The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1851-09-04
NEW ORLEANS:
MoRNiNc. SEPT 4.
LOCAL INTELLIGENCE.

CH1TSs o. Bkg0My.-Iho examlndtton Of AR
mold Porter, on charge Of bigamy, came - yes
terdsy before Recorder Caldwell. PHI. O'Nsill.
Is one Of the counsel fsr the defence, scted toi
Elizabeth Porter, the prosecutrix and MT wife,
going ON the stand to give testimony " cited
from Roscos's Criminal EvidsncS, pages
$40 and 81, from Russell on Crimes, VI /, sage
207, proving. that the 6fst wife could not give tss
timony in case like this. Staske ON Evidence,
vol. 2, page (msrginal) 707, was also quoted,
showing that the real wife was incompetent TO BE-
q prosecutrix or witness, and the second wife
was alao incompetent until the first marriage was
clearly proved, by means Of witness who was
present ON the occasion.
Col. Field, for the defence, commended that the
case should be dismissed, ON the ground that the
wife could not make the affidavit, then in court, nor
could the court entertain it.
Recorder Caldwell said, that he would sdmit the |
points Of law raised to be valid but he had Wit
ness in court to prove the irst marriage.
COL Field commended, (and cited Whsrton,s |
American Law, page 204) that the psrty who |
could prove the marriage, was sione competent TO
make the affidavit; ~ the prosecutrix was not |
competent witness, it would be perfect anomaly,
that she could come ints court and make an afa- |
dsvt.
L. N. Gaiennis, for the defence, quoted from the
33d section Of an Act page -, Bullard and Cur
rvs Digest, in support Of the view taken Of the
matter by his colleagues.
Grisr Duncan, for the prosecution, centended
that the Recorder should only take = common
sense view Of the case the first wife was mot o.
fered as witness. she was only politely handed
chair, in order to await the coming Of the principal
witness for the prosecution. That party, counsel
contended, might not be willing to make an an.
davit in the case, and then the offender would 70
unpunished.
DR.. Robert Malcolmson (the witness alluded to
throughout the argumenD wac brought into court
under an attachment from the Recorder.
The citation in the case was directed to Thos.
Mocomson, hence the witness denisd the right Of
the court to retain him, and the Recorder accord.
ingfy discharged him from custody.
Col. Field, in reply to Mr.. Duncan, contended
that the law could not be modified to suit psrtic-
ular case. Judges l1sid COL Field have felt that
the crime for which party stood charged, and
convicted OF, deserved twenty years. imprisonment,
butrthe law only gave the Judge the power Of i'm
prisoning for two years. and he could mot consult
his feelings thus. II twelve slaves saw white
man murder his wife, still, although the magistrate
might feel that the offence was committed by the
white man, yet be could not modify the law by
taking the affidavit OF the whole or portion of the
slave testimony offered
MIR. Duncan observed that il was historical
fact that 4 white man was hung in this State on
the Testimony Of q black man.
Col Field said he was not aware Of the fact ; he
contended that the idea was adverse toevsry law
oil the State.
Mr.. Gsiennie, as an older man than Mr.. Greer,
said he wished to state the facts Of the case su.
ded to by the gentleman. They were these An
old man resided on Ichoupitouias street, beside
him, (Mr. u some years ago, and had killed one
OF his own slaves, In stable OF clubhouse. The
community knew that he had committed the crime
under the most unwarrsnabie circumstances.
siaye was somehow or other purchased and manu-
United, and on MS testimony the white man wa
hung.
hecofoer Oaidweii sald ne could see no dlner
ence In his not dscharging the prisoner and hi
dischatg'ng him he could discharge him, it wa
trns' but y he did ne would have him re'arreste'
on = Dencn warrant
The aecu,ed wa. nronouncsd :. d;.oh,,..d an,
then r..,r,e.ted bv ord, of ~. Court s
Dr. M.lcolmsou wa. them brought into our, AN,
,,...d a, n. w;,n.., .,,na n. te,,;r - ,,.
fnIloxyu. Ha rai1 he knevy he
i,.u El;,sh.,h Row,.v he n,o..cr,,;v h. ,,,
,,...,, =, ,,.,,;.o. az III ,.,,;.. .hor, ,b,..
Tour vs,r. 400 e. New Yo,L a;d M, Inns, n
street bnt 4 WA, of Broadvav did No, Lno,v n;
,.,. ..i.,;,.a ~ .l.,rvD,sn ~. c,,,n. - ~,
80. 80 ~, -. s,sonah ,ha,s =. =. .,.. !;
the habit Of seeing them performed; he knew tn
parties as living together here as man and wife
they were married in a house, not in church h
thought he saw written document given tn
clergyman remarked, at the time, that the Bird,
groom was quite a Young lad Porter was n.
more than q wears of age now, not more than
then he knew him as ! child. he thought the,
v.s no nerxon bv at the marriage but the mart,
sb.m.slve. the ner.on who acted AZ clercvma
~ h;..s.w. \. d;d ~, know ,,,he,h.r ,bs =. !,
.sH.;.,;... 49,. n,;.s, =, ,o, he h.d M ,.hs. ,
- ,;a 80. =. r., ,.o,,d 49, os ~.
did not know il there was any other person pre-
en,-there might have been woman.
This concluded the Doctors testimony, and Il
Recorder, at this stage Of the proceedings cont
ued the case over TO Monday next.
IN N,
iou"g ~ Aae" As1an'I. me Ease OF lou
A'en Ds' ino"as mcnn'eh'' not aheeeo ''o'
oaneu Up ses'e.s - .o. .:a a.oa
10, "eu'e. a. M' po'e'u'o' ~" no' appoI.'
.''s1 .o.''e. 80. - =. - '"e. ''
""ut w Huso MY siofo " w WssA sbAo sunttchs q