mob The pledge they required
me then indeed would have been vilian.
n "a said that have condemned the mob mat not
me- should have said nothing about IT, as believed Inc
Tenders would be prosecuted and might be brought oeioG
-, for trial. Yet SO deeply mortified was l. that conin
nj upon all occasions remain wholly silent. spond VI :,
M seldom but when did speak of 1t dcplored ana con-
dnnrd H. Ii also said that have, upon all occasions
dnouned the decisions Of the General Court through pae
O opinion. This is also untrue have not spoHen III
TINS of appreciation of that opinions on the contrary re-
ord both decisions Of the General Court as being erroneous
fey are both in conflict with what CONCEIVE 10 1e .ne
pcple Of the previous decisions OF that Court IN aco
case Rob- 77o and Hunter Hill case fat
a. Gruyson was convicted upon ccumsiantia evidence
ov yet had from that evidence no more doubt OF ms gn
tim have my existence The circumstances SHOWN
usvdence conclusive 10 admit vi auouo ana w
y.y believe that if those good and intelligent men who had
drded the from Its appearance upon puper hau pee
Were was and could have the witnesses and neao
ahe evidence they would have concurled WIN me IN ;e
opnion that The prisoner guilty. When the conviction
mud upon circumstances numerous and various IN lieir
character is utterly impossible for ANY un 10 commit
5hem 10 paper in such way as 10 produce ua iaiI anu
aruuer deductions which could result in the minds oil
hose who present und hear The evidence. Hehce
all such the jury by whom the man is tried IS
&e only tribunal that form proper estimate US 10 'he
keeht and tendency of such testimony. When the jury
davcts crcumslantiu testimony alUne as was the Case
III the Judge before whom the trial had concurs win e
nv their conclusions, am decidedly oil opinion uia'
IL General Court ought not ~ review and revise The juog
ukt In this opinion think all ubundanily sustained
bv least decisions Of the General Court expressly IN
,1 See The above referred 10 in Rob- and Grat
icrhxces upon all occasions said that SO lar as le
Inn was concerned II wholly nmateral whether the
Gkeral Court decided the right wrong because
hv Court hid right 10 exercise jurisdiction over e cs
son. in the eye OF The law was 10 be regarded as an III
o4mt man. -,
10 the imputation Of being influenced BY the pride OF
opton in expressing my dissent from the decisions VI e
Gdra Court the statement oil single fact will THINK
Sufficient repel that charge. After Grayson was COZ"
c,. his counsel stated that he was very poor man ana
lot loe employ counsel appear for him before tile
raj Court said him that would request some gentle
len appear for him. In compliance with this PROMISE
Jplitd 10 Mr. Boudn and Mr. Cabe both Of whom DID, al
Inv REQUEST appear for him and if they had been aoorlng
reward Of many thousands vi dollars, they could not
I'VE discharged their duty with more fidelity and ability tian
~ cid Al my request they again appeared lot h'i vi
4. second trial IN the General Court
This communication has been unavoidably already sPun
II 10 distressing length; but there is one other matter
hieh has bearing upon this subject and II has given me
ore concern hun the foul impuallons against me when
found 10 the Fredericksburg News highly intelligent
respected member of the Richmond bar gave II as his opn
las have heard andi which others may concur matt
my dury on the second trial of Grayson, TO have advl-
tie Jury acquit the prisoner, IN conformity ~ .hc
MON of The General Court. This candid opinion
thai gen,enuns and expressed through no unSlndncss
feeling towards me- otherwise should not notice it,
on this point think very differently ION that gentle
M II tho question before the Jury had been question: VI
reaw in.teud OF question VI mere TACT should nave
ncu RED In the opinion All questions OF las are 10 DC de-
ed BY the and when 50 decided arc oindis upon
,nry and should govern them rule. But u qncs.
:sc fact belong the jury and not 10 the court aud
or III The court may set Il verdict aside and grant new
yet me fac, is not thereby decided by Inc cJut uas
,gsin submitted jury 10 be again ted ana ASCERTAIN
BY them. They the constituent triers oil inc TACT
ID when the Judge before whom the cause Is red con-
wh the jury in their finding, he would DC violating MS
" 10 set the verdict aside. Upon this question there was
difference of opinion, far my knowledge extends,
seen the court and the bar upon Grnysons TRIAL Mr.
on ono OF counsel for Gfayson, reduced TO writing
dry propositions which he Thought Wef; 10 DC oIu1eu
ihe opinion OF the General Court and submitted then
before he commenced his argument, ana cnqo;u 0!
whether would sustain him In contcnong lot 'hoss
nostions II they should be conroyerlcd by the counsel
Q nhe prnsrcu,ion informed him that would do
lmsde his argument before the Jury-aid down ana eS
med all his propositions, win an aoiy nave sciuo',
Witnessed and they not attempted 10 ue cohtro-
yedby the counsel for the prosecution on the contrary
NLeke who closed the argument Of The case stated 10 me
that whilst the opinion OF the denefa CouF' was emu
tho The most profound respect yet as the only question
4 be them was a question OF fact und not oi law, ana
uaey the only constituent tI!ers OF the iaet IL
wher duty to lind verdict IN conformity 10 ",ia. 'sy
byed the evidence found be entertained mo
opinion and believing the person 10 DC proved
tee guilty and entertaining not the slightest DOUBT
Of, guilt could not think, with any SORT OF proprieV
hu.ither advised noUe prostqtii given an instruction
jury acquit the prisoners and Tor the same reason
ued 10 grant new trial
I RICHARD Fl. FIELD.
WINpsoR, Nov. Is, 1850.
Ibayo heard Il rspor,ed that Judge Fields to
cont him about the hanging Of William Grayson and as
soasI made It known him that ho go. mp nnd asked me-
10 e drink OF brandy say that went TO Judge Fields
To II VIM. Grayson had gotten another new Hai[i ao
mob 10 consult MIN about hanging of the said Gray
sonor did do So; did Judge Field say any ming 10
me out It--ur should have known Judge ric"u oe',e
thao have gone him such OCCASION II had nau y
in eempalIon; for always looked upon Judge Field
as honorable man. and hope ever shall have too much
sespect try get any man to degrade hlseiii anu
hnot have always looked upon Judge Field to De
abodong any thing that you'd violate his ,n, pa h In s
the ,pe would moi bear II. Judge Field might not have
MOTH IT, COR he did make any reply Mt tho lime siaid
sonirne his house. and did take drink OF brandy before
| lefbut when invited 10 drink we had been done
talk, about Gruyson Tor some time, perhaps han an
hound hope that Judge Field is too much o. gentle
man off any nun IL for such act us me one sio-
ken believe him be such aud what motive any per-
SON ,ud huye had in 80 mis-stang what passed be-
tweels or OF what have said 10 any person aooht H.
caunsay or think unless it some friend Of VIM Gray
SON The purpose Of sanderng Judge Field or myself and
raj sIa difference between hereby state 10 all that
This " concern that it is either mistake 10 Them or
4 paole iulsehood 'ohN = LII ILL.,
! SrAsArDsyiLLE, Nov. %, 1880
DeSir Having learned, from yourself and others, that
il hasen nsnuard in quarters that the negro Gray
son e in Culpeper last summer did not receive inlI
( ;,ri, nd that have been charged win