The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-07-16
CITY INTELLIGENCE.
CRIMINAL COURT. TRIAL OF BARRETT AND Will
LIAMS FOR MURDER.

and the prisoners having peen drought l the uiai WAS
resumed.
Mr. oUID then made his closing address to the jury
on the part Of the government. He commenced by
remarking that considerable portion of the time
Of the jury had been taken up by the counsel for the
defence, discussion of tho philosophy and purpose Of
the criminal law He would not undertake 10 follow
them in these discussions IL sufficient for the jury
10 reooect that the punishment FOR murder has its sane
ton both in the Divine and human law. In the it
Is written, "Thou shalt do no murder and in even
more authoritative language, "Whoso sheddeth mans
blood 10y shall his blood be shed " there distinct
authority given 10 human tribunals and human justice
10 take upon itself the part of execuoner in vindication
o. this great preeept of the Divine law We also have
the law Of the land which has been written in the plain
est and most precise terms and the punishment which
he hw has gwen 70 the offence is that OF death That
law the Jury bad teen to carry out and execute
n was entirely inlDatual TO them whether the object
purpose Of that las, both Divine and human, punt
tive or whether Il merely for the purpose of pre-
ventic repetition Of the offence that could make
difference witt. their verdict.
A portion of the time had also been taken up by the
counsel ol the defence in stating to the jury their duties
IS iuryMen AMI l had been said that they stood ms
lulrark between power and oppressed humanity This
was not tbs day naiher ths the country for State
tIills---
alf MAuRr remarked that he stating hypothet-
oal ease when no made thai observation
Mr. Ou1D went or to say that such observations had
no petsinency Ear the present trial concerned
He donbted whether there any officers connected
with the government Of the United States, either
pyng high low positlons besides those Immediately
connected with this court who had any interest In the
proceedings in this trial The grand jury of this county
upon evidence sufficient to satisfy their minds had pre-
sened true bill for murder against the prisoners at the
bar ; and this court alone, according 10 the law was
bound to try whether that allegation true not
There disposition the part Of the government
prosecute these any othor The duty of the
jury in of this kind plain and apparent it
was interpreted by their oath They to try
the fact whether the prisoners at the guilty
guilty Of the offence with which they Charged and
they to try that question according to thcey
dence He joined with tho counsel upon the other side
in deprecatng any outside influences any bias prepos
session the government wished to bring such advon-
tous circumstances to its aid II the prisoners could
not be viced in accordance with the forms OF law let
them go free but the jury should be satisfied from
the eydencenot with mathematical certainty, but be-
yond any reasonable doubtthat these parties have
mitted the offence with which they charged accord
ing to their solemn obligation the jury would be bound
to find them guilty.
Much had also bcensad upon the other side with
spect to what constituted reasonable doubt. The rule
of law in reference to that matter when all teccalties
were taken from It, simply this: that the jury must
in plain and comInon-sense language, believe the fao
that they must attach the belief to it that would
he govern control their action in the
binary transactions OF life.
One of the counsel the other side Mr Chilton) had
taken occasion to remark that he thought the opening
upon the part of the government vndictve If such
it was Mr. o. declared 1t far from his purpose He
could lay his hand upon his heart and say in the
of tho jury, most of whom were his neghbors and had
known him from boyhood that he did not harbor vindc
tive feelings against any man but still he in the
habit of calling things by their right names He would
not stand here and call vany virtue he would not call
brutality fairness would he call cowardy murder
fair openthanded attack. He would endeavor Without
passion and without prejudice to tell the jury the facts
he believed them, and as the evidence proved
them The jury had also been told by Mr.. Chiffon
that they were not to take into consideration any
circumstances with regard to the enormity of the
murder but that was novel doctrine. SO far
from that being the case, the very distinction which
the masters of the law had drawn between murder
and marlslaughter was founded on the enormity Of
the and the want of enormty in the other Those
circumstances which the learned counsel said were not
be considered by the jury the fragrant proofs which
tho law demanded and without which the murder was
enormities of the transaction, whether they few
many and they had right not only to do that but to
follow those enormes to their remote consequences.
What the facts in reference to this case 1t was
admitted in the first place, that foul and brutal murder
had been committed and the prosecution relieved of
the burden of proof to that fact IL admitted also
that the parties who committed 1t murdcrers Then
the whole hung upon the single point of difference
which to the identification of the prisoners at the
bar with that murder. Generally speaking, murder
cannot be proved by direct positive and absolute testi
mony. The murderer takes to conceal his move
setF he hides himself in the darkness of the night,
going unattended and shrouds hmsen secrecy so that
but the Unseieut eye tell who is the author
at the decd IN sltc cases. there is great difficulty in
proving his crIainaity, matter how strong may be
the chain OF Attending circumstances that point to him
tho guilty patty and then the counsel for the defence
will tell tc jury how much uncertainty and danger there
is IN relying n9on crcumstantia evidence In the
present case however there such circumstances
Doubt uncstiniy bu the matter is brought down to
positive aud distinct proof and the counsel for the
defence always DO IL similar they change their tao
ties, and attack tue credibity Of the witness.
Mr. o. then reoapitulaed the evidence which had been
given, aud asked how this appalling weight of evil
jence 20 be evade1? 1t by imrcaching the character
Of Gsrreo, who testified to all these facts The counsel
for the defence therefore undertook to break down his
testimony 10y searching examination, but they
signsl failed in tat endeavor and their waves broke in
netectua foam as they Tell upon the immovable rock
What other course left for them Their obvious
was to bring wtnesses TO prove that the witness
Carrco was not man Of yeracty but they made
no such attempt. The prosecution would have been
pleased to meet them upon tha. issue but they
did not think proper TO raise il, What have the
jury right to infer from the failure oil the defence to
take that obvious coursef Evidently that could not
be donchis testimony could not be ipeeched in that
way. The presumption OF Law always in favor Of
the crcdbility Of Enthusiastically strong the
presumption which has been much Insisted upon by
the counsel the other side Of the innocence OF the
prisoners who under suspicion having committed
murder arising from the indictment Of the grand Jury
The veracy Of CarTico had not ,een imreached, and
could not be impcached it stood fair as that of any
man in court That witness had been characterized
man Of ''base-bora instincts but prejudice ought to
attach to man from the station in which he wGs
reared. Nobility OF mind not always sound IN
the CASTLE its opposite in the howell; aud The
history of the world afoB al least memorable In