Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-05-22

INNOCENT
outset. You should be convinced o his guilt be-
yond reasonable doubt. On the 18th of Novem-
Der, Mr.. William Learned saw him in good health,
| and loft him so at six clock that night. The
next morning he went 30 Naughton's house,
opened the door, aud there saw Naughton dead
| upon the floor. This is confirmed by his son, Viii
| liam II. Leurned, Mr.. Davis, and Mr.. Hews.-
| There was blood upon the steps. The body was
| examined by medical man. who teslifes that
| the number of wounds upon it caused it death -
| This is therefore clear of the murder of
| Naughton, done for the purpose of robbery. Who
| was the murderer The Government must salts
| fly you beyond doubt that the person before
| you is the murderer. Evidence is of two kinds,
| direct and circumstantial. You have heard from
| the mouths OF the witnesses direct testimony of
| the murder. CiTcumstantial evidence may be
equally satisfactory. The Court will callito your
! notice the principal points for the Government
| and defence, and then will leave it to you to de-
| eide whether there is euOugh evidence to commit
the prisoner at all. The facts must be consistent
! with the hypothesis. You must not regard the
| opinions of newspaper editors you must pass
| by them an idle wind No witness called upon
| has stated where Glynn was that night. The
| Government prove that he was absent from home,
| ana establish the connection that he went to
| Dudley. He said he going to Dudley the
| boy, Gotf, saw him going i'll that direction. Ed
ward May saw him in the morning returning from
that direction. As far as you are satisfied Of
these facts they establish link in the chain of
Thursday night may be slight, and may furnish
| argument, though not Inconsistent with the idea
that he might have been somewhere else. They
also point you to the conversation at the break
| tast-table The argument is, that the prisoner
| could not have known that he was dead, unless
| he participated in the crime; but you should re-
| member, that he could hardly speak word in the
English language; you are, therefore, not to
Judge him as one of your neighbours; he might
have been easily understood.
| Government CT esfo oh tho faof hot
by no possibility of means could he have learned
OF the fact of the murder. Grany testiies that
Glynn said he did not know of the murder until
Saturday; there is discrepancy in the state
| ments. The Counsel for the defence say that he
meant he did not know of the funeral If he lied
| 1t might have been to save him from the reproach
| OF attending the funeral. The declaration to Mr..
| Shumway is that he went to Barnes tavern,
bought liquor, and went direct to the house of
| MIR. May and slept in the barn. Consider. in the
first instance, further testimony of Shumway and
Barnes, that he did not know who lived in Naugh-
! tons house. This Grany dispToves, as he has
! been to the house. You will judge whether or
| not the reward had any influence on Shumway
One thing in favor of the prisoner is, his conduct
while he was in custody of the officers.-he had
right to keep silent, and stood upon his rights
He had right to tell them that he did not know
who lived in the house. The law in such cases
should be thrown around the prisoner The next
circumstance is that of the axe. Was the axe
found at Naughtons, the axe of Mr. Mayi Is
the axe brought here the one? Both are proven
satisfactorily that they are the same.
the axe was accessible to other persons You
Will consider whether or not there was not an op,
portunity for others to take the axe after Mon
day, as no one saw it after that time. Those that
knew the axe, knew it defective. 1t is said
to be impossible that he should have carried this
axe off in the early part of the evening" and sew
eral miles. The circumstance is not as strong as
| that would be, if it belonged to him. The pris-
/ oner has introduced evidence to show that he
! came here poor boy, had but a single suit of
! clothes, and no change of apparel. The man who
| committed the murder imbued with blood,
his hands and his feet. 1t is impossible that he
| could have come out of the house without blood
upon his clothes. The prisoner had not a drop
upon him. Circumstances go to show that there
were two persons engaged in the act. 1t is said
that the prisoner at the bar was not the to
take the bank book, he could not read or write
but, on the other hand, it is said that he might
have known the appearance of bank book
There has never been found upon the person of
The prisoner any prints of the murder not an ar
tice of Naughton's about him. Settle all
! the facts in the case upon the mind If the re-
suit is to fasten the crime upon the prisoner, you
must not hesitate to say If you are not salts
| fed that he did it, then return verdict of not
| guilty.
The above is substantially the charge of the
! Judge. 1t occupied about an hour and three
| quarters in delivery.
! AT 2 O'Clock the jury returned verdict of Nor
| GUILTY.
In the case of James Redeman, for the murder
| of Samuel Freshman, in Dudley, on the 9th of
December last he1prisoner pleaded guilty of man.
slaughter, and was sentenced to the House of
Correction for two years.
TriaI eff Samuel Clemson, for she Murder
Of an Infant Child in Worcester.
THURSDAY May 81
For the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS General JnuN RI
CLIFFORD, and District Attorney P. EMORY
ALDRICH.
For the Detenee-E. B. sToDDARD, ESQ. ,'and W.
A. WILLIAMS, Esq.
The following gentlemen were empannelled as
Jurors; Samuel Chanberlin, Westboro Joel
Goddard, Webster Emerson Haven, Upton !;
Bainbridge Maynard, Milford; Calvin HOLMAN,
| Lancaster; Aaron IL. Marble, Charlton; Sumner
| Pratt, Worcester: VIM. B. Ramsdell, Warren !;
| Henry Rawson, Mendon; John w Rice Barre !;
Luther W. Rngg, Sterling; Lewis Whitney, Pc
tersham MIR. Rugg was appointed foreman of
| the jury.
The clerk then read the indictment. At this
point, the case stood adjourned till two o'cloek,
| owing to the non arrival of witness.
The Court assembled in the afternoon, at the
hour appointed, when the Attorney General NOV
| ed postponement of the case till the next Octo-
Der term, which the Court granted, and Gleason
was put under $4,000 bonds for his appearance &C.
cordingly.
| John Glynn was set at liberty, on his own re-
cognizance in the sum of $1,000, to appear and
answer for the murder of Mary Naughton.
| In the case of Lucina A. Ransom, for the muir.
der of the child, Frederick L. Doremus Williams,
a mol pros was entered.
| officers Braman and Reed arrested an insane
Irishman on Temple street, on Wednesday, who
was ravingly violent against being nterfered with
He claimed to hail from Providence but not PROV
| ing sufficiently dangerous to require permanent