The daily republic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1853-1853, 1853-07-20
CRIMINAL COURT.
UNITED STATES VS.. JAMES w. SCHAUM-
BERG

BERG
P. r. Fendall, esq, United States Attorney, |
and Samuel Chiffon, esq, prosecuting; q. Collins /
Lee, s. S. Baxter, r. B. Key, and Charles s.
Wallach, esqs., for the defence.
This case was commenced yesterday afternoon;
and after the jury was sworn,
The DIsrRIcT ATTORNEY made opening
statement in behalf of the Government. The in
dictment was for an assault and battery with in
tent to kin Edward II. Fuller on the Cd Of Feb
ruary last, and was framed under the act of Con-
gress of 1881 The offence of an assault and bat
terry with intent to kill was one only short of
homicide. But it was not necessary to sustain
the indictment to prove any pre-existent malice,
as in the case of murder; the intention to kill may
not have been formed till the moment, and still
the party would be guilty. In the case of man.
slaughter proof of malice was not necessary, nor
was it in this If the jury should be satisfied
that the accused took the means to enable him to
cause death, and used those means, the law as
well common presumed he intended to
| kill But even if this were not SO, and it was ne
cessary that, as in the of murder, to prove
malice, the evidence in this case would show that
more deliberate effort attempt at assassination
never before American jury. Mr.. F.
then stated the immediate facts of the shooting,
which took place on the steps of the National
Hotel, on the evening of the Cd Of February
1885, of the pursuit of Fuller by the accused, and
of his having knife at the time upon his person.
| The evidence would disclose that the accused,
at the time of committing the act used the means
likely to produce death, and the law would pre-
sumo that he intended to kill Fuller. The evil
dence would further disclose that nothing had oc-
| Al, IL,
could afford the slightest provocation, sanctioned
by law morals, for this deadly assault. There
was nothing in the evidence showing that there
was the slightest cause to induce the accused to
expect any personal violence from Mr.. Fuller.
On the Monday preceding the shooting, Fuller
sent copy of the handful to Schaumberg, and on
the same afternoon met and passed him, without
any thing occurring between them On Wednes-
day-the day of the shooting Fuller saw Schaum-
berg, and avoided him; but whether Schaumberg
saw Fuller or not, was not known. This pro-
ceeding by Schaumberg, was yindictiye one, and
to which he was moved by feelings of revenge,
Igrowing out of the publication of the handful.
He (Mr. F.) desired to be understood in no
way vindicating the publication of that handful;
ON the contrary, he considered it wholly improper;
but if the defence desired to go into the inquiry
of the whole controversy between the parties, it
would be seen who had commenced that course of
! proceeding.
/ Mr. BANTER said the defence desired to go into
a full examination of everything connected with
4 the subject.
Mr.. FENDALL said if the subject was gone into
fully, it would be found that the difficulty grew
out of money transactions between the parties, and
of Schaumberg' IS refusal to pay large debt due
by him to Fuller, and which the latter required
for the support of his own family and aged mo-
Their. Schaumberg took high ground-that he
was above such person as Fuller, and absolute
1U IN mai was fha riu
|of the difficulty. Schaumberg also published
pamphlet denouncing in the most atrocous terms
the character of Fuller. The jury would bear in
mind that when the evidence adduced of Full
Ter publishing this handful, that that not the
beginning, but that Schaumberg had previously
published in the most opprobrious terms Mr.
Fuller.
SupposinE that Schaumberg felt that Fuller had
done him wrong, he had no right, legal or
lmoral to take the law into his own hands; the
courts Of justice, civil and criminal, were open to
him for the punishment of the offender. But, in
stead of resortng to the remedies afforded by the
law, he resorted to this violent measure. Five
weeks Of lingering agony and sorrow had MIR.
Fuller passed, with his wife, his children, and his
aged mother plunged in deepest grief and afiic-
he still carried in his body, and would carry with
him to the grave, the ball placed there by this as
sassin at heart.
Mr.. BAXTER said that he thought he had good
reason to complain of the course pursued by the
District Attorney in opening this case. Hethought
his experience in criminal trials had led him to
suppose that here. well as elsewhere, a man
was innocent until he was proved to be guilty
1t was, therefore, rather surprise to him to hear
the District Attorno in opening the case, indulge
in inflammatory language, or use epithets towards
the accused such as ssassassn at heart" He re-
gretted it more particularly because such language
gave indication that there was strong personal
feeling mingled with this prosecution. He did not
clearly comprehend the definition given by the
learned attorney of this offence of an assault with
intent to kill. If he understood the District At
tomey, that gentleman laid it down as law that
wherever the means used likely to produce
death, there the law presumed man to be guilty
of an assault with intent to kill, if death did not
occur; or murder or manslaughter, where death
did result. That was strange law. The court
had, few days since, directed that the marshal
on certain day should take certain convicted
prisoner, and on that day, between certain hours
cause him to be hung Now, the marshal would
certainly use means to death, and yet he
would be guilty of neither murder nor manslaugh-
ter. Every occasion, then, where the means used
were likely to cause death, was not an offence
The prosecution to sustain this Indictment must
show attempt to kill with an intent to commit
some felonious act. 1t must show an attempt to
kill, which, if death had ensued, would have been
either murder or mansaughter. The whole case,
with all It's circumstances, must be considered to-
getner, ana not Iaken IN detached parts. The
particular circumstances attending the shooting
did not constitute the whole of this case there
were other circumstances having an important
bearing upon it which would have to be consid-
cred 1t had been said that this shooting was in
resentment for the publication of the handful by
fuller the evidence would prove, he thought,
the contrary. The defence would contend and
would prove, that the shooting as clear a case
of self-defence- as ever was brought before an
American jury.
| Mr.. Schaumberg did not make the first publ
cation; the first was one--a voluntary one---by
L III L. :4xal