The New York herald., 1850-06-08
Peiice Intelligence.
Rafora Iuatice QHhor~

THE " "ToRPRDo' CHARGE A0AIr Sr ONE EYED ruonr
soN-fHE DECISION OF CHE MAGISTRATE
At lattws have the judgment OF the magistrate ON
the torpedo" declarations and confessions made by
Thompson, in various parts Of the country We at
first ndsavored 20 condenss the Justices written docu
nsnt, but On doing We should perchancs take away
some Of the very curious inuen ndoes and reec
which appear in various parts to reject the
pursued in this affair by the prosecutin attorney
We therefore give the decision in full and let the
public reflect and draw their own con slusions there
from. We shall review the whole matter in a day or
two. and ndeavor to point out the and secret
movements prsetieed Of late in procuring indict-
ments &c.
DECISION.
The prisoner has been brought before by virtue
Of the direction OF another magistrate endorsed upon
his commitment, directed to the sheriff OF the city and
formal complaint has been preferred against the pri-
soper. and am compelled to rely entirely upon the
county, and the assistance which he has kindly rem
dersd me- In the course Of the examination tho
have been elected that in the month of May. 1sS a
certain box containing explosive matter,
the house OF Thomas Warner Of this city, and is
alleged with the intent to destroy life; that subse-
quenlly thereto, Thompson and Samuel Drury
arrested upon suspicion of being implicated in the
affair but for want Of sufficient proof discharged
That. in the Of u few months afterwards upon
testimony submitted to the magistrate Drury and his
son we're arrested. examined and committed for trial
The elder prury was afterwards tried at the Court of
Oyer and Terminer the jury not agreeing he dis
charged bail Ii the trial of Drury that
witnesses from Canandagua were examined, and their
testimony went TO show that Thompson as early as
the month Of May lS49 had openly proclaimed in pub
lie houses in that place that he the inventor or
maker of the box which had caused. much excite
mept in the community Upon the deli very Of this
timony. warrant issued by the presiding Judge.
for the arrest OF Thompson who at that time in
prison in Kings county, upon a charge of forgery
Tho remained there until his trial. acquits and
dschafge, when he brought to this city and then
(several months having olapsed) committed for
examination by the Judge who issued the warrant,
no examination into the matter having up this time
taken place and further invest being had lin
the prsmises) The proceedings before have been
conducted by the Assistant District Attorney on
rei.,ion to the matter being entremely imitl a.
ed-haying no reliable facts in my possession.
! am indebted to him entirely for all the
evidence produced for the people (on that sidG)
1t is submitted to that enough ha. been
shown TO justify me in committing the prisoner for
fence has been perpetrated is admitted and 1t remains
to be- ssen what con nection Thompson has had with
the affair ON the part OF the prosecution, the wit
nesses welton Failing Greig Bird Bennett aud Curtin
have sworn thst Thompson has, at various times
svowed himself to be the inventor maker, SC, of the
box in question. This At least Is the Interpretation Of
their testimony as contendsd for by the prosec
believe neither of them except Margaret Curtin and
Bird attempted TO connect the sending Of IL with him
Upon careful review of the statements of Mr.
Greig IL is rendered very doubtful whether the con-
versaions OF Thompson at Ca nandaigua at all Justify
the conclusion that he meant to say, did say
that he the actual maker Of the box in
or in other words thstthst box was the work of hls
hands Certain it is that Mr. Greig has never en-
tertained such idea his statement mas been made
with great caution, and impeachment OF his veraci-
ty has been attempted This IL subst sutally all the
evidence upon which the warrant Of Judge Edmonds
for Thompsons arrest issued and 1t appears that
the witnesses Curtin and Bennett examined on
Drury trial although at that time immediately with
in reach Of the process of the Court Why their tes
mony was not had at that time have not been given
to understand Is IL not singular that in the face Of
the alleged public avowals OF Thompson which
first made upwards Of year ago, action has been
taken by any Of the several Grand Juries which have
been empaneled since the warrant Of FIRST
Issued account for 1t only upon the supposition
that other facts connecting the prisoner with the com
mission Of the offence were supposed to exist and in
the course Of Development 1t with this impress
sion upon NY mind that entered upon the examns- |
ton, which has resulted only In recaptuaton of he
facs already known to the authorities. With all the
vigant exerons and commendable zeal Of the prose-
cutting oGcer, nothing beyond this has been elected
With regard to the testimony OF wit nssses Patterson
and Bird will only that the fact that
nesses, (nore than year agol one OF whom was
aitschee to the Office OF the Chief OF Police and
that they did not, to thing which Thompson said
attach sufficient Importance to warrant them In
ing an investigation into the matter am inclined to
knownto officers of the Law fully clothed with the |
to the peIPe,rators No ofieal notice, however. ap
pears TO have been taken OF them and will not n
tsr,.in an idea :her OF nesgsnee or Ignorance Of
voted much time and labor in their sealous efforts
seek out ihe truth need hardly refer to the defence
shown here by the prisoners counsel suicet to say,
that the whole testimony appears to be OF specula
tive character 1 cannot conceive any circ umstanees
which could operate TO induce guilty thus openly
TO proclaim his own nfsmy except upon the theory Of
well fortified assurance Of immunity the penalty
of the law through it, m or Of a me-
intent yielding TO the ehdngs of remore neither Of
which do believe have operated in this case What III
any other circumstances which might have been ad
dsced in evidence may be within the wedge
authorities what tfapy) motives Of public policy
control the exclusion OF the testimony of Witnesses
v hose names have been mentioned In the course OF
hese proceeding and which testimony t Is supposed
by many might throw farther light upon this most
complicated subject lam unable TO say. The prisoner
has been constantly before the public and their const-
utcd authorities. No lack Of energy that sm aware
~ can be imputed anywhere in endcavoring to unv-
The great mystery, which for whole year has hung
Of the most atrocous fconies that has ever
been attempted In our midnt; and am constrained to
'sy that Mt this moment there appears bs bat fcw
Indications Of any tangible reliable devslopements
calculated to disspate the doubts and uncertainties
hich have 80 long surrounded this whole affair am
endant upon such evidence ms has been laid before
snnot be Justified and by the reluctance which has
,sen manifested by Of cur highest Judicial func-
onarier TO commit for trial upon testimony feeble
,ncerfnin and IN definite in its character. am ad-
he'd that neither the spirit the policy Of the
Nv d. mands such action at my hands. shall there
ore difcharge the prisoner from custody, aud shall
raDsmit all my proceedings to the proper officer uhe
)strie Attorney for such further action may be
lee med proper.
n Good .irroinfmenf-Mr James Hopkins one of the
ccnt members OF police. OF the Third ward has been
hosen by the aldermen aud assistants. to fIl the
flee OF Captain Of Police OF that ward. made vacant
y the resignation Of lfr. WnlAms The Mayor has
on med the nomination.