The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-07-24
CITY INTELLIGENCE.
CRIMINAL COURT.-TRIAL OF HEISsI.ER AND
JOHNSON FOR MURDER.

JOHNSON FOR MURDER
FRIDAY, July 2s.-Tne court met at the usual hour,
and the trial resumed The traverse jurors VINO
were not ON this panel dismissed until next We'd
neseiay morning at 10 o'clock.
Mr. ouLD behalf of the government, stated that he
should only occupy the attention of the jury for short
time AZ there were but few questions involved IN THIS
case that required discussion and the court had granted
Instructions the points Of law. This whole COMMUNE
ty had been startled by foul and brutal murder that
had been committed upon peaceabc and unoiiendng
Citizen who shot down in cold blood on one OF our
most frequened thoroughfares The grrnd jury alter
investigating all the facts connected With this case pre-
ferred an indictment against the prisoner at the par
eissle the principal in the first degree ana against
three other parties principals in the second degree
charging the murder to have been committed by lless
Ter himself and that The other three parties We're there
present aiding and abetting him in the commission OF
that murder The offence, proved before the Jury ia
Contemplation Of law is and the same and the pun
ishnent in each the Two OF the parties in
diced have fed justice and the others are the prs
oners at the bar Now the fact Of the murder was adj
nitted and the only question was as TO the party who
committed IT, la Of murder, the party indicted
always has defence of kind. III II is done N
open manner and is by crowd of wtncsscs-if the
circumstances aggravated and arocoS, II Is con-
tended that the party is insane Jfhe circumstances attend
ing the transaction are witnessed by human eyes, and
the only be made out by proving chain OF crcun
and following out their connection with each other
and drawing differences then the defence Is set up that
surrounding case that is only made out by circumstan
tal evidence 1t was all strange, then, that there
should be sort Of defence in the present but
whether that defence we'll ill-foundcd the jury
must Judge He had nothing to. do with the general
character of the prisoners but should conne himself to
the circumstances detailed in evidence by the principal
witnesses in this case, connected Immediately with the
actual fact of the murder.
Mr. o. then proceeded to detail the evidence to the
Jury commenting at length on the points which
tended TO fix the guilt of the murder upon the prisoners
at the bar The question which then raised was,
whether tho witness William Johnson an accomplish
in the transaction not. If he was an accompce,
the prisoners could not be convicted upon his uncorrobo
rated testimony but if he not accomplish his
testimony would be sufficient without any corroborating
evidence Now, what were the fcts in reference to him
If he connected with the transaction at ALL it must
either be that he the principal in the first degree
actually committing the deed the principal in the
second degree present and aiding and abetng in the
same accessory before after the fact 1t was
not contended the other side that he accessory
either before after the fact and there not
particle of evidence TO constitute him principal Hc
could not be shown to be connected with the transac
ton in any way; and being relieved of the charge Of
participation, he stands before the jury witness
entitled to full credit and belief. But his testimo-
ny not without corroboraon, in many of its
material points The evidence OF the witness Manyette
established the leading facts in the case and supported
the testimony Of VIM. johnson. He also cerrobo-
rated by Mrs Hensley, who testified that three parties
did out Of the 9th street door of the barber shop
Drummond likewise corroborated him to the point
where he stated that he down 9th street to
for Drummond states that only few minutes after the
shooting he met Vim. johnson at the of and til
Streets coming from the direction of 9Th street. His
testimony also corToborated IN still direct and
pointed manner by that of Patrick Gormley. Now how
this sort of evidence sought to be evaded The de-
fence point to tring Inconsistencies in the est
mony of Mrs. Hensley and which natural consider
ing the fact that there six parties to the transaction
two of whom were entirely unaccounted for 1t
true she testified that the tall up, instead of
down. Ninth street but she not olfoborated in
this testimony by any Witness and must therefore have
been mistaken. The jury must naturally infer. On
the other hand If the jury believe that the who
fired the pistol did up 9th street. it could not be
VIM. Johnson for it proved that he went down 9th
street. This fact did not reflect upon her integrity
in the least for after stating that she pistol IN
the trl mans hand, she modified the expression by say
ing that she meant to say by that that she fash
and 1t from the direction of the tall and she
also admitted that the night dark she could not
have seen pistol in mans hand. significant fact
of the truth of the statements of VIM. johnson was,
that the counsel on the other side did not attempt by
crcssexamining him, to contradict his testimony 1ney
knew it was true and therefore wisely abstancd from
cross examination
The prosecution afraid to cross-examle Van
LOman johnson, and he broke down; he here
vict and he went away felon He stated that William
Johnson told him that ~ shot man." Now, he would
state this for his benefit he only told lie to word
and that by substituting the word ~ for 'eisslcr
der any knowledge of it, after stating, next morning.
that he knew nothing, had heard nothing of it, after
he that his brother arrested and charged
with participation In the infamous act, and being pos
scssed of the information which he states communi
Gated to him by VIM johnson, would he not have come
out at once and relieved his BROTHER by Informing the
authorities what he had heard Weigh the two witnesses
in the scale, and which Of them entitled to the
greatest weight Of crcdence. One them had committed
perjury, and the jury could Judge and determine who
entitled to belief, and who was the perjured man.
Mr. 0nd, after occupying about an hour concluded his
remarks by saying that he had discharged his duty well
as he could, although somewhat fecbly in consequence
laborng under the disadvantage of temporary illness
1t now became The jury to discharge theirs they not
only held in their hands the scales of justice but they
also wore its sword, and he hoped they would carefully
srutnze all the evidence in the and that justice
was done not only to the prisoners at the bar but to
clety and to the law which had been violated.
Mr.. RAs.IIrPE, on behalf Of the defendants made an
elaborate argument He stated that he should indulge
In no outside issues, but should confne himself to the
questions involved in the CASE presented to the Jury
and as covered by the instructions which the had
granted. He would remark in the beginning with all
due respect to the learned gentleman who had Just closed
his Argument that IN the whole course Of his speech he
had not touched single point comprebendcd In those
Instructions Mr. r. then took up the instructions and
detailed the evidence bearing upon the case conendng
mat the witness William johnson the real perpc
TRAITOR of the murder, and that upon no other hypothesis
could tho testimony be explained. The witness Many
cite testified that when he turned round he saw William
lensley tilted that she tall man push another
one and then fire pistol and the circumstance that
The wound was at high point in Stoops's breast
ana inclined Nawarls he regarded MS ire, acabIe