The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-11-02
THE HENRY CLAY STEAMBOAT CALAMITY.

n
Taa.ar, John G7main, Eipavd Hus1ard, James q Jasur
Jas. Bstendoyf and Chas AerYau [Mr. Merritt has not
sppeatsd during the trial
At the sitting Of the Court Mr.. Wheaton proceeded b
sum up N the part Of the defenaan,s He commencsd
by saying Mat this was had stated by the pro-
secuton case of the reatsst Importance both to tho
men Of resp,rtabiliy who never sil then had bosS
destruction of thi' boe, had held a high position In
society and 20 "essed ths confidence Of the public
was not sembl.nce of crime oinst them in the evi-
denes adduced I.wasa case in ch public feeling
greatly excited IN consequence of the almost unpa-
raleed destruction of life. II vas well t,at th indct-
neht had been found though he at lo.s to know
how It was found; and If there msre evidenes
there here lie should like to know how they to
the conclusion that there was pr,md aa against
them But they all know how these Investigations
ace BY he and ury, without the defendants having
an opportunity of cross amning the witnesses. Mr..
Wheaton referred to the which the Indictment
was fouEdthe 18th section of the act of Congressane
would then ask what the testimony necessary
vict the defendants Let them look to what would pro.
baby be fair Interpretation osthe act The first fact to
bt found Is that the charged employed
board the oat that they had employment board
that boat; that Il ey had daty to perform. The
mex quest sn what the distinctive duty of oaoh
on board that Boa,a Then, by whose ggence miscon
dent occurp The jury have hrs to find that the parties
charged were employed on board the boat then by
their negligence nattenton misconduct the destruc-
ton of thoss lives took place Having found that they
were employed the jury would then look for the next
defendants
guilty of misconduct, negligence inattention 70
their particular dutiesp The jury must look to the
act Of misconduct, negligence or insttention that
has been done, and they would ask themselves which
act they define act of misconduct, &c. Whist
has been done which ought not to have been done what
has been omitted which duty imposed upon them to doe
He (Wheaton) asked the prosecution with great conn-
dence to point to act of commission OF the engi
boat managed most skfully from the time the re was
discovered until the boat struck the shore What haa
he done or omitted TO do which sklfal man weud not
Omft do Il Tho niatr riot ttnr
cannot point out to the jury plainly that the yfaring
man. though fool could err; il ho does 4 ,t ponf
out so plainly that the human eye cannot be deceived
then those not to be presumed be guilty and
he asked for acqu,ta As to the clerk what culpa-
destruction Of human life board that vessel by selling
tickets at the Captains officer What did the pilot dok
suppose they found the act of Iacng could they find any
Henry Clay That the catastrop phe was awful, his
clients did not attempt to disprove; that several human
lives, short Of hundred cut othe wife from hsr
husband the child from its mothers brsast-aAd mAnv
Others went down in the presence Of their friends Il
WAS wonder then that the public excitement and the
public Indignation should bs raised against those officers
at the time. The pnblic mind did net stop to inquire
them, punish ,hem-et them be puni he'd" victim d
demanded some one is guilty i must be the ocsrs.
/" Let life be paid back with lite But the law
vDdictve Furnishes the innocent that life may b
protected The jury might snd these 10 prison:
they might condne them in their solitary cells but t
will not bring back single life that has been lost The
guilty must be punished that navigators be shown that
they must take caro- OF the precious burthens that
the 70 well shAss Ss guilty i they viii sas
have the effect of making them more careful.
Il BY Furnishing the guilty and by saving the innoosne
that example is set Counsel conended that there
direct evidence OF culgabe negligence Suppose the
jury found that there trial OF speed and that IL
fire occurred by radiation they must first fad that thsrs
racing referred 10 1st sarkie p. 478 and p b07l
While there doubt Of the fact o. the racing would
fenec to p $40 of the authorty] Mr. whsates, {.
speaking Of tie testimony Of the witnesses for the prose-
cutian, alluded to their natural excitement Ono haA
IOgt wifi rot ufa nd chi Suc1f fnRn
excitement that had this occurred in State whore th0
law Is sss resreed than here the officers might have
the northern section of the country the people know that
justice will ba done, and that though It is slew
Mr. Wheaton, in referring to Mr.. Riders testimony,
said that at the Astor House indignation meeting hs
wac under oath The learned counsel in conclusion made
eloquent appeal TO the jury He begged them to ASK
themselves 'has there bsen cupable omission the
part OF either OF those defendants If there has, ws
say clearly and distinctly that that act which have
marhsd down culpabs the Of the destrue-
tion OF this vessel and consequently the of the d.
structon of human lre?', Ponder gentlemen, upon
these things, il yeu have doubts but If you have
you knew, you would delight to honor-whom the vsxy
Kindness Of your hearts would prompt TO avo-to say -
them promptly, in that pure and energetic language
consisting of few words In opinion you are not
Mr.. Jordan then followed, on the part of Mr. Colysr.
and sad that il he had the power Of taking the vote e
the jury to whether they would hear any the
part OF the defence, he should feel very well satisfied
mind that remarks which he about -
make would be excluded 1t appeared to him that sua
the nature Of the case and such the Demonstration
Of the innocence of all the parties concerned ia this in
dicment, that he would deem it unnecessary to spena
time in any further discussion He did not expect for
personal to himself and therefore unnecessary -
mention, TO AXE part in this discussion but feeling
little more like to-day than he had for dsys
past, he wond endeavcr to show the jury beyond al
doubt that Mr. coyer the only person with whoss ds.
pale and scope of this Indictment and that TO punish hA
under this act Of Congress- is out of the question: a.A
and eloquent address which had been just made to ths
jury by his colleague. His r Jordans) duty was more
the testimony He intended 10 show that ali the witness
es who had to facts relative to Mr. Coyer have -
exhibited themselves to entitle them to no credit a.
conseatcnnot that he designed to charge them with
intention Of suppressng the truth but that they wsre
so excited they unable to discriminate as TO The
facts they have 1t is Of the noblest esra
of the human mind 10 erdsavor to raise itself above pre-
udce and error to arrive at the truth because truth ID
always the foundation of justice and alsehood and acea
the basis every Our courts Of justice for tho
purpose Of arriving at truth they formed for thae
purpose and it was framework which was wisely and
justly made In the community every mans facts arc
colored by his preudi es but when into court
Of justice where the Judge holds the balance in equpos
it is different II is that which distinguishes courts e
justice from mobst Is that which distinguishes courts
Of Justice from Indignation meetings Not that no IN
tended to eepsure the people who met there it vas u.
and 1t relief to them which he had dsposiuoa
to blame But bere according to the legal evidence The
Jury are 10 investigate the ruth and come to the concs
sion thst they must punish the guilty but free the inn
cent Mr. Jordan then proceeded to examine the quss
ton, first, whether Mr.. Collyer implicated even
admitting all the rest guilty; and he would dsmoa
strate to the Jury that Mr. Coyer not guilty and
that Notwithstanding what had been shown BY the
ability and esrnestness OF the public prosecutors,
that all the defendants equally innocent with
Mr.. Collyer The first question here u was Mr. Coll
yer employed board the vessel Aud he would can
upon the Judge that he must he employed to make him
anepabe. He did not that he should be hired bus
assisting IL he rsnsgement eS the yesae Mr. JorSss
continued al considerable length TO comment upon the
testimony and at the rising Of the Court had not Coz
cluded.
discussion arose aa TO whether Mr. Mcmahon wsule
be entitled 20 address the Court for the other defendant
and understood it. the question remained in abey-
until IL was ascertained whether Mr. Jordan EN-
bodied in his remarks general defence Of all the paree
Adjourned to Wednesday morning, at 10 o'clock.
Personal Intelligence. -
Col. r. y. Emands, Col. oyd N Sturtevant Rosteos
Capt. n. b. Palmer Stonington Conn. COL A. H. 0ree1
T. Weed, Albany; Col H. Wells, Pennsylvania; u. B. p
MAJ H.