The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-08-05


we're empaneled, viz: John Ashford, Alexander
Bradley, Jacob Smull, William A. ScbaefLer, BEN
jamin +. Moxley. Henry Martin. David Major.
Charles H. Wiltbsrger. George Mayhsw' Edward
The case was opened to the jury by the DIsTRIcT
ATTORNEY on the part of tho United States. and
by Mr.. MoReAN for the prisoner. The examina.
ton of the witnesses for the prosecution then com
menced. and was continued through the residue of
that day, and through Friday the 9th. and part
Of Saturday the 10th Of July. About noon of the
last-named day the examination Of the witnesses
for the prisoner commenced, and continued during
the residue of the day. On Monday, 18th July,
1t was resumed; was continued on Tuesday, 18th
July, and Wednesday, l4th July. On Thursday,
July 10, on account Of the sudden illness Of Of
the jury, John Ashford, the case was suspended
On the 18th and 10th Of July rebutting witnesses
were examined on the part of the United States;
and on the 10th additional testimony the part
oil the prisoner was, by consent, admitted. Some
OF his witnesses being absent their evidence on the
former trial was, by consent. read to the jury from
the report in the Washington republic. The num-
Der of witnesses were eighteen in chief and fifteen
rebutting on the part Of the United States, and
| forty on behalf of the prisoner.
The evidence on this trial did not materially diff
fer from that given on the former trial. with few
| exceptions to the general coincidence Mrs. Ann
defence on the fret trial, was not introduced the
second; nor was any testimony offered, on either
side, on the second trial, in regard to principal
| topic OF her examination on the first. On the
Witnesses were
for the United States and the other for the prisoner
| each Of whom was deemed important by the Of
| fering party.
Richard Wros, jr., witness on the part of the
United States, gave the following testimony: He
had known the prisoner ever since the prisoner
a small boy; the prisoner had been an apprentice
to the witnesses father. In August or September,
1850, prisoner came to work for the witness. who
was then erecting building for Mr.. Lehman, on
the border OF the canal the prisoner having before
| been at work on the Patent Office. One morning
| the prisoner came later than usual to his work,
and, as the OF his delay stated to the witness
| that he had been up all night; that his wife had
been confined, or was about to be confined. The
| witness was not sure which expression was used
The prisoner said he had great mind to leave his
| wife, and swore that 1t was not his child. The
witness questioned him closely as to how he knew
it was not his child. The prisoner said he had
| made her own up to it. She acknowledged the
child was not his He pinned her pretty close, and
| made her acknowledge. She said II was Sheckels's
| child. He threatened to leave his wife. The wit
| ness said II he did 30, the best way was to keep
quiet-to say nothing about it; to which the pri.
soner assentcd, and said he would 90 away. The
witness being intimate with the prisoner, took the
| liberty Of asking him some questions-of cross
questioning him. The prisoner acknowledged in
confidence that he had had connection with his wife
enough for the child to be his The prisoner seemed
drowsy; but there was nothing else in his appear
ance or manner which attfacted the witness's no.
tice: The prisoner was generally lively.
!
testified a. follows: She 10 tho prisoners aunt
When he was about ten years Of age. in Alexan-
dria. he received an injury on the head, BY blow
from toleraby large block of wood. The wit.
down stairs, and the block of wood was thrown
from above. The witness did not see it thrown
The prisoners mother was up stairs 1t struck
the top Of his head. He wss insensiele for some
| than that the prisoner was little deaf afterward
No physician was called in. The prisoners mo.
Their and the witness themselves dressed the wound
The prisoner, ut another time, was struck by boy
in the street. Since the blow from the piece Of
wood the prisoner has frequently not heard well.
| Cross.ezamined-The witness does not know
which was fret in point of time, the blow 90 the
stairs or the blow in the street. Does not think
that there was an interval of two years between
them. The prisoner is now in the Path year of his
age. The witness was in court one day on the
former trial OF this cause. Supposes that the open
ing Of the wound from the blow first spoken Of was
an inch and a-half long. Can't recollect that she
saw the bone. The piece of wood with which the
blow was inflicted was square piece Of mahogany,
1t might have been thicker. 1.-THE book was a
volume of Kilty's Laws Of Maryland, in quarto. ]
The prisoners mother WAS living in the house. No
one else was living there except six or seven chill
in the house. The wood came from the steps Of the
first story In answer to questions from jurors, the
witness stated that she did not know whether the
prisoners skull was affected; nor how long the
any fever; nor whether any medicine was given to
| hun; that he was insensible for some time; that
they kept it to themselves; and that the witness
thought the prisoners mother bad thrown the block
| OF wood. In her further cross examination, the
witness stated that the injury which the prisoner
received from the boy in the street was a bad cut.
Can't say how long It was kept tied up. Ne ply.
! stefan saw him, TO her recollection Thinks the
prisoner staid in day on account Of it. The pri-
soner's family do not hear we'll. The witness CAN
not say whether the deafness proceeded from cold,
or what. On her re. examination in chief, the wit.
ness stated that her attention was first called on
| yesterday to the wounds she has spoken Of On
| being asked If the wound on the head had fire.
quently broken out since, the witness answered
that there had been something of the kind; that
there had been breaking out on the top Of the
head where the wound was; that che could not re-
| collect how long afterward, but about week
two after he received the wound.
The evidence being closed, the court, on the ap-
P!ication OF the prisoners counsel gave the same
instr uctions the law ut the former trial. and,
in addition thereto, the following:
"And II. from the whole evidence aforesaid, the
jury shall find that from any predisposing cause
the prisoners mind was impaired, and there was
prolonged change of his character consequent on
the birth of the child on the 18th September, (if
they shall find such birtb,) and he became sad,
gloomy, and unsocablc, and without interest in
things which he was formerly interested in, and.
under the influence of said causes, he became men
tally incapable Of governing bimselfn reference to
his wife, and at the time OF bis committing the said
he was committing crime as to her, he is not in
law guilty of MURDER
The following instructions were granted on the
prayer Of the counsel for the United States:
!. That if the jury believe, from the evidence,
that the deceased was k lied by the prisoner, by
means Of leaden bulle. discharged from pistol,
such killing implies malice in law, and is murder.
2. That the burden of rebutting the presump
ton of malice, by showing circumstances Of allie
Walton, excuse, or Justification, rests the pri
soner; and it 10 incumbent on him to make out
such circumstances to the satisfaction of the jury,
unless they arise out Of the evidence produced
against him.
g. That every person Is presumed to be Of sound
mind until the contrary is proved; and the burden
of rebutting this presumption reefs on the pri
scaer.
On Saturday, 18th July, tho case argued to
the jury b. Mr.. WOODWARD for the United States,
and by Messrs. MORGAN and BaADtsV for tho Pri'
soner.
On Monday, July 10, the case was further ar
gued to the jury by Mr.. BRADLEY for the prison.
er; and on tuesday, July 20, by the plsrnicr AT.
roRNEY for the United States.
The arguments to the jury having been closed,
the prisoners counsel, in reference to SOME posi-
tons taken by the DIsrRic ATTORNEY in argu-
thac E,,th or mat m