The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-04-19
THE sTANwIx HALL MASSACRE.
Court of Oyer md Terminer.
Before Hon. judge T.. p. Cowiss.

ADMITTED TO BAIL THE APPLLIc ALTON TO BAIL
TURSEE AND PAUDEEN DENIED.
April ls The People Lvin, Morrissey and others
This is application admit to bail all OF the de-
PENDANTS except Bsher who is still at large The mo-
ton is based upon the testimony taken before the Coro
per, and that taken before the Grand Jury on viii
the ind'ctmsut found The defendants at the
time ask leave TO furnish further proof affidavit
oral Testimony, the subject, showing their in
nocepce of the offence charged affecting the question
Of bail The District Attorney the tins also
moves for increase of the bail heretofore taken from
the defendant Irving. The first question settled
whether euch further proof be received. After
careful examination OF the subject have to the
conclusion that such proof cannot be received 1t has
not be- The practice heretofore either this country
or in England, such precedent bs established,
without making application for bail substantially
trial on the merits for the prisoner produce such
evidence in bis benslf, the public prosecutor
should be permitted 60 controvert it, which, in effect
would transform motion to bail into examination
into the guilt or Innocence OF the prisoners. The rule
seems 10 be well settled the contrary and with
son, because, open the whole question OF guilt in
poceRce to proof motion 10 admit to bail, would be
attended with most serious public inconveoence In
there win be exsant the files OF Court
the preliminary examination OF the accused. the
timony before the Coroner that before the Grand
uryin some case all Tue ms in this case party NAV
sometimes, by casualty bs deprived OF the benefit Of
preliminary examipation but the hardship in partou-
lar anoud not induce the establishment OF ore
cedent which woudp Of great public
The motion to put in proof must therefore be
This brings us to the main question The po the
Court TO bail IL unquestioned But the principles which
will gude the Court in the exercise Of this power have
been VIII established, ard wiz be recognized here as
that in the higher class o. offences. particularly of
capital nature, court viii not bail after Indictment
although they may before This distinction has arisen
from this tact that In the nave before
1t the testimony taken before the Coroners jury
fore the committing msgirtrate and can thus, by
inspection or the testimony, be enabled to form
Judgment to PROBABLE gniit nnocsnce; while in
the other the old rule did permit the testimony
befoys the Grand Jury TO be disclosed aud the court
therefore after ;ndctmsnt unable t, say on what
proof It mad been found In Lord Mohan's q Salk
by we sometimes bail HIM bee ,uss the
co1per proceeds upon dispositions taken ia writing,
winch We ,nyio look into otherwise, if be found
gnilty OF murder by grand jury, because the court
cannot take notice of their evidence which they by
their oath are bound TO conceal " "a charged
with murder by the verdict of ceroners inquest
be admired to BAIL though not after the finding OF an
ind indIctmtnt by grand jury "a Chtty Crln. Law,
above given. So lin Martin Lous, Rep I42,) The Ter
ritory BenOit ths court say-ssOn a coroner's in
quest finding person guilty Of capital crime. the
judges have often lcoFed into the testimony. which
the coroner is bound 70 record and when they have
been Of opinion that the jurors had drawn illogical
conclusion admitted the psrey to bail But the evil
denee before the grand jury is not written
be disclosed the discretion and control
finding OF grand jury too great presumption OF the
defennaut guilt 10 bail him." Other instances TO the
same effect might be cited-an showing that the dis
tinctiou made between baipr in capital bsfore or
sitter Indictment has been founded above
gven that before the indictment the have
to the depostious and testimony which the charge
based, and in the other could not, because
grand jury were required to keep the testimony before
1t secret and the court having means of inferrng
otherwise would, therefore, slways imply that the
grand jury had not indicted insufficient proof aud
list in this case. 1t 10 provided BY 2R 72t Sec 80,
that Every grand jury may appoint one Of their num-
an OF I 70 Of
&c. wh,cb done here and the whos evidence takea
before the Grand Jury VINO found this bill admitted
s before the Court consisting o. the record Of ths tes
ony taken before the Corsnvrs Juay which was also
read before the Grand jury sosesasr with full record
question Of bail s therefore, open to consideration
thu extent it would be il applied Tor before
indictment for the Cours know on what testimony this
indictm-nt found. rhe question then acises nder
what circumstances bail oe given in like the
Wssesr Cm Gases late V Chief SPENCER
says s That if it stands Indifferent whsther person
charged With felony he guilty not he ought to be
bai.d nd that In capital cases, there any
irduce the court to suppose he may
innocent they will bail " That eminent OF jurists
in the case, after stating further that thee
fixed rule every case but
be governed by the pasuiiar attending it,
to the forthcoming Of the charged with
the mission OF crime and it is intsudes
part OF the punshmen for until the guilt OF toe
party be legally ascertaned there is ground for
ishnspt and it woulo be cruel and unjust iufct it,
The laws (says he Of every free couny estim,te per-
eonai Liberty Of the scored character and 1t is
not to be violated abridged before rial II he further
sayk) the punishment be death corporea ioprsou-
ment a consciousness of guilt would probably induce
flight ana an evasion Of the punishment aud 10 admit.
ting to oa therefore regard must BE- had to the probaoe
guilt of the party and the nature Of the puniahment
He then TO recapisusste the facts ia aat
ticular which for mansaug ghter--stated ths
prisoner had once been tried and the jury dsagreei
that the foreman had, when called, rendered verdict
Of guilty, but then, being polied, Of the jury
dssent.d-snd then pro .eed II therefore bound to
as os @
entitled to be bailed These principles approved
by the Court in the case Of Tayloe Cow 49, which was
after approving of the rule laid down By Chief Justice
Spencer the above cited Mr. Chief Justice savage
W the facts In the now befoe tbs Court afford
the presumptions of and II appears to
the Court from the deposions that 1t is quite indifferent
be baisd, otherwise not" The same rule has bean re-
peatedly recognized III England. Hawkins Pleas OF the
Str Oh In Com Digest, BAH F., it is said. "Tns Court
will not bail in murder, treason &c unless there be
reasonable cause" The criminal code Of Louisiana
tains u provision which TO be
mary Of the common law role on this sub.
jsct Article 192 provides that Gan persons shall
be haabs except for capital offences where the proof
Is evident and presumption great;' and then rscitns
that murder, rape, and other osncss punish
able with DEATH proceeds Persons accused of the Of
fences above enumerated Capital oences) also to
be baed when the proof s not evident the presump
ton strong Ins general s n oeauc,oe @ % from %
capital otherwise exercise its discretionary
powers, and admit to bail when from the testimony un
der which the accused held 1t Is nosreot whether he
ia innocent or guilty in other words, when upou
examination of the testimony the presumption OF guilt
is strong and they particularly called upon to
bail in all cases when the rresumpuns decidedly in
favor OF the innocence OF the accused. may be well
here also TO inquire on what testimony indictment
sbo ond based. satisfied that this most importan.
matter oftentmes overlooked and still oftener, per-
haps misunderstood, BY our grand ures and yet such
10 the very nature of the oryanzaton Of grand jury
such its mode of proceeding the secrecy OF ts action,
and the expsste character the testimony taken before
itthst these rarely and then only incideu
tally brought before the court for rness errors
the court should vpilapty watch, and, far prac
cable, correct In injustice likely to be
done than in the fnding OF Indictment, insufficient
prooan injustice difficult TO be guarded sssnst, aud
yet ofentmes most oppressive In consequences to
the accused. l cannot regard the indictment as in
theory mere accusation based upon probable 70
believe the accused may be guiity-lke tss finding Of
the committing magistrate-but direct aud positive
charge oath that upon the testimony before the