The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-10-26

holding hat'he grade as established waa the proper one
and thu other that the cutting of the street would DO too
deep and would njure their property materially THIS
division Of opinion very natural one and the mere
the Common cssHs was IL favor Of
the proposed change furnishes Of ITSELF not Tie slight
est ground for mpsachns his au Motives te: SSs w o
Bryan M'Cahin which, must, think, satisfy any mimi
that point He looked for the measure believing y
to be lust and right He voted the poered bribe or
what he understood be bride The Court entertans
eoubt Of his truth and sincerity, and presume the
Jury does not You may then think gentlemeo,
Ia the further consideration Of the question Of guilt in
nocence the accused that the measure one which
any honest man might advocate ana sun Dc none s
case and still larger number Of the Witnesses As no
man however, lawfully accept bride to vote for
just measure, no man can receive bribe 20 vote
for measure which he would have voted for without
such bribe it win be still left for you to inquire was
witness as supposed he whose testimony IS essen
ta to the the part OF the people says tnefe was
brbe that he paid II 10 cnesS .or stoo hann hv
ONE person. that it was paid and charged 70
his account thus showing that the check was not only
rendered but although declined at first was Ultimately
retained and used and therefore accepted ana tnai
GU will recoect, after ample time for reflection ana
hance of purpose think the evidence Is that that check
saS on he 18th Of september and that 1t given
On The 18th or 18th of August thus leaving more than
month between its being received and casned. DOCS
Warng then speak the truth is he not only pari-
ceps criniswhich be admts-but ut one ana the same
time reluctant and perued Was y
him proved by its production and by the testimony OF
the officers OF The bank That check was rendered to
has proved BY his brothers. testimony that in an inter
view with Warning shortly after the finding Of the ndict
/ told You to put IL back into your pocket" The
tfer, therefore is established and it may be proper
unaocepted, is felony in the party making it,
and that to enter into negotiation or proposition to
receive bride is an offence equally guilty on the party
terrain the ocr This is solemn question: gentlemen;
solemn in its and demanding your careful
have the fate in degree, of fellow citizen in your
hands. Waring swears that when he handed the check
to the defendant the latter said he did not wish To re ;eve
anything Of the Kind, and showed it back; but ne
(Warng) replied that he would leave IT with him and he
could return it at some future time he thought 1T Or
if the object not accomplished, to which the Alder
responded that If the measure did not pass be would
certainly return the check retaining II in his hand all
the time. That his (Warings version Of the story
defence which undoubtedly Is to be considered
Sssest Of Warnings testimony relates to words spoken
That point is that testimony to conversation is to be
received with extreme caution he point Is rrintst
wish to put it in either words It is undoubtedly dam
gerous species of testimony, that which goes to con.
so easily isrepfesented You have that to bear in mind
interpreting the words used except 50 far as they
ii is said speak louder than words The defence
that WarLg falsey-not only here but before the
Grand Jury giving this version That + the pracip pal
indictment recollect-,coud the accused, after
the indictment, apply to this perjured man
for affidavit be used in this Court reliable sub
iect which to found important moon-the motion
to quash the Indictment That difficulty struck my
mind it has attracted also the attention Of the
District Attorney i is for you however, to look at that
matter, and what weight Is to be attached to It,
Mr.. Brady rose to make a remark.
Judge Roosevelt intimated that he should wait TILL the
Court was through and consinuea-rhe testimony OF
Mr.. Hugh Herrick is that affidavit was sought to be
obtained from Mr. Waing of the circumstances In the
Grand Jury ROOM 1t is to that aude The whole tes-
tmony of the defendants brother suggests matter for
grave reflection A party at the time under In,
dicment, goes with another party related in the
closest manner BY ties of blood, to witness whose
testimony il is important to overthrow, and en-
cages him in conversation. No other Witness is pre-
sent offer is made to call another, to guard Warning
from possible misapprehension or misrepresentation
strong asseve atoms made to him while his mind Is
greatly confused and his in some instances
his sienceare sought to be used contradiction
of his deliberately statements here in open court
Such evidence, 30 obtained-coupsel for the defence
requires to DO carefully weighed. and here again would
apply the point to the danger attending the evidence
Of conversation The point as applicable 70 this part
Of The evidence TO the conversation which Waring had
with the accused. How, admitting that interview be.
tween Mr. Herck his brother and Waring to be ever so
ment the accused that occasion that he (errck)
told waring put the check into his pocket with the
fact that the check Notwithstanding was presented at the
bank and padf
Mr.. Brady--I should say by Murphy putting it into
the bank.
Judge Roosevelt continuing-Did Warning actually
return to his pocket, aud then tender IT
to more yielding oniciar 1t Is for you
70 how the evidence stands on that point.
Re positively he did not and what Ell ell;e on
that point is there 10 contradict him2 If Nt -, why
was not the cashier Of the Mechanics and adeta Bank
called to prove that he received that check IRON the Mas
Bank, and why not the cashier oi the Nassau
Bank called 70 prove to whom il paid and SO trace 1t
back to the individual who first received it from the
drawers Why not the partner Of the accused who,
IL appears kept account in the Nassau Bank, calei
to that he the check and aeyer de-
posted it in the Nassau Bank or il nc did, that he re.
ceivod it from individual other than the aceasedY
part Of the prosesuion they had brought up the cashier
Of the Nassau Bank at all events Tor believe it is in
testimony that the word written in pencil on the check
iNassau) is in his handwriting
Mr. Brady remarked az a correction that 1t was the
cashier of the Mechanics and Traders Bank.
The Judge corrected himself accordingly. He might
have given us some explanation on the subject.
There is there sort Of vacuum, undoubtedly, but
will bear mind that the prosecution had right to
upon the positive evidence of Warning; and
competent for the other side to show that this check was
been some diculy about IT, but II looks very much as II
that might be done. was about myself in the course
Of the examination to suggest tina: the cashier OF the
Mechanics and Traders Bank should be called up. or
that Mr.. Ropes tho partner of the accused, should
be called up. The case obviously defective on that
point at least unsatisfactory to me. The state
men of WaIing II false, perfectly susceptible of con-
tradicon If the accused had not received the check,
and this somebody easily II to ascertaned
by tracing that ear mark chcck--thc Bulls Head Bank
heading having been crossed out ard that Of the Mechan-
les and Traders Bank written in But Warning, 1t is said
has conradiced himself That Is certainy but you
have heard the explanation which he gives and which
OF the members of the Grand Jury, in part at least
confirms. waIing was sick and confused and iaborng
under an anxious apprehension OF legally eliminating
sell he determined, seemingly a isast-as Mr. lockwood
testihegto make clean breast OF IT, You viii consider
this explanation gentlemen. do stand here
iend for swearing falsely under apprehen
sion of personal danger. Far from 1t Stn he ap
prehensye and is for you to judge whether that L
good Consider the explanation and give 1t the
weight to which IL may be entitled in your judgment
Again IL Is said that The witness waring was partic
pator in the offence That circumstance Is calculated to
weaken the force Of his testimony and demand for 1t
rigid scrutiny. II does not disquaify IT, On the con
TO testify, and il would be extraordinary nconsis
tency Grst 20 compel to testify and then TO dis
believe him. Besides what motive has the witness
now to add perjury to briberys He does not
but eliminates himself at least in character. He has II
seems friend 20 any enemy TO punish He
anxious, impor iunate-1 the words Of the
witness Mes hanhat the prosecution should be stopped