The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-11-17

lbt tOuS utsb'tV
OF Melville and his wife and then directly alluded to
the circumstances OF the homiclte. | am unwilling
10 conceOe that hall deliberately leave an IN
dividual under sush circumstances aud afterwards
deliberately draw his pistol and kill him. and yet be
absoved Of all responsibility. Thus is the most fear
ful testimony Ia this 1t is conceded that Louis
Steamer Intended 10 tell the truth His testimony Is
coroborated by Blainval. lie heard the conversa-
ton FROM the packing room. The conversation
ceased; he saw him draw the pistol and leave the
packing room, and afterwards heard the report oil
the pistol There we're three persons Ia the base
ment. We have Colwell, Blainyai, ana Steamer,
and the latter overheard all the conversation in
French and saw the prisoner leave him aud draw
the pistol from his pocket. He drew the pistol aud
cooked it, He had time TO reflect from the time he
left the deceased until his return, with the knowledge
that there was an avenue for s,ape, aud through
which he could escape There was no deadly weapon
about Melville. | repel the charge that he sought
those premises with any nlurderous Intentions But
1t is enough to say that If he had such intention,
he never carried it out. Whea the deceased was
fund he had letter in his hand, aud in the cell OF
the prisoner was found fragment fitting Into it,
which he had torn from the hands of the 0ecessed and
was there anything calculated to convince the prisoner
that he had ground OF apprehension IN all thlsf
My learned friend inquiries what was the motive
which impute TO De Corn? answer, from the con-
nection between him and the wife of the deceased
was the motive. He aided aud abstted the wife IN
separating from her husband. When the husband,
under false pretence, had called the prisoner as
physician, she asked him to leave the room, and
then had private conversation with DE Corn, ia
which she asked him for help. II has been ascer.
tanned that he visited there the very night before the
hOmicide-that collar bearing his natue was found
in her room; and the very first place he sought
refuge was there. lie aided the wife to fly and had
furnished her with means for support. Every man
is bound TO know that if that wife had been unusty
treated in any way, the law of the land would have
redressed that wrong. l can easily see the motive
which prompted the act OF the prisoner which must
have been the consciousness OF his Illicit connection,
and the fear of the A female dis
graceful as that who has broken her marriage ties,
| would not disgrace my manhood by placing
her on the stand. look upon her as the motive
power which vas the first great cause of this affair
The District Attorney then examined the testimo
ny relating to the discovery OF DE Corn at the Wal
ton House. He could see no circumstances in this
evidence to warrant the verdict OF justiable horn
eide. The law Is no respecter OF persons. We have
prisoners from the lowest depths of vice and iguo-
rance. On the other hand, we have one whose family,
education and accomplishments are highly respe,ti-
bic but The law recognizes no difference. Great
crimes are almost always committed under great
temptations. 1t is great crme-a crime for which
a Webster was executed and q Eugene Aram was
convicted. You are bound to sift this testimony
thoroughly, and to perform your duties as have en-
deavored to perform mine
Judge Edwards then delivered the following
charge, which we give verbatim -
Gentlemen OF the Jury-The prisoner at the bar
stands before you indicted for one of the highest
crimes known to civilized society. He stands
charged, gentlemen, with having deliberately AMI
designedly taken the life of fellow being This
presents many peculiarities which distinguish
it from those that ordinarily brought into this
court. The prisoner at the bar does not belong to
That class of who frequently brought here,
whose passions have been reused and whose moral
sense has been de raded by excess aud rregularity
neither does he belong TO that other class OF men
whose lives have been habitually criminal and de-
PRAYED. He is q man of foreign birth, q native OF
France and, as the testimony shows, respectfully
and honorably connected in his own country. It APP
ha had final, md iharaT adj
ton, and that he has both here and In his native
country, sustained amo1g. bis acquaintances the cha
racter OF an upright, homes. and honorable man,
and quiet, peaceable ana respectable member OF
society. The deceased, gentlemen, was also native
Of France. The proofs show that from his infancy
his disposition had been hayward and violent
end that The lady who stood 20 him in the relation
CT foster mother, says such was the violence of his
temper that she had found II necessary to procure
his confinement in the insane asylum at Charenton,
for her own protection. 1t appears he escaped from
there nd afterwards placed under the guardian
ship and protection of an eccesiastc, with whom
be came TO this country 1t seems that after
be arrived here he led an unsettled life, and
during his continuance here he exhibited the same
tul bu ent violent and degres.ive disposition which
he had exhibited ut home and so much so that the
witnesses state that his own couutrymen hal avoided
his society and that they found expedent to do
to prevent being exposed to quarrels with him. He
came to this city where he found the prisone. at
the bar ENGAGED in business. He then sought
the il tmacy OF the prisoner and 1t does not seen
tnat ~ prisoner sought his acquaintance; but the
contrary il would seem from the character he had,
and from tie testimony which has been given here,
that i was nos parlcularly congeual to his tastes
Whilst this intimacy continued the deceased had
requested the prisoner at the bar to accompany bin
20 bis house and there introduced him to HIS wife.
The prisoner bad made many visits there until final
y the deceased and his wife separated. The prisoner
ut the bar continued his visits to the wife after the
separation, until finally, on the morning of the 3ls
Of March last the deceased called at the place
business OF the prisoner, at which time the prisoner
shot him, alleging that he did it in self deferce.
Now, in this case, gentlemen, the homicide is fully
etsnlshe6 aud admitted, and the question for you 10
decide is, whether this homicide is murder or man
slaughter, or whether, as confended by the defence,
iustiE2bie homicide. Murder, gentlemen, is de-
lined to be tie killing OF hnrnan being with pre-
medated desg to effect death 1t is sary TO the
crime CT murder that there should be premeditated
design It j. 50 expTes declared blythe statute; bat
IN the exposition Of that statute Jurt has decar
ed that il is III material how short that generalization
uey be. Even at the time the offence was committed,
ii tae party intended, if he had settled, fixed
and determined purpose. il constitutes the crime of
murder. Now, unquestionably, you would be less
apt 10 find Fermentation where. if there was an
intent TO kill it was formed shortly previous to the
commission of the act, than where the circumstances
show long reconciliation, and the accused party
was shown to have harbored malice; or where there
were circumstances that show that the intent did
exist long anterior 70 the COMM ssion Of the act you
would find il much easier to give q verdict Of pre-.
nedHGlIvn ID tDdJ case tnan WDere the only evil
dences You could make use of would be his conduct
at tie very time the deed was committed. 1t was
said and il seems to be contenCed by the District
Attorney, that il may be presumed that there was
preneditated design, provided a deadly weapon is
used Iou win find in tie statute book in the def.
nition Of ansauGhter in the third degree, that
Of the essential ingredients of the crime il that there
fhnuld he a deadly weapon used; but the very use of
deaGly weapon cannot prove murder The deadly
weapon has been considered by The commoa Ian as a
strong item Of evidence 20 show what is called malice
afoTetbought, and Il is under this statute strong
item Of evidence: bnt j. cannot be deemed conclusive
under our law. The next definition TO which shall
call your attention is that Of mansaughter in the
third degree, which, it seems to me, Is the only
definition OF manslaughter which can apply in
this case MaDslauaher in the third degere is
defined to be the killing of another in the heat of
passion without any design to Effect death by dan
gerous weapon. This is specifically modification
Of rue which has always existed in reference to
mansaughter. The meaning OF the words " he u OF
PASSION " is, that il receives great provoca
tion ard under the Influence Of that great provo
catic bills another, that killing is not murder but
II. Ia fcio tbo