The Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn. Territory) 1849-1855, 1850-07-11
Webster's Petition for Writ Of Error


cory OF PETITION.
Suffolk, IS. Supreme judicial Court, March
Term, 1850.
John W. Webster, Plaintiff in Error, vs.
The Commonwealth, Defendant.
And now John w. Webster, hereto
fore the defendant in certain indict-
ment for an alleged murder, whereon
judgment was rendered against him at
this present March term of this honora-
BILE court, comes and prays the Court
here that writ of error may issue on
the judgment aforesaid, returnable to
this Honorable Court at its present term,
on such day as the court may direct, to
the end that certain errors in the pro-
ceedngs and judgment of the Court on
the indictment aforesaid may be correct
ed, and that this honorable Court will
cause to be done in the premises what OF
right, and according to the law of the
land ought to be done.
Lsignedl JOHNW. WEBSTER.
The Points of error are:
lst. That the Supreme Judicial Court
did not require jurisdiction Of the accu-
sation against him, the said Webster.
I'd. Also, that the indictment in law
is not sufficient to warrant any Judgment
against him, because it does not iudici-
ally appear from any record before
Court that the Municipal Court accept
ed or acted upon the indictment against
him.
Sd. Also, that it does not and cannot
Ijudicially appear to the Supreme Judi
cial Court aforesaid, from any matter or
thing before it in the records and pro-
ceedings that the said Municipal Court
made any adjudication directing the
time when the said indictment should be
entered and have day in the said Su-
preme Judicial Court.
4th. Also, that the said Municipal
Court did not fix and adjudicatc that the
said indictment should be entered and
have day in the said Supreme Court a,
fixed or other certain time when ii
could be judiciaiIy known that the said
Supreme Court would be in session.
5th. Also, that ifthe Municipal Cour,
did fix and adjudicate that the said in
dictment should be entered at and have
day in said Supreme Court, at fixed
and certain time when it was judicially
known that said Supreme Court would
be ia session; yet that said indictment
was not in fact entered on said day in
said Supreme Court.
9th. Also, that it is not and cannot be
found, from any matter or thing in the
Supreme Conrt to be judicialIy known
to said Supreme Court that said J. w.
Webster was served with any order or
decree, or copy of such order or decree,
of said Municipal Court, fixing the time
when the said Indictment should be en-
tered in the said Supreme Court.
7th. Also, that no order or decree ol
said Municipal Court, fixing the time
when said indictment should be entered
in said Supreme Court, was ever legal
ly, or in fact served upon said J. w.
Webster SO that, in fact, the said
Webster was never legally transferred
from said Municipal Court to said SUI
preme Court.
. Sth. That neither the sentence pro-
nounced, nor the judgment rendered, by
this Honorable Court, on the indictment
aforesaid, is warranted by or in accor-
dance with the laws Of this Common
wealth, but that each is contrary there
to.
9th. Also, that there is error in this
that it appears by the record aforesaid
that the judgment aforesaid has been
given for the said Commonw ealth a.
gainst the said John w. Webster
Whereas, by the laws of the land the
said judgment ought to have been given
for the said John w Webster agains,
the said Commonwealth.
And the said John w. Webster prays
that the judgment aforesaid, for the err
rors aforesaid. may be revised, annul-
led and altogether held for nothing, and
that he may be restored to all things
that he hath lost by occasion Of said
judgment Signedl
PLINY MERRICK,
EDWARD D. SOHIER,
Counsel for J. w. Webster.