The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-07-13

over BY reoogn'zapce to appear Of the ssszs
and that be did accordingly appear ami sav-d he
Court by the records Of the sssizss; but ye, they
would make no rule for the record to be a,fe 10
With the arrest Of judgment because prece 'eat O.
this nature might be Of dangerous consequences nc
Courts OF record have power, at any time, o: ven VET
a. during toe term at which any entry made, o. tne
o~n motion or the DIGESTION Of any party
and without notice to any one the mistakes AID
supply the omissions Of their CLERKS or RECORDING ON
GERS - to make the record conform 70 the
case and the exclusive judges oil tue neces soc
propriety OF amending or extending toe RECORDS ana
Of The proofs and of the sucency Of the proofs o. which
to proceed (BspjsmiD l. Bsloo sad VIC vs. hooer' IT,
Shaw, CusbiDgs Reports. p. 2ss)
Court OF record In considering the question OF the
rei forth truly It's own transactions, not bound by
Ordinary rules or evidence but may resort 10 suy proof
that is sa.isfsct,ry mayo va Whson, Jones, Law,
n O 23l: U S Digest, vol. l6. p 2i9)
ParcI evidence what TRANSFERRED ut tho trial is al
sbie for purpose OF explaining tue record. Oar
The Court erred in refusing to let the witness state his
reascps for hsveg good opciou OF the defendants cha
rsc,er IL .he country o; hs nativity:
trial. toe Witness may assign in evidence the reasons
wbcb be gives thu. character" Il Macoaiys Ev., 32a-
S2 See also opinion OF the Court OF Appeas in tae
His settled law that witness Cannot he examined q
to any distinct TACT TOR the purpose mpesh
se bis testimony by conascictpg him s'srkies Ey
ls4; Phil Ev, 81 Harris wlsop, Wendell, 5s)
Be. If Question relative TO such fact be put and
swereo evidence cannot sftsr~ards he addu led
purpose of contradiction (Starkes Ev., 134 Con- 63s
Starkies n. p. @ l49; Gailson, So
WGen TitrcsS on his smr at9u denies parti-
Gu ar fsct gong to mpssch his general character ana
credit, Witnesses sAnoot he called to contradict hi
(Speecsls vs. De Wilot, East 1Os; La ~repcs Bar
xar. weud., BOZ Harris VA. Wilson, Wend., 81; l
Salkie's Ev., i42, l64; Cowen as Nosss 70 Phil.
Ev., 7iS; Grsenl. Es p SOL, sec. 44s)
The Attorney General replied.
Nr. Blankman again asked that it should appear
on the record that juror was withdrawn.
This was objected to by the Attorney General.
The Court after consultation decided to consider
the certificate Of the Circuit Judge as fifth point
made by Mr. Bankman for the prisoner and to over
The Attorney General said he did not understand
that the counsel for the defence asked to have the
certificate in the case.
The Court then said if not, there was no neces
sity OF any action on the point.
Mr.. Asbmead desired it to be distinctly understood
that as he had neither lot nor part in making the
stipulation nor agreeing to it, he did not ask to have
the certificate appear as point for trial.
The Court then said that it was understood that
Mr.. Blankman asked for it, and it would appear not
part of the record but as a point made by him
and overruled by the Court.
The motion for a new trial was denied.
Hereupon Mr. Henry Vande Voort, the clerk of
the Courts of Oyer and Terminer and Sessions read
the warrant of execution which was interpreted to
the prisoner, 1t was then handed to the Sheriff, to
whose custody the prisoner was consigned.
The bill OF exceptions was signed by the entire
bench and the case will be taken before the Court
of Appeals.
We understand that the Court of Appeals will
not meet until the second Tuesday in September
and the prisoner is sentenced to execution on Thurs
day, the I'd of September.