The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1850-04-01

-e%1--
THE SHIP RUssIA-This long protracted ex-
ANIMATION has at last terminated in the honorable
discharge of Capt. Wilson. The Commissioned
lread written opinion, in which he comedies with
1.-The counsel for the accused, that there is no proof
that the ship was Intentionally burned and MOTH
ling whatever to inculpate the Captain One Of the
editors of this paper having appeared for the ac-
.eused, we have been careful to abstain from any
remarks on the case during the examination. And
will now only say that the decision of the Com
missioner accords with that Of every person who
was present during the investigation. Suits have
been already commenced on the policies. We think
the Insurance Companies should have reserved a
criminal prosecution until the evidence in the civil
suit had discovered the guilty parties. Mr.. Prem
itiss, in his argument, commented with great power
on a, professional custom which he wished to see
of having the Government
zaided by counsel retained by private persons to
procure convictions. He said it was many years
since he had refused to prosecute in capital
And he never would, hereafter, appear in any case
for the State. 1t is within PERSONAL knowledge
Y that he refused fee Of five thousand dollars tc
prosecute in capital case. We commend this
course to the gentlemen of the profession for thei
Reconsideration. We give an extract from the opn
lion of the Commissioner:
81 DECISION OF Hon. j. BALDWIN, q. s. Commissioner
Case of United States Capt WlSoR. After long
became his duty 10 determine whether he should return th
aceused for trial before a!s Jury or discharge him
ia ti pToTaSed N All the attend
examned as though il was trial before jury and that to
capital offence This he did regret, although it ha
attended with some Inconvenience for when charges
their and consequences preferred
over, by and against such respectable he had
willing submit to it, in order that the prosecution
well the accused might have opportunity
In making final decision of this case he felt most sensibl
the responsibility involved yet he trusted and believed
sense Of bis duty but disposed to perform well toward
the government well as the accused. Should he, how
An writers upon the duties of examining magistrates agree
does not require the same proof to return the accused
There must however be clear and convincing proof that
sbs ba il was eommtted by the accused The duty Il al
examining magistrate became imperauve he must IN sue
Here tie Commissioner read the opinion Of Chief Jsstc
larshal as duties of examining magistrate. Cite
eemed proper probable suspicion of guilt, to send tn
a The Commissioner stated that crime prove
have been perpetrated then proof Of the probability Of
~ Elementary writers upon criminal Jurisprudence well
ing magistrate to return for trial all persons charged wit
capal Offences otherwise he might nsnrp the province OF
laid think examining magistrate to be entirely wthou
discretion but On the connaIy elotnea win It hke othe
Hence, he had sometimes deemed privilege, as well as
duy to discharge for an accusation involving capita
punhmen where he convinced OF the innocence OF tn
accused and he had the satisfaction of knowing that the
rcse OF this high prerogstve had not only been scrunlze
ons aud by his enlightened constituents Here he read tn
afdayit and the testimony of Mrs. Ross Mrs Chambers
and Eliza Harris, vi e. and commented upon themI Il
being dserepant many witnesses have declared they wou
mot believe Mrs. C. and e on oath and does it substan
ont offence OF more must be associated. The verl
4 Ii So BY and between whom The District Attorney upo
to warrant further proceeding against Dr. Knapp and there
ore asked his release, which readily and cheerfuy
plied withereby leaving only Wilson and Jones. But
obvious the testimony does substanate the charg
aganst them for, besides, Of the witnesses KNOWN
presume it conspiracy, would be to against light an
4 knowledge.
Hike upon trial in chief to the counts in the indie
nen but extends around the entire circle of Grimes it b.
comes his duty determine whether the evidence impcate
the accused in crime other than that of the consprac
aedged In fact, TO determine whether they probah
guilty of having set fire TO and burnt the Russia.
As the evidence adduced sustain this direct but
ey ercumstanla TO determine the force OF which neee
ry involves consideration of such evidence by the rules
That the ship was destroyed and that by fire. esabshe
the accused, any other person, he to infer? He
the hypothesis IS shewas set IRE TO BY theacensed Now
Are ali The facts adduced consistent with this hypothess
Are the circumstances Of conclusive naturel
Are the circumstances so strong as to leave no doubt
4 gullt !?
Does each circumstance tend to establish the gutP
Fnaly-dO the circumstances exclude every other h.
pothesis ?
All are 30 completely negayed by the proof that he
not conclude the ship was wiuly and nacously fire
and believing he deemed it act of supererogaton
quire whether the accused guilty notthere being
4charged.