The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-03-19

he was the private counsel OF the Kidd SALVAGE comps
ny ana tnus ne made himself the object Of remark
Dus mere 40 statement that he was Influenced by
Zee ss private counsel and lawyer forrets anyth.c
s;s NJ ne never never vii o,sst his fee: lLaughtsr)
tns. Hndross was used as witness in the civil suits
pardoned and in the criminal sst Against Csrnsntsr
he was examined after the pardon. Counsel them rs
ferred to the convice cd feoR True f. Young who WAS
pardoned BY Gov. Briggs, and also examined on ths
trial Of Carpenter and hs would then ask ii it was not
true that convicted feons moist from the dungeon
did lend their aid to crush innocent man and hs
would slso ask of the highest officers in thu
State justified In urng those pardons for the pur
pose Of usng those men ss witnesses? II the editor
OF newspaper did not comment upon such proceed
ing he would be reoreant TO his duty snd he (coun
se would cay that there Is parallel for such pro
ceeding TO be found II for these comments he is
BE- prosecuted In every county in the State whore II
the liberty OF the press IL this precedent would bs
allowed to be established II Mr. Jordan hal beer
lbelled, the civil courts open to him but the
jury here should not allow him to take this
from county to county where the people Of the county
40 to prosecute his action for him The defendant
was ready to meet him anywhere but the jury should
set their hands ON the and say that these
private matters between private citizens should be
settled In the civil courts Of their city aud not in
the criminal court Of this county. II George wilkes
found guilty here 1t must be Of . crime-of an In
any intentional wrong! Have they shown any ma
nee On the contrary, the editor says, after stating
IaOtG, t0eC the pOefttou OF Mr. Jordan
and Mr.. McKson entitled them TO rssp.ct, and that
they In their zeal had permitted themselves to be
Counsel thsn offered to put in evidence the rsport
OF the trial Of Carpenter, contain ed the Police
Gazette, and to which the article complained Of re-
sci offered to read the notes Of the trial taken by
Judge Ed.srds, before whom the cause was heard.
The Judge ruled that the defence were not in
proper position yet to offer them In evidence
Counsel for defence then offered tho testimony of
Judge Edwards, taken de bene esse.
Mr. Msthsr wanted to know what they desired to
and Young were examined at the trial OF Carpenter
and that the Attorney General produced their par.
Mr. Msher objected to this As It was no psrt of ths
present libel TO say that these were examined ON
that trial charge against isver that he intro.
duced witness who was convicted, and had been
psrdoned Is not libel nor is IL complained of here
as being libelous.
NJ The Judge admitted the testimony under the oh
Counsel then read tho examination of Judge Ed.
wards, In which he stated that he presided in the
Court Of Oyer and Teiminer, associsted with Alder.
men jackson and Ingersol At the trial Of Charles II
CaIpenter that the trial lasted he believes Yards
for Andross Il Is hie (deponents) Impression that
1t wss granted on the condition OF his testifying
against Carpenter thinks Mr. Brady objected to the
pardon, on tho grounds OF its containing condition
After some furt her testimony the deponen said
Carpenter was acquitted the jury having been ou,
Counsel defence then offered to read the note, Of
Judge Edwards taken at that trial
Mr. Jordan objected but tho Judge decided that
there we're portions OF the notes which might be
ceiyeo as evidence.
Counsel for defence proposed to read them with
all the witnesses sworn and examined OF the ts.ti.
mory they proposed only to read that Of Andros aud
Mr.. Jordan objected Suppose their testimony wa,
fase, could they prove that the prosecuting officers
were aware Of that fact he asked have the counsel
for the defendant yet approached anything am cunt
Ing TO q defe nee OF the charge here
The Judge sad the charge, as he understood II, is
that the Attorney General and District Attorney used
those for toe purpose OF copvicting Carpenter;
and ht thought that in that view they were at liberty
TO read them as evidence
protecute IN this and 10 preserve his chaacter
and b. contndsd ths.ths evidence of thsss men
they sworo falsely would not show that the prose
cutting officers we're aware OF 1t.
The Judge ruled that the defendant cannot 20 into
ADdI oss and Young were examined The court were
unable 10 gee tc relevancy Of the testimony on that
trial the irsue mere g as may be ne cessary
20 show that these men we're exa mined they may usa
tfen, but cannot read their testimony that trial
Counsel Tor defence excepted to this ruling, and
then again offered in evidences The report OF the trial
Itself rs contained In The Police Gazette which was
alec ruled inadnissbie excepted TO by Defendant
council Counsel fer defence then offered 10 evidence
tae examination Of Mr. Nandervoot the clerk of the
Court ol Sessions, and Of the Csurt Of oyeg aud Ter
miner, TO show that Young and Antress two con
visited islons
The court allowed the evidence subject tie obiec-
uon Of the prosecution.
The tesiimony Of Mr.. Naudervoo.t was then read.
lt went TO show tdst there had been four indie
syaibst n0ro,s to one Of which Ae had pleaded gut,
he not tritd the others There we're three in.
dieiment sgsinst True y. Young Tor forgery in the
second degree, otbrrvire, for passing counterfeit
money Counssl then offered the four dis,ments
sgaiItt VIM n AndIoss for forgery in the second is
gree hkewie pesting counterfeit money $40 bul.l.
ds q there be bad PLEADED guilty Counsel then
put in, In evidence, the Indictment which Carpen.
tes vss Sied and aoqetsd it vas an indictment tor
forgery In the second degree Counsel then put In la
evidence (suhecs 10 oh scton OF the prosscuicn) the
d,Positcns OF Ex1overror Young In which he stated
that he was applied 90 b. Nr jordan for pnrcon
Wm. Andtoss aud that the pardon which wa.
Efahtsd contained condition, ths ouly one he ever
gfauisd containing tueb conditions and also, that no
relative or MEND OF ndross applied FOR the par.
dtn course then read the pardon itsei 10 dated
lst July 1913 and stated tha. 1t upon tns eona
ton tbat Anstoss dc enter into rscosnzanse 20 ap.
pear aud testify the tfsvtrss % the uiictme at
sesinst ChsIls- II. Csrpenttr.n Counsel then read
re letter tf Gov toGng 20 ar Jordan, snd Nj Jor.
eens answer, relative 70 The PaFdoning oi Aniros,
The Governor IA his letter, asked AIR Jordan Tor any
piormsion relative 10 the circumstances of Aniro,s
case, With view 10 ascertain II he pfoper sub
Jet for pardon Mr Jorcans latter gave history Of
tte thele facts and concluded ~ stating that hi.
opinion might Is gathtrte from these facts !. 20
NhttLer lie contidsfed Anaross proper fubject fer
executive clt m.ncy
The court here took a recess.
ssKNtSa Session
On the ~. ss,merg 81 the court Of hali past two
o'clock ctuns.l tor defence pfocet Jed TO oder Ia evil
Cspce the d positions OF Govsrn0r Hamilton Fish and
q letter of Dir Jordan snd MT. Mckeon TO the 60.
vernon There wefe objected TO b the prossc ution
Mr. MRtLsr stated bis objection 10 be- that not one
vcrd Of tntse ssposions has references TO apy part n
tie libel Judge Edwards, in his deposition, states
tfat reference made the trial OF Carpenter
10 any pardon granted By Governor Fish.
Counsel Ter defence offered the deposition, for the
purpoe ot laying the foundation Tor introdu sing the
psfcon, TO which they refer, In evidence They also
onet The letter ~ thosihg the motives tor which tae
ysrdon vac asksd
Mr. Jordan said that Il would appear that before
that pardon Andso. vas competent witness 10 the
cesei he bad pleaded guilty but had not been sen
tenced ON The other indictment. a. the Court deem
td u neesssry that there should be evidence of con
tctn q the principal (Androts before the accessory
tCarpenter) could be found guilty, ths couassl for
The prosecution produced bic tAnGross'D conviction;
but the pardon On that indictment not referred
10, Ter heard e. until ttme time subsequent TO that
tftgl
rne Judge raid that the opnon Of the Court is that
tie tsstimony offered Is not admssioie. Except
I'd 10
Council for defence offered In evidence the re-
core ~ the two convictions OF True Young
Mr. Jordan ssid that these papers were not properly
extmgnttd