Staunton vindicator and general advertiser. (Staunton, Augusta County, Va.) 1858-1860, 1858-06-19
Trial Of Rev. D. DOwney,

tr lTldI VI Kew ID UOWneys
The trial Of Rev. D. Downey, charged
with the murder of VIM. Mullins, in this
place, in December, 1857, commenced on
Thursday the Sd inst, and occupied the
Court until last Tuesday, when the case was
given to the Jury about o'clock in the af-
ternoon, and at the time Of writing this ar
ticlc the Jury have been unable to agree.
During the whole time of this deeply
interesting trial, the Court House was
thronged with visitors anxious to hear the
particulars of the painful tragedy which in
volved the life of human being. Our read
ers have already been made acquainted with
some Of the particulars Of this horrid trans
action, but repetition at this time may not
be unnecessary.
In December last. Mullins was on visit
at the house Of Downey, in company with
several other persons,-the marriage of
Mullins had been contemplated, but for
some cause the nuptials were not celebrated,
and il is alleged by the accused that the
meeting at the house Of Downey, was for
the purpose Of celebrating the marriage and
Of producing reconciliation between the par
ties. Instead of this result, however, while
the two persons, Oowney and Mullins J
were alone in the sitting room, the discharge
Of pistol caused the visitors to rush into
the room, where they found Mullins shot,
from the effects of which he died, almost i'm
mediately. Evidence was introduced by
the defence, to prove that the killing of
Mullins was an act of self defence, as q
witness { Margaret Lee) deposed that she
saw most of the t ansaction. Tbis testimony
was correbofated, in part, but what credence
is given to all her statement by the Jury,
we cannot know. For ourselves, We must
say, that VIC, in company with very many
other persons, believe the nrtlcss, simple,
straightforward story Of the unpretcnding
girl. But few persons could have under
gone scrutinizing examination Of nine
hours, and committed fewer discrepancies.
1t would be impossible, in this article, to
60 through all the testimony elected on the |
trial. No one saw the shooting, but the |
fact that murder had been committed, was
apparent. The Commonwealth Attorney.
had consequently, to rely upon all the at
tcndant circumstances, to make out his case. !.
The examination Of the testimony occupied I
five and half days. The argument was
commenced on Thursday evening the 10th,
and concluded on Tuesday evening about
) o'clock, in the afternoon, occupying four
and half days, and was the occasion of a
fine forensic display, by the eminent coun-
sci employed in the cause, all of whom ac-
quilted themselves with distinguished abili- !
ity and added to their high reputation as
members Of a profession which they adorn |.
1t may not be out Of place to remark, that
many an eye was moisencd with tear,
during the progress Of the trial.
On Thursday morning last, the Jury,
after having che case from Tuesday even
ing, being unable to agree, were discharg
ed, and thus has terminated this most ex-
citing and interesting trial = The Jury
stood, 9 for finding verdict Of guilty Of
murder in the second degree, and for ac-
qlittal.
We had hoped to be able to publish the
whole Of the testimony in this case, this
week, and had made arrangements for SO do !.
ing, but the time at which the Jury was
discharged left US but few hours to wade !,
through Fifty pages Of closely written manu-
script, thereby precluding the possibility Of
publication in this issue; and, added to this,
Il has been reg arded an obstruction to the
cause of justice to make any publication dur
ing the progress of trial, and, consequent
ly, we were compelled to await the dicision
Of the, Jury, which decision was at an hour
so late as to leave us no alternative but to |
await another issue Of our paper.
Counsel for the Commonwealth. -Col /
W. H. Hartman, aud W. s. II. Baylor,
ESQ. For the defence, -Thos. J. Niche.
Col Baldwin, James II. Skinner, and H. |
NJ. Bell, Esqs.
Something NeW.-We saw gentleman,