The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-11-10

enable him y bsssnA eisea Of he DATED elsSss.
aIy As-snd Il Is chained That ts evidence shows that
he had not !eft Hanover, his native country, early
enough 20 - 70 have been resident hsss for Tia pod
81 ave years previous TO the time this oath taken
The only evidence going back 70 period In Hanover
when he left that country is that Of Mrs. Aonter She
says he left a. mate Of vessel in August ls4e, and the
argument OF the defence Of that he
resident Of his native country down TO that time and
II he had then endeavored to become citizen he would
not have been entitled The Ave years did not expire
till August, 1854 and the oath was made In the month
Mr. OConor-And the burning Of this brig, which end
Judge Neson--Yes. Now, the fact that the prisoner
himself testified 70 his citizenship the llth Of February
1854 Of sufficient weight to control that question:
that time-that is, 30 far as he himself is con
serned OF interested, unless he has, over and
S beyond h TINS Pesis: Of testimony furnished sv
sworn 20 was not true; and, undoubtedly, In case
pseui., as the present one you ought 70 ook into
the force Of this OATH and you ought TO Be REASONABLY
we'll satisfied that the oath was untrue You eco the
dilemma In which 1t places the prisoner for you only
false at the time and was under the act Of Con-
this coneluson-thsthe was guilty Of false swearing
sonaby mistaken that he did testify to what was false
At the time Now, do not mean to suggest anything
be to
vt in the result-stil it 10 perhaps proper that We
should suggest that Il the prisoner BY any contrvancs
management in point Of fact had his letter
Of citizenshp-his naturalization papers-short Of the
residence OF ve years having imposed upon the officers
in whom the authority is vested TO naturalizs foreign
ers and he had thus procured act of
short Of the Eve years residence that fact would
be sufficient doubt to have justified the oath that
was taken by him 1t would authorize the prisoner to
have taken the oath which he did that OCCASION and
Notwithstanding any irregularity which might have
CURED in the proceedings for the purpose Of naturaxa
wou hsye bseS y 70
him the high privileges Of an American citizen. But
there is no evidence whatever this subject, and
merely refer to the principle II bears upon the case
that you will be enabled your investigation Of this
branch Of the to determine when the down
to the point as to whether the prisoner at the bar is
guilty OF the offence charged upon him here Of the
alternative crime Of perjury under the laws. II
s ut and proper that in this dilemma the jury should
look thoroughly over the whole subect-over the differ
ent bearings and collateral matters connected with IT,
and thus you will finally arrive at intelligent
clusion on the subject These gentlemen believe,
A. said before tits necessary part OF the
proof to satisfy you either that the Julia Moulon
owned in whole or in part by citizens Of tho United
the United States that the prisoner at the time
citizen of the United States in order to justify you
authorize you in finding the prisoner guilty under the
indictment. You must hnd either the other Of
these points II you find either Of them then, IL you
deem the evidence SUFFICIENT, you will declare the pri
Juror asked the Judge to explain the latter portion
OF his charge.
Judge Neson-It is this: The government must satisfy
you that the vessel Julia Moulton the time of this
Transaction owned in whole in part by citizens Of
the United States IL she foreign vesself the
evidence be that she was foreign vessel owned by
aliens-then theRovernment must satisfy you that the
prisoner was at The time of the offence citizen of the
United States
Juror-what want to know is, how are we to as.
certain whether she is a foreign vessels
The District Attorney said that the juror referred to
that part of the Judges charge in which he said that
American built vessel the burthen Of proof of ownership
devolved upon the prisoner.
Mr. OConor thought the prosecution had relied upon
their evidence to the ownership. In their opening
they had stated that Smith had gone to Boston and
purchased the vessel and the defendants counsel
not then bound to supply any lack Of evidence that
point They had however, the bill Of sale to Captain
Smth but unfortunately the witnesses who could prove
II were now gone to Boston.
The Court remarked that the registry implied the
existence Of the bill Of sale.
The bill of sale sent for and neither the Court nor
District Attorney made any objection its being read
Mr.. OConor then read the bill Of sale Of the Julia
Moulton to James Smith, for the sum of 5000.
THE VERDICT.
The jury retired at about 10 minutes 70 O'Clock
and in hour returned into court with solemn te
nances which betrayed the result Of their deliberations
usual FORM How say YOU, gentlemen the prisoner
the bar guilty or not guilty.
The Foreman answered, Guilty
Mr.. B. +. Dunnng asked that the jury he polled,
which being done each juror answered separately that
TINT his verdict
The Court-Let the Marshal remand the prisoner.
Mr. Dunning-Wil the Court grant us some time to
mAke'a motion for new trial N
The Cour cannot be later than the middle Of next
week.