The weekly Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1861, 1857-11-05


Conant" was not continued for any such
course, or upon any such statement 10 you
allege. II is, however, true that Mr.. Brown
Immediately after the motion to change the
the place OF trial had failed, suggested that
he wished to file motion to continue, when
/ requested him 10 state his cause then, that
/ might save. the expense Of getting the
witnesses on part Of the State if the case
was not to be rrled. He undertook to do
so, saying however that he could not make
IN accurate statement without first seeing
his client, and proceeded to give q state
ment not quite as indefinite as you give il,
but SO much so that the court refused to
grant the motion, but gave Mr.. Brown time
to have dn interview with Conant, and pre- !
pare more accurate statement; and in the |
afternoon of the same day think, Mr..
Brown came into court and stated particu.
ularly the grounds OF his motion, naming
three material witnesses for the defence,
two Of whom were out Of the State; stating
where they were, Gnd why they were absent,
without any perhaps" and also stating what
he expected to prove by each, on the triab
alleging on this point sufficient for COM
ple,e defence. IL such testimony had really
existed and been truthful. The court OBJ.
served that the cause was sufficient, unless
would admit as testimony, what Mr. Brown
said each of these witnesses would swear
to. This dared not to do, feeling that the
case was TOO important 10 be rashly endan.
gered. IF had admitted the statement as
testimony and thereby lost the case, would
you not hate justly charged me with the re-
suit! My position in this Cunont case has
not been pleasant one, for while you have
in every issue Of your paper, but one, since
court, called public attention to what you
/ think is my unfaithfulness, | have been
! just ds constantly accused in. other quarters
. of persecution, cruelty, and unnecessary Sc
: verify towatdsthe unfortunate defendant in
9 this case.
e I have already occupied too much Of your
= space, and while choose to pass in silence
:, your mention Of what you ure pleased to
!. call, ironically, my "transcendent dnJ shin
. ing abilities" om still anxious to remove
d from your mind any suspicion, if indeed your
). entertain any, that ! suggested the para
j graph in the Democrat, to which your las
article was q reply. My hrs! ada only
knowledge Of that paragraph. arose from
II reading it after the publication of the pape'
;, containing it. have no complaint to make o
n unfarness to me professionally, on the part o
!, the Sentinel, except in the case referred to
~ and if had any such complailts they woul
be lodged 'withyou rather ihan'in any othe
~ quarter. Respectfully yours.
I'd E.B. TAYLOR.
We publish the foregoing communication
=, with pleasure. 1t is plain aud candid.
~ " The rule adopted in The continuance Of
- case in court, as Mr.. Taylor incidentally ad
mitS, is this:
The party desiring the continuance, mus
file his melton tn toriItng. That motto
V, must contain a distinct statement of tn
st grounds of continuance. If ii is the at
ds seuce Of material witness, the motto
", must stGie
DIS /. The name Of the witness.
of Q. That the party has used ull prope
n. efforts to procure his attendance.
n 8. What he expects to prove BY him.
SIS i. That he expects to be able to pr
an cure his attendance ut the next term Of til
court.
5. That the motion is not made for d.
'N' lay, but for substantial justice.
g" The above facts set forth in writing. mi!
~ be swuu to, by the party or bis alto ne
'.o asking the continuance.
!" In the case Of Eber M. Conant, none
$50 these things ,cere done. No written moti'
was iled-no qGdavit was made, becau
m. they were waived by the prosecutor.
of Mr.. Taylor's error, in our Judgment, Il
IN. in voluntarily waving the Sling ofthe mott
If and the affidavit. He should have held N
,nt Conont and his attorney to the strict rule
court.
1t may be proper. and is indeed commen
i. able in some instances, for an attorney
. d matter of courtesey towards opposi
ral counsel, to waive a strict compliance y
ely the rules in a case of continuance, but in
Der cause of such magnitude as the ore abe
me referred to, and where NOT the welfare Of
ms individual, but the welfere Of commun
1es' is at stake, we submit to ap intelligent pt
am lie, whether q public prosecutor is not
as dtf,y bound, to hold the party desiring Ct
re tinunnce, to the strict letter Of tEe law
the rules Of court.
yer With this, we leave the subject. H
tare -----------=----- ---==--------=-
mo. E. T. JONES'