Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1858-07-15

Maury was addressing the jury on the part Of the
defence. He commended that in all legal presump-
ton the prisoners were not to be supposed to De
Guilty. oy the evidences OF SO base and cowardly
| considerable tact In his attacks upon the incon-
| sistency Of the testimony given by him. fnsinu-
ailng that he was In all likelihood a porfieePs
| eTfnnintS with those who had made the attack
| on Lewis and Entwistle In conclusion, he con-
| TENDED that there was room for a reasonable
doubt Of the guilt Of the prisoners, and that they
Onght t0 be acquitted.
He was followed on the same side by Mr.. Chill
ton, who went through the whole evidence which
had been adduced, on which be commented at
considerable length, particularly on portions of
the testimony of The witness Carrico, which, he
argued, Were irreconciIable with consistency.
When he concluded, the court ad journed
| FOURTH DAY.
| To- day, after the prisoners were brought into
| court and the jury called, Mr. Guild begun his
closing address to the jury the part Of the Gov
| eminent, by stating that a considerable portion
OF Their time had been taken up by the counsel on
| the other side In discussing the philosophy of
criminal law IL was not his purpose to follow
| them in that line of argument He should speak
OF the great Divine law" thou shalt do muir
der ~ A portion Of their time had been devoted
10 tt Hin" the jury Of their duties as Jurors The
grand jury had found In their nvestig alton suni
Client ground upon which TO find true bin Of
murder against the prisoners at the bar and it
only remained with the jury to try the fact
whether they are guilty OF Innocent II was not
tne purpose OF the grand jury, nor Of this court,
1
| as to reasonable doubt All technicalties taken
away from he case, the jury were bound by their
0aths TO believe that these parties are guilty
| There were no perplexing doubts to solve.
| The counsel had stated that his (the speaker's)
| opening had been a vindictive one. He could
| lay his hand on his heart, and say his mind was
free entirely from every vestigs of vindctiveness
or i'll feelings God knew he harbored no i'll feel
| Ing toward the prisoners. The jury, in looking
al this case, had right to look at all the enormi
ties OF the crime, and 10 follow them to their
mote consequences. w hat was the proof in this
| case Here the speaker followed the two pris
oners from their starting place to the scene of the
assassination. and dwelt with great force upon
each ciIeumstsnGs tnst occurred, up to the final
ACT or cowaTdly desperation, whIt resulted in
the death Of Lewis. How was this appal Hing
weight of evidence to be impe ached, By attack
Ing he char cter Of Ca co ly Two meth 8
Wee Escorted to, and both had proved mel
fsctual. Their waves Of attack Were broken into
Intellectual foam around the rock OF evidence,
which remained mistaken. Why did they net
attempt by bringing witnesses TO break the char
acter of the witness Carrico Because they courd
not do 1t. His testimony is as unimpeachable as
| that of the learned counsel the other side
would have been. He NAV be a coward and
I'VE consi !ned himself TO infamy by his failure TO
act out he Is at least honest. He has spoken tn.
Iuth Gentlemen on the other side complained
OF the opening OF the pros, cut o complain ed Of
their calling the prisoners rim nals-and calling
H. vlndctive, They. in their argument to the
jury, assailsd the witness CarriCo, and even had
gone so far as TO insinuate that he was an accom-
ptlce with these assassins. If the prisoners were
under such circumstances, to have the protection
Of the Court also was the witness
AT tue time Of this transaction. the city was
fdll Of terror, by reason of the disOrderly an 4
mu5d rou> gags which then inf .sted it, 10
the jury not believe that bad the witness Carrco,
gone over the street at the time Reve Lewis was
shot, and fell to the pavement, that his life would
have been also sacrificed by these prisoners, His
fear was well founded. He valued his life which
was also valuable to his wife and little ones His
conduct in coneealinS the matter was obviously
.iT rom Stan,
anxiety to have both the prisoners arrested, was
manifest. He accordingly, knowing that if Will
liams was arrested before Barrett, that fact would
necessarily involve the flight Of Barrett waited
until he could have them both in the city at once
and then gave the information which led to their
arrest.
there could have been no difficulty in that. The
circumstances under which he saw them was
sufficient to be entirely sure to their identified
ton. He saw Barrett first at Beveridge's cellar
Again. soon after, he met Barrett and Williams
walking together. He saw them. face to face. at
the corner of First street, and followed them
from thence-no one interveninx.for several
squares, never letting them 20 out Of sight, and
LIN the full glare of the street lamps, up TO the
ve'y spot where he saw them commit the deed
The counsel bad dwelt with great It -ess upon he
TACT that CdrIlcO was coward. They must get
some intervening proposition with which to con
meet his cowardce, or il was a non Seguiftr-a
SORT of logical Adame; If it had a relative it had
antecedcnt.
They spoke Of cowardice. Where could there
be found Il man, where wal ked or crept u man so
baSely coward as the man Barrett Why did not
CirTlco give the Information as to what hr saw
on that Saturday night? Because the next Mon
day morning the papers stated that Mr.. Carrico
fUnnd MessIS. Entwistie and Lewis at the north
. cas-. corner OF the Capitol grounds. What was
The Inference ON the part of the prisoner! That
Cdrfico had followed their guilty steps up To the
v.ry corner and was possessed OF the fatal secret
w hat was Carfico's inference, and why did he
not communicate the information, 1t was beraus
he did not want to be- dead man on Tuesd Az
That Is why h- did not do II. As to the discfe-
pancts between the evidence of Entwistle and
Carrlco, that did not tend in the least to lessen the
weight To be attached to Carrico's evidence For
while every witness called to the stand on the part
OF the prosecution corrobeTated the evidence of
CaEricO to the disc epancy between them I'm the
time OF the occurrence, not one OF them agreed
with Mr.. Entwistle as to that point, and the only
Inference. waS that CarTico was right, and Emit
wistle mistaken.
The chain Of proof was complete: there was
no conflict. IL the prisoners had been any where
else than there on that night why could they n IT
have proven the fact to the jury, They found
on the Avenue at Il late hour; they ar. followed
up 10 the fatal corner, and seen to do the infa-
nous deed Is it probable that two PERSONS
could b. placed for one hour and Il half at any
time OF The day or mig hit In position where they
could not have shown that they were bent upon
some honest motive, had such been the case? Ii
would be possible with one man alone who
might mud himself in circumstances where il
would he impossible TO have cleared himself but
II would be impossible with two men together
They must have had the means to explain their
whereabouts, had they been any where else than
where they are proved To have been.
After leaving this branch of the argument MT
Ould stated. in behalf of the prisoner Williams
that there was no evidence to show that he fired
pistol AZ Lewis, who was killed; but IL the Jury
believed tha. he was there, aidiug and abettiny
Barrett in his acts, LIE was guilty Of murder. He
was proved TO have been there; to have scruti-
nized the parties narrowly, they passed by; to
have stopp d with Barrett, when be stopped; to
have thiogn a stone at, and afterwards shot, En-
twis!e. IL the jury believed he there and not
acting In concert with Barrett, in any respect,
then he was innocent.
In closing, Mr. OuId Told the jury that he was
through his duty, and that theirs now begun
He cautioned them TO thrust forth from their
minds every vestige of prejudice or outside feel
ing, II any was there, and To disc barge their duty
as faithful and true men.
Tue case was then given to the jury, It being
twelve O'Clock, IN, and they retired.
| SPECIAL POLICEMAN APPoINTED-Mayor
Berrett has appointed Samuel Handy to bs a
| special policeman under the supplemental police
| law, vice Benjamin Kurtz removed The latter.
on being appointed by the Mayor, and confirmed