Indiana American. [volume] (Brookville, Ind.) 1833-1861, 1857-07-31
Larry Indiana Trials.
"REMINISCENCES BY HON. o. n. SMITH.


CASE or ARsoN--KkNTUcKY PRACTICE.
Before taking up the Fall Creek
trials for the murder of the Seneca
Indians, will continue the recollect-
ions of some lighter cases. l have
sketched an incident upon special
pleading with distinguished member
ot the Ohio bar, and have stated that
the Indiana bar, in thatscience, were
the closest practitioners. We had
the pleasure often, also, OF meeting the
gentlemanly lawyers from the Ken
lucky side Of the river, in our courts
in Dearborn and Switzerland, and oil
seeing their mode OF practice. found
their forte TO be aspeech to the jury,
and not in watching the evidence in
its Introduction, as -e did onsthe In
diana side. At u term OF the Dear
born Circuit Court, c0lorod boy was
indicted for arson IN burning the barn
ofGeneral Pike, near Lawrenceburgh.
| was attorney for the State, and
Messrs. Vawter and Armstrong, OF
Boone county, kentucky, appeared
for the prisoner, under some under
standidg that they were to have the
bov tor term OF ye..rs upon his ac-
quittal. The evidence OF the burning
was first given To the jury. / then
proceeded TO give evidence of the con-
iession OF the boy while the barn was
burning. The boy, being suspected
by the neighbors, was seized and
threatened, that unless he confessed
and told all about it, he would be
thrown into the flames and be burned
alive. Upon these t.reats the boy
confessed and told where he threw
the chunk with which he carried the
fire to the barn. While all this evil
dence was given, the counsel for the
prisoner sat quiet'w tout making
any objections, and when l closed,
proceeded to cross question the wit
ness. then proved by another wit
ness that the chunk was found at the
place described. The case here rest
ed until after dinner. Court met; no
evidence tor the boy offered, and the
argument commenced. had little
to say. The proof, as the case stood
was conclusive. Mr.. Armstrong rose
and spoke over four hours, with great
eloquence, appealing frequently to
the sympathy of the jury, but said
nothing about the law of the case.--
Col. Vawter, the senior of the firm,
then arose with the law OF the case,
that confessions extortcd from the
witness by threats OF persanal vio-
lence were not evidence, and calling
upon the jury to reject it. Had lie
made the objection to the Court at the
proper time, the evidence would have
been excluded, and the prisoner ac-
Quilted, but his practice III Kentucky
had suffered him to sleep upon the
proper application of the law to his
case at the right time. Judge Eggles-
ton charged the jury. The prisoner
was convicted and sentenced five
years to the pcnitentiary.
A CASE OF MISUNDERSTANDING
For the more immediate considera-
tion Of the profession, and to take
their legal opinion, a sketch of two
cases before the associate Judges up
on the defence Of ''tender," may not
be out of place. They were cross
actions, and came before the Court at
the same time, and were submitted
to, her. ] call the parties John
Jones and James Backhouse. The
facts: Jones was raised and educated
in the north part of New York, in
what is called the Gencsse county,
and Backhouse was an Ohioan, from
near Cincinnati; In New York
where Jones came from they called
"shell bark hickory" "shag bark wal
nut" and ground hogs" wood
chucks" In Ohio where Backhouse
came from, they called ''shag bark
walnut "shell bark hickory and
'wood chucks, "ground hogs" The
parties met accidentally and Jones
proposed to sell TO Backhouse "ten
nice walnut logs" for his saw mill
Backhouse, supposing Of course that
they were "black Wa nutlogs," agreed
to give dollar piece for them on
delivery at his mill dam. Backhouse
then proposed to sell to Jones two
tame "ground hogs that he had ut
home for fifty cents each, which jones
agreed to give, and To receive and pay
for them when the first log WAS de.
livered. Jones cut the logs, loaded
one on his wagon and drove down To
the dam to unload. Backhouse hap
pened to be there. what is that
you have thereY' "One OF the logs.
What logs2' "why one Of those
walnut logs you bought of me. -
That no walnut log. "Yes il is, as
fine 'shag bark walnut as grows in
Indiana. j." "lt's no such thing, il is
nothing but Il shell bark hickory -
"Will you receive it2 l tender il to
you with the other nine under oui
contract and demand my pay IL
shall not receive il, but am ready u
receive the walnut logs bought Of
you "Then let me have the ground
hogs ] bought of you, am ready u
pay for them" "Come down TO the
house and you shall have them. -
At the house There they are, Mr.
Jones. "What, them ground hogs
dew tell?" "Yes, pair OF as tn,
ground hogs as | ever saw. and per.
iectly tame They are no ground
hogs, they are nothing but wood
chucks, would not give a cent for
them, the pestering things bored ouI
ground all hollow in York State. -
Il tender you the ground hogs and
demand the pay" III shall not touch
them wood chucks, but am ready Il
receive and pay for the ground hogs
under our contract The parties
were strictly honest men, wholly in
capable Of the suggestio fdtsi or tn,
supressio reri, as was admitted by tn.