New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-02-02
Trial Of samuel Drury ON Charse OF At
teuptins 90 Murder Mr.. Thomas Warner

fCs.siaueS frs- Fssrft Pag>J
NJ s;s,x.s resumed ftt had Seen TIE intention % iN
Teoss.Ss nd Darlssscn woa have 90 u
fh-tr avn stamp bgt he Witnesses are rtspeStsoc eh
~ "a. maze 10 suppOss Aa b Was heard Only ~ osc
Win xhor h wss eoaversng snt he anew, even n No
s..rs eetrayed ha tner testimony wcoid eos oe oseNS
by jar. and Be spoke feTstors WIN pSsSs e -,
We ind Mr. Drlry quietly Waking mo NJ room 80
Thompson Darlington Tor ne perpose o. soosIsenE
another scheme that rrs,ag ,oe % hs provincial esN
81 he .-rasus u he box To show that Was nos
Conspiracy. the inEnAcy OF Mr.. D. win fnSnpsoo 40
Be Dot a nsz who could easily have ben trapped nto
nsking admissions He would, # act gully Al onee ast.
denied his participation IN sending he box Nhcn A. -
mission necessary eseu IN civil casa TO mruS' m
ends Of gs,ice il = perfectly proper, eosh ~ .esA -
mora pOat u view 70 resort 20 sratagem IN ne Asc
Brooklyn Mr. DrGry Commenced nc conversation minse.
as the Provinceown bs anc made 81 srrangenens an.
Bristol BIZ should % hs house a. Astoria Win -
bills lMr q here he testimony 10 " h~i Vas said
bv Thompson DrTy ard Darlington IN rcgsrd 10 ne ooN
s-ut ~ NJ WArner and COMMENCED n The deieucr,
- said attempted 10 cUntrovsrs he testimony
NJ could not have been gucfSnt OF NE cnAcisf OF ""
| mouy Of the oAcrrs viii perfect iruis-
Nj q commended that the mosiy. hal been sho~a-.a'
threats showed deep an fe aanosiy t0wsrd NJ
Drurv This ,hre days arrwsTS ~ss decOy
~, ~, md f,nr coun,erri 10 bills innocent h.
a placed IN his hands Il e utterly qfvpo-teras 10 tAk OF
co.plrscv Esch Juror present 10 himself The cues
or lesvinr out al the cry shout conspirarv whether M
Drrrv a. The nom IN brookyn, dd sa" Ia uAi G, se'ss
/ ',,n yshSi has been alleged M sAd he would admit
f.f he prosecution bound show prisoner guilty
"a ,s,r hev proved csse which ~. and Zee alone,
eapsin and he siienL q Circumstance IN preot
! - he charge Where Dnlfy on the night Of DE
| N NAV He ami MS son are charged Win having en
h,t boy on that night Il either OF them could have
.bovp where he was il would have been saheien, bnl
"a shown hy neither The theory OF ne case u s ne eef
:, 80 Dyvs concerted the plan and the by deiNefus
ne box carried inio edeci they knew such ehAfsr
| Nas made against hem one week aer~Au Nh.n ui'N
could shown where they were on MAJ nsa' o. >.
rsn reading IN the country, with ten children and yet
CANNOT tell whether they home on ina ngh % TOY
Mr. Warner has shown BY me testimony 90 Ssosv "a
lsruoe that he himself he evening md nisnt o. hr 81
"a u Pm lphis Mr. q. read case. King vs. trsnes
" Burdeti that the sbsence OF expansion whesr !. SS
be given /. m support OF he charge as to the assertion
! mai Mr. Warner committed the otence-am MOI mere 10
defend the moral character OF Mr. W aruefhere y 'oe
palisou however In his going on that sisnd WIN suo
iusd and broken spirit and Vet tesiNiug win hahAhess
,ha, denoted truth they have charged mat he not Only
nenpafed tAkiug e of his wife but % his SON. rea
i've 20 HON in letter from Rochester he expressed ne
best fee ing and stated his intention ultimately OF isAng
design wa. BY Mr. Warner. Mrs Warner would have nrs
suspected IL Mrs W states N her testimony 'here hsd
nf h..u any feeling between her and Mr.. W nat pre-
vented the interchange u ordinary courtesy snd S,sues
! Mr. q appealed The Jury m relation 10 Mr. w as re
! R,f dsv snd having the reference At B O'Clock, he
sss necessarily IN hurry having la'' rr'9 'nes
M. dress and had other business probably ha - ususl
with every business man and lad but hts ume 20
yet fo Mr. Ruggless ofcC A. 70 telling his son 10 open
The box after he gone great stress was aid upon
he need have opened The eoN instead Of whch lie a9
powder and matches originally adjusted nr-t and the
bottom placed on sner was hied In thai Way The 10
XII his wife ard child instead o. telling Them for God
| sake to ay Tor their lives he need not TO have said
ANYTHING escaped himself and the circumstsnces u'l
der Which he box was zen be stated by the gih.
| Ia Il probable, had he known the danger, that he
would have exposed s tts WeeIe voc ou ,l,, ~
And this ths Counsel for defense ash you to convict
Warner and seaoii prur had they aey Shown ina. n,
| W uttered threat that he would nN HE ianiiy-hsd he
been overheard to SAY az Dru vas ma DC nad sem '
Regrets that ANY should be involved As Mr Warner Il
IN mora point Of view, tut would be an outrage 10
convict Warner OF the crime and send Drury abroad IN
tue World In 10 Thompson ~ anadaigue
a. represented By witness stated that the box As mad.
for other ends than destroy Warner lie Druy and
Darlington, connected, and II may be- well lhN
Thompson prepared the box for other purpose MI
Dmry at Brooklyn said II stick together oil h.
cant each Il have been made TO blow up some
Police oihcer m attempting to arrest them 10 me name
al heir homes allow motives 90 prevent the uphited
| arm OF he law from falling on the guilty party Mr. q
spoke nearly three hours
Judge EDsoNDs then gave his charge lie said tue fret
inquiry will be whether there has been attempt I'd take
the hie Thomas Warner Describes the machine and is
| effects Here has been an attempt 10 lake he 10 wac
shown that the Indictment only spoke OF an attempt TO XII
| Thomas Warner Who wasthe guilty party Prosecunom
| say u Mr. Druy defense say sent by Mr. War
ner himself The main inquiry is did Dmry doit' aud hs
= The only hing by which yon can convict him II IS no.
necessary ha you should Mr. Warner did H. The ques
aon vast Mr. Druy or any other person not Mt Dry
Had Dury motive There must be motive In lnquirinR
is not necessary conclude II adequate motive
It's difficult for msn who act up 10 the law moral aud h
10 trace the motive persons committing crime
| reads quotation on The point As 10 Dury what mo
i've had be- On Two occasions he uttered violent threats
against Mr. Warner ind gnant AMI angry Al him and
says time he ought to have been blown up The ma
chine exploded he tzy that the reference DetN
them 10 come Ayarce IL passion A. strong 81
revenge and when they march together tho balance OF con
Science may be- OyefihrOWn u Is for the Jury ~ see
II they Ind operating the mind of the prisoner
those Feelings which have been alluded ~ by The proseeu
u0n Some motive. whether adequate not musi not be
| overlooked
The next enquiry Ii. was the defendant secluded hat
hs could commit The ofeu,e h. In this vicinity had
| he liz
be- commit Il The testimony be found In his comics
sous Independent of Them here IL no testimony Ia war
conviction IL Is true confessions sometimes unrr
liable but free scknow Judgments become most Satisfactory
Whee they are dangerous when 20 person bat single
witness was present man could fabricae such comics
sious Blu when made presence Of several and there
other circumstances 10 corrobOrae IT, there reason
uisrecolecon, but memorandum almOs, Immediately
aerard madeb the officers, who have been called 10 tes
fy since The Jury will decide ifruly stated As c0nObO
rsnon, esufy % The Conversation Mr. smith as
par,-he Mrs Van Bunis The having been used
The character HE considering the indlydu
lend 10 1.-The subsequent interview with Thompson, The
asking why I was NOT arrested ioo-the ease with which
he Thompson whose character - known. Then the
other hand here has been deception used as " OTy and
We must be cautious not deceived. large reward
offered and must think whether a might
have been given 10 the conversation Then again Is the
confession Of Thompson thai he had manufactured the insi
meni, and al the same nmo stated his gnOniny
saying there were number OF indictments over him Then
evidence that Mr Dnry In the con
yersaOn as 10 he box, bu Ia gave silent
and 'he other confirmed The Jury must weigh here bad
not been mistake Then The parties whom It wa. al
believing heir testimony would not be- received II YOU
believe Drury made e confession ihs officers have ul,
related you have 10 that Dmry Ia strong hostility To Mr.
Warner having opportunity aud cOniess.ng two Of HE
assocatcs Do crime IL IL tor The jury ~ say. On part Of
defense Il said was done by Mr. Warner ~ destroy his
wife II said also MAJ have been by Miss Bnsby
Or others bat there nothing shawn In he way Of threats
or Otherwise proved except from the prisoner tho bar
On one side It Is said Warner the other Dry the tesumo
ny goes 70 shew thai Warner the guilty man; that may
he found In the couss 10 his fsuyhis recommending
bis Intimacy with The young girl, his letter ron Rochester
bic saying 20 his daughter ihsi her mother and hmse must
separate his saying while he had dollar he would study
his comfort On the part " his wife, IL said the dis
Satisfaction wss not 80 great a. 70 prevent cyiss be
tween hem 4 has been said be could have aban
doned he wife here 80 he did In London but his situation
ny The woman with whom he had associated. Then ask
rom him. yoG must be governed by circumstances Spoke
because expected box, bat DR. M0a and
testify TO the call for business and h. being Phlade
on 1a evening II b. knew for the first tis he
90 70 Phiiadepha that day Il explains although b. NIGH
have known he day before. Then again what viii MAKE
against him bis employing Thompson, fOr a long inns
whose character VA iniamoasend you ind Thompson
have sad h- made that box, bot not 20 Mr Wauers
ie 20 Tar a. reference can be Intimacy the par
mn nair IN Mr. Warner. Then the circumstance OF his
Wa dangerous yet told bis when gons 70 open
dice, Or desire destroy vile child As 10 ths
fF-TN The 49, 81 a..