New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-12-19

boD eide. b. the English common law, which Is
alic the law Of mos. OF the sister States, only two
degrees Of homicide ale distinguished, namely
murder that il, killing with malice afjre-
thOUght-snd maGsau. hter including oil other
homicdes ftom thee which in their char
acter fall but Just short Of nurder. down to
those which fail b. merely the slightest shade OF
being juitfsbL, and which ATE puIithei only by
small fine. Theoretically, i! seemed absurd 10
ctnfOupd together under the common name oil
manslaughter cfIeuses of such different character;
ard accordingly our New York law hss under
taken to distinguish several varieties OF man
slaughter, to which il has affixed yer! different
punishmeDts Yet it cannot be concealed that this
attempt TO give additional precision TO the law has
been attended by some practical incOnveniences
The comprehensive manslaughter Of the common
Law afforded great facilities to Jury 10 agreeing
upon verdict. Each juror Of the twelve might
have distinct aud peculiar opinion Of his own as
to the precise character and magnitude OF the
offense, ard yet sill might agree 10 cay
ing msu laughter, thus leaving it 10 the Court TO
FIX the character of the crime and the quintum OF
the punishment Even those who thought the oil
feuse murder might consent, for the sake OF YER
dict, to say manflsughter, upon the consideration
that murder is separated from the highest degree
of monslsughter by o space perceptble only TO lie
gal metsphy siciOns, and not always very discern
able even TO them while, on the other hand, some
members of the same Jury, inclined to regard
the act of the prisoner as even just6able might
still for the sake of agreement, say manslaughter
too, upon the consideration that the midest types
of this OffeDse differ only in name and in their I'M
intended result from Ordinary assault and battery
1t ia evident that the new provision on this sub
ject introduced into our New York statutes, what
ever other advantages it may have places new
and very serious stumbling in the way of the
agreement of Juries. But for this obstacle, aod
had the trial taken place under the old common
law, there is every reason to suppose that the
Jury would have agreed on verdict of man
slaughter
The complaints uttered at the nonagreement Of
the Jury have been aggravated by reference to
the expense Of time and money which new trial
will occasion. But it is very doubtful whether,
even if the Jury had sgreed, this expense would
have been avoided. Considering the great number
of exceptions taken By the prisoners counsel, and
the somewhat questionable character Of some Of
the rulings of the Judge, verdict Of suilty-aRd
there seems to have been no chance for any other
would have run great risk Of being set aside by
the full bench.
And this leads us TO the notice of another inno-
walton upon the old legal usage which is attended
with great practical endorsements. In old
times-and in Massachusetts, ard many other
States it is so to this day-capital trials we're had
before the full Court, which heard an argument
upon and settled all questions of law as the case
proceeded. Of course there could be no new
trial for misdirecton in point ofsw on the part Of
the presiding Judge. Upon our plan of trials be
fore single Judge, with reservations of the points
Of law to be decided by full bench, there is nsyer
any telling when an important and complicated
case will come tSan end, or how msny verdcts of
q Jury may be necessary before criminal who
has money and friends can be convicted and pun
ished.
Let us sag in conclusion that the public, great
as the excitement occasioned by the killing of
Poole vas, by no means appears to us to have
thing of the same interest in this case, that they
would have had, had Poole been different person
rom what he appeared on the evidence to have
,etn TIE censure of the Judge upon the prisoners
counsel, for stripping the shroud as it were from
he dead Poole, or rather for recalling him to Ire
uch as be actually had been while among US, ap
pears to US to have been entirely unjust and un
,ajed for. The cf aracter of Poole ss fighting
man, and his bad character at that, was an import
mt anG essential part of the prisoners case. 1t
llso had an important bearing upon the degree Of
Ilarm with which his death ought to inspire the
,ublic-a very important consideration in all
,sses of this kind For quiet and unOf
ending citizen to be set upon without prOvoca
len, by band of Iufhsns aud to be shot down in
place of public resort, would be most alarming
hing 1t might naturally lead every quiet citizen
o ask if his turn might not come next. For
lighting fomenter of braws and frequenter of grog
hops, who always went armed and ready for
ray, to get into fight and to be killed in grog-
hop, seems to be but fulfllment of the Scripture
he that draws the sword shall perish by the
word If Baker killed Poole not in selfdefense,
ought to be punished for it, and punished in pro-
portion to his malice and generalization. If he
fought quarrel with the design to kill Poole, he
ought to be convicted of murder; but after all, the
great importance of this case is rather with fight
ng men and rowdes generally than with the mass
Of good and quiet citizens.
VIRGINIAN POLITICAL ECONOMY