The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1857-11-04

Lord Mansfield now addressed the
jury. He said that in his opinion the
evidence was not sufficient to condemn
the prisoner, and if the jury agreed with
him in opinion he would discharge him.
Without leaving their seats the jury
agreed that the evidence was not sufici-
ent.
At this moment, who they were about
to fender a verdict of acquittal, the
prisoner rose, and addressed the court.
Fl C said he had been accused of foul
crime, and the jury had said there was
not sufficient evidence against him. Was
he to go out of court with suspicious
resting upon him, after all ? This he
was unwilling to do. He was an limo.
cent man, ard if the Judge would grant
him an opportunity, he would prove it.
He wogld call the housekeeper, who
would copfrm a statement which he
would now make.
The housekeeper had not appeared in
court She had concealed herself or
been concealed by Smith. This was
considered a dark sign against him, but
he himself now offered to bring her for
ward, and stated as reason, not that
he was not willing that she should tcsti-
fly, but, knowing the excitement, he was
fearful that she would be bribed to give
testimony contrary to fact. But he was
now ready to relate all the circumstan-
ces he knew; she ght be called and
examined. If her testimony does not
confirm my story, let me be condemned.
The request of the prisoner appeared
reasonable, and Lord Mansfield, con-
trary to his usual practice, granted it.
The prisoner went on with his state
mant. He said he wished to go out of
the court, relieved from the suspicious
which were resting upon him. As to
the poison, by means of which the strang
er was said to have died, he knew neith-
er the name of it, nor even the existence
of it, until made known by the counsel.
He could call God to witness the truth
of what he said.
And then, as to Mr.. Thompson, he
was perfect stranger to him. How
should he know what articles of value
he had? He did not know. If he had
such articles at Hull be might have left
them on the road, or which was more
probable, have otherwise disposed of
them. And if he did, by means of the
fatal drug, he must have administered it
himself
He begged the jury to remember that
his promises had been repeatedly and
minutely searched, and not the most
trifling article that belonged to the de-
ceased had been discovered in his posses
sion. The stopper of vial had been
found-but of this he could only say,
he had no knowledge, and had not seen
it before it was produced in court.
Ono fact had been proved, and only
one. That he would explain, and his
housekeeper would confirm the state
ment. A witness had testified that
some one had gone to the bed ,oom Of
the house keeper on the night in ques-
tion. He was ready to admit that it
wa. himself. He had been subject for
much of his life to sudden fits of illness;
he had been seized with one on that oc-
casion, and had gone to procure her as
sistance in ligh ing fire. She had re-
turned with him to his room for that
purpose, he having waited for minute
in the passage, while she put on her
clothes. This would account for the
momentary disappearance of the light.
After remaining q few minutes in his
room, and finding himself better, he had
dismissed her and retired to bed, from
which he had not risen when he was in
formed of the death of his guest.
Such was the prisoners address, which
produced a powerful effect. 1t was de-
livered in firm and impressive manner,
and from the simple and artless manner
of the man, perhaps not one present
doubted his entire innocence.
The housekeeper was now introduced
and examined by the counsel of the
prisoner. She had not heard any part
of the statement of Smith, nor single
word of the trial. Her story confirmed
all he had said.
To this succeeded cross examination
by the counsel for the prosecution. O-e
had made deep impress
sion on his mind-that was, that while
the prisoner and the housekeeper were
in the room of the former, something
like q door had obstructcd the light of
the candle, SO that the witness testified
to the fact, but could not see it. What
was this obstruction? ? There was no
door-nothing in the room-which could |
account for this. But the witness was
positive that something like door did |
for moment come between the window
and the candle. This needed explana-
tion. The housekeeper was the person
hat could give it. Designing to probe
his matter IN the end to the bottom,
put not wishing to excite her alarm, he
began by asking her few unimportant
questions, and among others, where the
candle stood when she was in Mr.. Smiths