The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-08-29

consequence Of the negligence Of the defendant II
acclaimed by the prosecution that il the duty OF
me conductor to regulate the speed Of Mat nain
around that cure-tbat the rate was dangerous; and
they say they have produced witnesses who were
passengers in the tran who testify that the speed
was as great around that curve AZ upon any other
part Of the road They claim TO have proved by
Mr. Whistler, that the ordinary rate OF speed OF that
train was thirty i've miles per hour ano have ntro-
duced the evidence OF distinguished mathema-
ticiaD, who has testified TO calculations made by
him, tending TO show the speed Of this train 70 have
been about thirty miles per hour. They further
claim that the conductor having permitted ara
allowed that train ~ run at hazardous rate oil speed
1t 30 dangerous a part Of the road the accident
occurred through his negligence, and he is, there
fore, criminally liable. The defendant claims that
this train was proceeding around this curve az lts
usual rate Of speed, ard they say they have proved
this fact by the evidence Of witnesses whose positions
and capacities for knowing this fact are far better
than those of other Witnesses and that the steam
was shut OF in this locomotive in the cut below Nor
walk station, and that the speed OF the train was
thereby, and by the application OF the brakes sensi-
bly, decressed that the duties Of the conductor are
not as claimed by the prosecution and they say that
he had right to suppose that the draw was closed,
and the signal of the draw right for the passage
of the train, and that it no part OF his duty TO
look ont for signals that being solely the duty OF the
engineer. You are judges OF both the law and fact
The Jaw authorizes me TO instruct you upon the law;
but you are not Bound TO regard my instructions in
criminal matters. have been requested to instruct
You that agent is not responsible for the act Of
another, and that there is difference be-
tween civil action and criminal prose.
cution, and such | instruct you is the law.
The law will hold party civilIy liable when il will
not hold him cIimnally responsible. The defendant
claims ihat he was in the discharge OF lawful act,
and that the prosecution must show that he did
some act tending to evince esrelessness and reck-
lessntss in COZ Quoting that train Such ia the law;
but further instruct you that if that train going
at dangerous rate OF speed and II you believe that
it was the duty Of the conductor to check it, and
that he recEessy and carelessly neglected his duty
in permitting that tram 10 around that curve at
dangerous rate Of speed, that would be such
negligent act that it would he mansaughter il death
ensned. If you have reasonable doubt in the case,
it will be your duty to acguit the accused
The jury then retired to their room, and the Court
adjourned till p. M.
AT the assembling Of the Court in the afternoon,
the court house was filed with spectators, who were
attracted by the interest felt 10 ascertain the result
About 81 p NJ. the jury returned into court and,
upon being called stated they were unable to agree,
and asked for further time. This being granted,
they again retired 10 their for further delbera
ton.
The jury again returned into court, and, on being
inquired OF if they had agreed upon verdict, the
foreman replied that they had not, and he must
say that they could not.
By the Judge-It is easy to say that It is desr-
able that you should agree at this tie and not sub
ject the parties to the expense Of another trial. !
think you should take more time to consider it.
The jury, accordingly, will keep the case until
Monday, to which time the Court adjourned.
II is supposed that the jury, with the exception Of
two or three, are in favor Of verdict Of acquittal
II is hardly probable that they win agree at all in
the case, as they have made two attempts without
success