The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-08-06
CRIMINAL C0URT-TRIAL OF HEISSLER AND
JOHNSON FOR ROBBERY

The two prisoners having been brought in
Mr.. Cross proposed, inasmuch it the trans
action, although the prisoners indicted separately,
they should be tried together
MIR. NoRRIs objected.
The JuDGn confessed he could see the advantage
be gained by separate tal.
George Johnson then put upon trial; and the in
dotnent charging him with having robbed Mr. Cornell
on the Sd day of April last, having been read,
Mr. NoRRIs withdrew his objection, and both parties
placed upon tiial.
The jury then clnpanelled and sworn, and the
charge read to them.
Mr. Cross flor the prosecution then stated that the
circumstances of this robbery, he informed
follows Mr. Cornell was proceeding out Fourteenth
street. on his way to Columbian College, and had nearly
reached the boundary Of the street at the foot of
the hill when he accosted by five men, among
them the prisoners at the bar. who first asked him
for tobacco and thon for quarter and afterwards all
his money, jewclry, and he believed, parti-
cles of his clothing, the delivery being enforced by
presenting pistol at his head. He did not know
which of the five was and did not care for they
all acting together and zach one OF them responsible
for the crime. 1t offence not only against prop
ery but against person. and attended with such vio
lence convinced him that If he had made the slightest
resistance they would have been willing to have commit
ted murder well robbery The only question was as
to the Identification of the parties and he thought the
evidence would show that the two prisoners were among
the five men who on that night committed that offence
Mr.. NORRIS flor the deioce) said the District attor
ney had told the jury this of than ord
nary character, and they should that account be the
careful in weighing the evidence presented to
them The District attorney also made statement
to them which indicated at the difficulty and
embarrassment under which he labored in sustain
ing the And this is the point that lies at
the foundation OF the transaction, and upon which it
must either stand fallthe identity of the persons
who committed the robbery, for it mattercd not how
heinous the crime under what circumstances committed
with what atrocy if the party charged could not be
identified the peipctator, he must be let 60 If he
hndsrsood what the evidence would be in this case and
he might premise by saying that he thought be did, tho
Identity of the prisoners at the bar could be shown only
by the man who the ring Leader of the robbery
certain character whose name long since had become
torous, and more recently had become odousa young
man by the Of William Johnson ala, Swpcr
johnson. lie informed that lie could be identified
10y the man robbed; that there escape for him.
ana that he was the man. in fact that committed the rob-
berry, and here he stood unwhipt justice uncharg
oil OF the crime; and he might say further vet
exempt from the penalties Of this crime and some Others
This state of things had been brought about by some
body but 1t was not his disposition this time to crti
cizc the conduct of those who the agency In H. but
IL was matter OF regret to him. and must be to the
curt, aud to all those gentlemen who were conducting
this Transaction gentlemen of high sense of honor that
this not here put upon this charge and tried for
this offence Instead OF standing In the criminal hoy he
put upon the witness stand and the Jury were called
upon listen to his testimony giving e onl, nfortan
hoa, he was informed, a. TO tho identify Of the
fhrtics concerned in Tire robbery He did not know
whether Mr. Cornell robbed not that would have
TO be gathered from his statement ard from tho insrc-
constructive There must he violence and The intent
must DO 10 take the paTtys property and ayest him OF
" IT must not DO done IN sport but In good earnest
-cTe ~, : II