The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-12-08
TIE SLAVE TRADE IN NEW YORK.
United States District Court. i.
Refore Hon Judye ln1erSoil


out the Ponehisa sla,e uesssl The testimony In this
case having cosed, Mr.. Gerard summed up for the
cused and the District Attorney mr. McKeen) for the
government.
JUDGE CHARGE
The Judge then proceeded to charge the jury. Hs
said -
GENTLEMEN or THE JuRY-Your attention has been oc
cuped considerable Iime the investigation of
this case and the attention which have given to
that you understand IT, while the intelligence 1t
presumed that You possess also that you
will be able 70 apply the legal evidence TO tho
case under consideration, and discard the extrane-
has been pressed into the service 1t has been intimat
cd that relation to OF the parties
Commissioner Morton, who has given his tesmouy that
you must discard entirely evidence in this case,
regard to the guilt or innocence OF these indviduas
An arson also been made to the action OF the Graud
Jury. II is no matter whist they have done. You
not TO consider 1t. 1t Is not 70 weigh feather In your
estimation in considering the question whet thsse in
dividuals guilty not. You to determine the
merits upon your OATH from the evidence that has been
given you in Court upon the action OF any
Commissioner. upon the action OF any Grand Jury.
They responsible for the which they adopt
you responsible for the which you adopt The
to investigate the charge set forth In the
naictmsnt,) that these three individuals, eithe,
Puuosa ed her the United the uo
OF New York Tor aforegn port and At the time she
thus lifted out by them, they had the intent 70
poy her in the transportation OF slaves from foreign
country other country And II ese the only
facts that TO nvestigate You will that they
three First, these defendants the the
factors or this vessel second did they as sucn at her
out for foreign port Third did they either Of them,
at the time that they thus fitted her out for foreign port
have the intent TO have her employ IN the transpor
ton OF slaves from enc foreign country to anotnerf In
reference the first TACT there to be doubt
OF this vessel it is that the other chartee
for her, and the ereiore the pro hdc rlce,
either the or
OF ine vessel The next question Is, she fitted out
for foreign port And about this there is no difficulty,
for It Ia conceded that she fitted out by them tor
voyage tie coast or Africa intended by them
engage In that branch OF the legal OF the
uy. And will say, In this connection, that that is
legal merce, much the commerce between
this port and other port oany ot or foreign country
1t is recognized lawful commsrce by the government
OF the United Sates Il is ued to very great extent
by pectable merchants In This city, and TO Its
tDs city s in indebted FOR s adv
and its progress Therefore, the to the
of Africa beng foreign commerce. no prejudice should
exist sganst any individual from the fact that he has
lifted out vessel from the port OF New Yorx 10
engage In that commerce. He has right to do 1t 1t
lawful for bm to do it, and no presumption should exist
sgainst hm from the TACT that he has engaged in
that foreign commerce. To be sure, that foreign
ports OF foreign countries be abused But the
that be abused by unworthy persons Is no cause
why any prejudice should exist against any who
cages in that commerce, so long as 1t is lawful. 1t n
therefore conceded these persons lid fit out this
there beng nothing else in the case, it perfectly
lawful for them to do II The only remaining
questop, and abou. which you viii have no
that vessel was naed out in the port OF
New York TO have her engaged in transporting slaves
from foreign country TO other country That is
tie only question tba, you aro try considering
this you would consider any other case where
the punishment Infamous and where infamy shall at
tach to the character OF individuals provided the
charges alleged In tho indictment sustained, you
to bear 10 mind that the presumption OF Innocence Is In
favor o. these individuals you are not to look upo,
their with any presumption Of gut. They stAod
before you under the presumption hA they Innocent
ana you are pound oy your oMn, pronounce them In
you can say your caths that that legal testimony
saishes you beyond reasonable doubt that that pre-
sumption red And the question then for you 20
determine L. has there been such testimony given you
In open court (which alone you consder) as will
saiy you beyond any reasonable doubt that that legal
prcsumpten their favor should not exist and which
sha compel you, upon your oaihs 10 soy that they
guilty OF the charge set iortn In this Indictment II
cannot II, upon the evidence given to you IN court
you bound scqut them. II you say IT, bey ond
any reasonable doubt thtn IL your oound den duty TO
intent and where tho Of the crime the Intent
70 do particular act 10 that the act has been
done and when you have found that the at WAS DONE
you presume that the person by whom tho act was done
intended to do that act and 10 such that,
upon proof that the act done, you
BEEN ouDa s0 board
vessei, you must find that at least has fitted
out or nsvisa'et that vessel with the intent that she
should transport slaves. Bat for the purpose OF
isning the Of these pares 10 fitting vessel
which, - said before, q lawful business, you
nave mol iact tnA tnere Wcrc slaves on DDard
she has never been 10 the coast Of Africa by which YOU
could nier that the parties intended that she should be
engaged IN such unlawful business. wol what tue
facts and speak OF facts now-upon which you In
fer this guilty inten,l Tho proof in reference 10 her
cargo has exhibited 70 you and believe every wit
ness who has been examined has said that ovory
es those engaged in the African commerce
have have . bean g accustomed TO transport, and
merce 70 transport Wel II these Witnesses TO
believed, then. from the fact that these things
infer any guilty inien,; for II yoa did, you would
infer such guilty intent upon every respectable
merchant IN the city Of New York ~ho has put such
tcies upon board From the TACT therefore that these
articles upon board the vcsse you cannot infer
such intent, uness there has been something else the
rule Of lag Is ths that where there 10 intent-and
there may be lawful INTENT there may be an un.
lawful nienthe presum pon of law Ia that no did the
act with lawful intent; and TIE public wish 10 prove
that be did with unlawful INTENT It Ia their duty 10
prove H. Therefore, from the TACT tha these things
upon board OF this vessel being such persons engaged
had unlawful intent, from the TACT that he might By
possibility have had unlawful intent II has been uvg
ed 10 you thr you should infer this intent from the
fact that mott OF the foreigners, and not
American citizens and from the fact that they
q al II Ia in proof they Nov at loss to
discover how any such legal inference fol,w Ire
collecrsinoe have been here this last time, had
son 10 try several Individuals composing the OF
certain ship here, for an attempt 10 make revolt be-
would he hard TO have made the prssu mption ag~ns
those ndviduals, from facs sat they were Mslsys
70 90 sometninK wonderful they
got out OF the jurisdiction OF the Uned States But
meet hspart Of the case the counsel The defence
introduced the gentleman who shipped this crew. he
tells you the had nothing do with the sh
OF them that they did not know who shipped that
was len entirely TO him TO ship whom he chose that
selected such he thought appropriate for
the voyage; that when they selected be put them
board and that neither OF the three individuals &C
cused knew anything about this and II he tells the truth
even II there bad been any presumption against these
parties from the fact that tho crew Vas such a. Il was
would reem 70 me that when that s proved such pre-
sumption should to exist. Another evidenco OF
guilt, s claimed the part OF the District Attorney,
IT, that br Mosqu TO- who board this vessel when
she seized, had In his possession ccr,sn letters
ten by different persons 10 others real ling and dong
business IN Africa Those letters have been exhibited
70 you. Az understand, those letters were sealed
but | take for granted that Mr.. Mosquito
bad access TO them, and knew the contents
OF them. The question Ia, then, what lcgs
presumption should exist against him IRON tho thai
these letters in bis possession. understand (aud
f wrong in this Dog the counsel TO correct me
that In Of these letters there anything said
about this voyage n am right in shs-and there s
reference made In these letters this voysge-hen
the fact that Mosquito had these letters In his possession
however much they might implicate other vduas In
other transactions, should not Affect him 10 this.
Mr.. Mckpon-TheYe letter that thai Mr.