The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-03-20

proved how Mia Gambie VAS By . trick aud q
falsehood, attracted into tho rooms Of house in
Scrrs street. and was obliged, by threats to write
promise OF marriage, and was for q long time
detained against her will.
Finally, hc answered tho reasons which the de-
fonsors OF WikoG could bring in his favor. He ro-
pulsed them, and argued that the accused could not
give any good motive for his defouce.
He finished by adding few words on the justice
OF his conclusions
The Attorney Genera, then, revising the result of
the oral instruction. demonstrated that the proofs
were sufficient 20 sustain the triple imputa ton
charged to Wikoff he said that the fact of detcn-
ton was undeniable, and was proved by all the
documents. IL was impossible to find in this case
any cause OF extenuati0n the fact of the offence
was determined by the law in tho 2l2d article which
Was written for determining the competency Of the
tribunal After having examined the degree of
Imputation as to that circumstance it was mpossi-
BILE to apply the minimum of the punishment in that
cited article. That by the letters of Wikof written
before his arrest, and also the witnesses tho facts
were proved. The mputation of threats equally
proved, and under the application Of the 47th arti
Gle OF law, the possession of dangerous arms was
also proved, and he Upe Attorney GENERALLY believed
that the first sentence of tho l9Sth article app
cable. He concluded by asking an imprisonment Of
three years for the first accusations six months of the
Same punishment for the second, and six months
more for the third.
AS for Louis Vannoud, he said that he might be
considered the principal agent in the first crime and
was punishable by an imprisonment of three years.
and he asked also for three months similar punish
ment for the retention Of those dangerous pistols
AS to Cavallari, he said that il completely in that
crime resulted from his knowledge and his will, of
course he could not doubt for moment Of the exist
once oil the imputation, aud concluded by asking a
punishment of one year in prison He finished by
asking for the confscation Of the arms and the ac-
cessory puniShments
Lawyer Clio. Maurzio was the first to speak in de-
fence of the accused. He began his speech by
throwing rdculo upon the nature of the fact
which the public minister painted with such black
colors, and. after having alluded to the beautiful
position in which the principal actor of the crime
was placed, in discussion, and relying on the
thority of the two most creditable journals of the
world, LIE Steele and La Prcsse, he commended that
it was morally impossible that Henry Wkof could
commit, for base motives, the offence of which he
was then accused. Having so commenced, the de-
fonsor passed to scientific discussion, the aim of
which was to demonstrate that the sequestration of
person, defined in the 2i2d article of the penal
code, had not, in the present appearance Of the
facts, uridical existence. In order to prove tha
proposition, the defcns0r argued that the arrest
an illegal crime, which reflected upon tho adj
mnstraton Justice; that it belonged to the class Of
the na1esfatic offences, and that there nothing
in this case which in any manner Interested the
particular persons. He read the definition which
was found in the 237th article of the penal code,
conceived in these terms: $ Whoever, without an
order of the competent authorities, and out of
fragrant crime and of public clamor, and in other
cases for which the law authorizes the arrest of
offenders, shall have arrested, detained, or Sc
questrated any person, by whatsoever motive, and
which had not for its object another special crime,
or have lent place to execute the detention or the
sequestration, will be sentenced to the punishment
of imprisonment
He deducod from the above definition that requi-
site of the illegal arrest, if it had taken place.
some motive. He explained the true nature of the
crime, and sustained that in the present case Wiko
had no fiscal meaning in that arrest, with the ain,
fextorton; no therefore could not verify the crime
contemplated by the above cited article. The de-
fensor said that in such circumstance the fol-
lowed the principles which were found on the files of
crimes. Who, with the guide of Professor Mitter-
mayer, would believe these crimes, and would con-
tend that such theory had formally become or was
the practical application of their magistrates! He
developed the difficulties which attended his system
of defence; that was to say in the present the
special crime would not be verified since the sentence
Of the accusation said that it could not proceed
der that title There was this difficulty, that the
law did not speak Of the effective act. The exact
ness of these principles practically demonstrated
by the defensor by those taken from the of Mi
che Terre, who was accused only OF single offence,
and was of necessity condemned for two offences, for
the reason that the Magistrate of Appeal in not al
uding to the completion of the act, had declared him
guilty of two distinct oniencesnn Illegal arrest and
an attempt at extortion. Coming to the applca-
ton Of these principles the deiensor sustained that
the same mistake could yet happen to the accused,
and they had not an absolute certainty of the crime
OF extorton. The defensor concluded by saying that
the tribunal could not justly pronounce any sentence
Lawyer Mariadi spoke after him. and tried to de-
monstrate how wonderful il was to see called a. an
offence the event which had been the object of that
long discussion lie said, THAT could it be an object
OF romance, or comedy, but that it does not belong
to the jurisdiction of human Justice" Then briefly
abiding to the above documents, he judged and
suggested that the event in question excluded the
combination of the elements which constituted the
offence Imputed to Mr.. Wikof. He showed that if
the fact should be considered sinister view the
evidence was wanting to establish the offence of the
illegal scqucstration because it not proved that
Wikof had acted in manner to violate the liberty
of Miss Gamble, and the result that she could
have left the room if she had the firm r.o,r,;on +
departing Examining the letters. and the snirt Of
.nc Iiaa af'icie 81 penal code, he excepted in
eacn case INC application of a sentence. He spoke
upon the fact Of the threats of which Wikof was ac
cused. He said that the 49sth article of the penal
code, concerning the prohibited arms, was not ap-
pcabe to the case the fact of her retention could
not be proved, and in fact he did not see sufficient
elements OF proof in the public instruction. He con-
Guided, therefore, by asking the dismissal of Wikof
Tor the offence OF illegal sequestraion, and ALSO as
consequence, the dismissal of yannoud and Caval-
lari There was also nothing proved as to threats.
ana OF the possession OF arms. lie left to his col
league, Leverani, to present specially the defence of
Vannoud and Cavaari.
Lawyer Lcyerani then spoke. He reviewed the
iacts OF the case particularly applicable to Vannoud
and Cayallari, for the offence imputed to them in
the sequestration of the person of Miss Gamble. He
cious aid in the act of sequestraion at the moment
it was accomplished. Nobody could be accused Of
an immediate concurrence, when the only part he
took IN the execution of the act that he escorted
Miss Gamble to the house of Wikoff but il would
be necessary to show that he knew the projects of
Wikof. The 10th article, Sd sentence, of the
penal code was not applicable. He spoke of
Cavaari, who had been called, in the conclusions
Of the public Minister, b,aro (assassin) of Wkoff
but proofs were wanting to establish that he had
aided or assisted, Intentionally, the author of the
offence. Passing to the offence of the possession of
prohibited arms. be examined the question in re-
ference to the penal sanction of the 49Sh article
applicable to foreigners who were a short time in
the state. He added that what was prevented in
some States was allowed in others. and that il was
not an intrinsic immortality He admitted that
foreigners were always subjected to the laws of
Police, Tor the public security Of the State when
they were accused of crimes of the first kind. He
thought that the ignorance of foreigners OK
cusable, when they were in the State for little
time He concluded by asking the dismissal of the
two