The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-10-26
the INDICTMENT AGAINST ALDERMAN HERack.
cIcse OF the Case-Judge Rooaevcits Charge
Das.greement and Disch rye OF the Jury.
COURT OF OYER AM TERMINER.

clcse OF the Case---1udgc Hooaevclts Charge
Dussgreement and Disch rye OF the Jury
COURT OF OYER AM TERMINER.
Before Hon. judge Roosevelt
ruUaspAY Oct 20, 1855.-The Court was moro than
usually crowded this morning, to hear the summing up
II counsel and charge Of the Judge this important
case
Mr. Whiting proposed present for the consideration
Of the learned District Attorney the points which
hney claimed the Court 10 charge the jury
list. warug, his own testimony, is accompIce,
as such should be corroboraed and not corrobo
yated, the defendant must be acquitted.
Cd The confederation required by the law to support
Warnings testimony should be the proof OF facts tending
to RI guilt upon Herrick, and which reasonably
consistent with his innocence The corroboraton must
b as to such and SO many parts Of the sccomphces evil
may reasonably induce the jury TO believe that bad
he h. he is telling the truth.
reasonable doubt that Herric accepted the check and
intended at the time he received it that 1t should inhu
OF vote he ssnn9 % the
check and subsequently obtained the money for IT, he
cannot DO convicted if he never, in fact intended that
the check money should secure bis official influence
9Th the jury believe that warng in giving his
tnony has wiltuy made false statement in regard to
any material fact in his narration, in judgment Of law
10 y unworthy OF any credit and It is their duty to dis
9Th The burihen Of proving the guilt of the accused
rests Jpn the prosecution who must establish IL peyond
AN reasonable doubt.
ID.
dence whatever of Herrck guilt and IL not to be con-
sidered al evidence by the jury.
g. Testimony to conversation such as that gwen Dy
Waring in relating his alleged interview with Herrck
il to be received by the jury with great caution sucn
testimony being regarded in law as weak and M
receipt Of the check by him. had 70 vote or
the measure in question, and would have done So .nen
he not Influenced by the check, ana CANNOT 10 con
yicted Of the crime charged ,
TO- If Herrick had intention that the check should
influence his vote or action when he received it,
tertio aft
ayails would justify his conviction.
H. In weighing the credibilty OF Warnings testimony,
the Jury are to regard the threat that here was evil
enough TO convict him. that unless he gave ev
dence against Herrick they would ndict him as very
strong not sufficient inducement, to Wartng to fall
sify the truth.
L. The jury to take into consideration the fact that
Murphy concocted this natter his subsequent acts his
interviews with the Grand Jury with Mayor Wood and
the foreman Of the Grand Jury at Woods oce and the
threat to indic and convict Warng unless he testified
against Herrick creating strong suspicious of unfair
procuring the Indictment and sufficient to call on
the prosecutor to explain by evidence such unprece
Is. If Warning whilst under oath before the Graud
jury told contradictory stories in relating the transac
ton or has on this trial related the facts In any
ter parts different froo those related before the Grand
Jury, has been contradc,ed in any material part by
other Witnesses them in Judgment Of law, the inference
Ia unavoidable that he has fabricated the story aud IS
unworthy OF credit.
Mr. Brady understood the District Attorney to have
sad at early stage of the trial. that he would inform
which counts of the indictment he would ask the
accused to be convicted. He called upon him now to
Mr. Hall replied that he would ask for his conviction on
the 9th 7th 8h h, 15th 19th 10th and 23d counts OF
,sry SLIGHT Variations but which resrred to no other
lansactionbhan this and to no other persons but Mr.
Herrick and Mr. Warning
halt Of the accused and occupied three and half hours
with much effect
scented all their views to the Court whether they
merely presented them points without argument.
Mr. Whiting said they had presented them, but would
Hall proposed to contest them in point of facts and
Of law He prepared to dissent from several Of these
and he thought the Court and Honor we're entitled TO
Mr. whiting would also add the following point TO those
Others which they would ask his Honor 10 charge the
was conspiracy between Wood and Waring and Murphy,
1t n perfect answer to this case in Judgment of law
Again, that the history Of the administration Of Justice
presents in which the acSompce has been per-
itted to give evidence not only to prove the narration
ed with the transaction, but to prove the corpus
delis ielgthe body Of the offence; and that in
will the law permit party to he convicted on the uncor-
rCborated and unsupported evidence OF ~ho orgi
mated the crime aud there no corrooorased evidence
In the case; and in judgment Of law be
victed on the testimony Of such witness.
Mr.. Whiting proposed them as points OF law on which
he asked the Judge to charge the jury If his Honor
overrued any of them they would resort to their excep
tions. They did not intend to argue them. The District
Attorney had nothing 70 do with them.
Judge Roosevet-But he has rightto be heard upon
Mr. Han wanted to avoid, what is too often the case
where defended BY several counsel the proionga
ton of summing up to the jury under the idea Of pre-
senng questions to the Court and his learned friends
had thing to say those points he respectfully
tended they ought to shy it now.
Judge Roosevelt understood the counsel for the defence
10 say that they merely relied upon them points to
be submitted TO the Court and prepared If
suied, TO take their exceptions.
Mr.. Hall then proceeded, at O'Clock, to sum up
IN the part of the prosecution He closed an able
address Mt ten minutes past four, at which hour
Judge Rooseyefcommenced to charge The jury
GEST1ExM-H is my province TO address you, not in
the language of oratoy but in that OF simple narration
and dry Legal g ,s s segs tsis ny
MED with rpors, whether we1 or i'll founded is not
Tor t6inquire, Of the tendency of municipal af
fairs to into official corruption In consequence OF
those Iumors, and believing them to be sufficiently es
tabshed by evidence the Legislature of this State in
the month Of April of the year. passed act fur
ther to amend the charter the city Of New York In that
act inserted provision making the act Of bribDg
receiving bribe or offering receive bride, enter
ing into proposition to receive bride, high crime
and misdemeanor the part OF any member OF the Com
Council which body was by the terms Of that char.
ter TO newly organized That act however before
went into effect to be submitted to the vote Of tn
electors Of this city and 10 be voted ON in the June 3
lowing AT the election thus directed authorized the
new charter adopted by the popular voice, and
came supposed o have become, law Not 10 6
after, however, difficulty arose in one banch OF
Supreme Court of this State, in regard 10 the queso
whether 1t competent for the Legislature
Of this State which had the sole authority to make laws
fer the State to make the adoption non-adopon Of
any law dependent the popular vote That difficulty,
after argument in branch Of the Supreme Court
ended in the decision that law cf thai character
utterly null and void, and the consequences was in
for from the dates that the Legislature called upon
In the month Of July folio ing to look into the subject
again. They did do IT, And on the 18th July they pass
ed act, being satisfied with the provisions of the pre-
vious act and considering that the provision in
Iation to bribery called for In regard TO other por-
tons Of the State well this city they passed act
to regulate the existing law in relation to bribery and
extended to nearly all officers of the city well OF
the State and TO the mbers Of the Legislature Of the
State In that act there provision that every person
Who shall promise, offer, give cause, aid or abet
in causing be promised offered given, who shall
furnish agree to furnish in whole in part to such
and such officers, (naming them or to any member OF
the Corporation, and any money, goods, right in
aotion-lke a promissory note or a checkeor other pro
perty, anything of value any pecuuiary other
individual advantage either present prospective with
the intent to influence his vote opinion, Judgment
lion upon any question: matter cause proceeding then
pending before him, which may be brought before hi
IN his Official capacity shall conviction Joe imprisoned
in the State prison for term not exceeding ten years
hned not exceeding 900, both, in the discre-