Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1856-07-18
WARRINGTON NEWs AND GOSSIP

of the Star will bear witness to the scrupulous
care with which we have endeavored to steer
this Journal clear of course upon the subject
Of the. homicide Of Heating, by Herbert, that
might by any chance serve to defeat fair
trial Of the accused. We have pursued that
course under deep sense of our responsibility
as the conductor Of apublic journal penetrat-
ing into almost every household in the District
OF Columbia and for many miles around, as
well as into thousands afar off accustomed to
regard its statements of occurrences in Wash.
ington as being, except in the few instances in
which we make corrections, positively and un-
quali6edIy true.
Yet we also feel, as we should, the respon-
sibility resting upon the Star as one of the
guardians Of the true interests of this commu-
nifty, which are involved in nothing more GER
tainly than in the rigidness with which both
law and justice are administered without fear
or favor, by the courts Of the District of Colum-
bis. We had hoped that we should have felt
ut liberty to abstain from making a single edi-
torial comment upon this trial during its pro-
gress; but the lsbors of those who are now
ways, have imposed On US the disagreeable
duy Of expressing our views-not upon the
question of the guilt or innocence of P. T.
Herbert-but on collateral subjects bearing on
the trial
A counsel fer the defence, in opening YES
teEday' commented with great severity upon
the curse Of the press with reference to the
affair, including, in plain terms, the press of
this city, whose publications concerning it
have, as far as we have seen, been marked with
s;IuPulous forbearance, under the cir.um-
stances. To the press he attributed the great
excitement existing here with reference to the
matter. 1t strikes US that features connected
with The trial are more fairly chargable with
having originated the more than usual inter-
eSt Il it that has been manifested By the Dis
triot public.
These are first, the manifest difference
made ty the officers of the law in the treat.
ment of the accused when first arrested, and
that of ether prisoners held under charges of
the same grade. Next, the extraordinary ar.
ray of distinguished" influence in the court
rooms during the original examination and
the subsequent trial, calculated, if not de-
signed, to defeat the return of verdict with
ont fear or favor. Next, again, the course
which the court conceived to be its duty to
pursue throughout the trial, ending in the in
structions given to the jury, which have al
reahy oeen severely commented upon by the
press OF the country, and which have been
very generally disspproved by the legal pro.
fession, as involving ideas of the law by no
means likely to render human life more safe
tnan heretofore in this community And
next, again, the fact that these instructions
went to the jury without protest from the
prosecution. A scrupulous determination TO
abstain from doing aught that can possiblv
improperly influence the result of the trial
compeis as to say no more of these instrue.
tons at this time.
AGAIN Circumstances connected with the
selection of the jury now trying the case are
TAR more calculated than any possible com.
ments Of the press to excite the mind of this
puoiic with reference to the trial. Eleven Of
the Jurors are understood to be members Of
the Know Nothing party Two of them de-
ciared' on being questioned by the Court
that they had formed opinions as to the
guilt or innocence Of the accused and had
expressed those opinions; while one Of
Item proclaimed that at that moment his
expressed opinion was retained which means
II meaning suy thing, that his mind was bi.
asSed on the case. One Of the Jurors ia nm
derstocd to have been a visitor of the accused
In prison and an active sympathizer with him
We submit that all these things legitima ,elv
account Tor the extraordinary manner in which
puohc attention is fixed on this trial, without
seeking for other reasons to that end.
Again Friends Of the accused have used
some OF the newspapers of Washington in his
behalf. Even to-day we find in the Gu,on
an earnest appeal, evidently for his acqui,tal.
10 much Of which We do not feel at liberty to
aiiude in detail, because it touches points
which we cannot discus, without Justly sub.
Jectlng ourself to the charge of having undu-
ly influenced the current trial There is a
statement in that communication, however,
which 1t is due to this public that We should
notice. 1t is as follows: ..s
consented IN
IN court be could only have corrohor,tI ~ !.
testimony for the defence. This pentIsm. s :
has authorized DR.. M. Woozencraft nn~
In this city, to contradict all the ns,csnanS,,
statements with which his name has besn =,
any manner connected Delicscy on the AZ,
oi Mr. heroerts friends has prevented the
publication of Mr.. Dubois statement dnr;no
the tendency Of the trial but a. the prone,
time ii will be made publicn
Of this we have to say that, without pre-
tending to dispute the accuracy of its reprs
sentatiOn of what NJ. Dubois told the gentle
man named above, of which We know nothin.
except what the writer states, we are YER,
sure that his original representations of tn,
afT iir To gentlemen Of Washington do not war
rant the conclusion with reference to what hi