The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-08-03
CITY INTELLIGENCE.
THE CASE OF GEORGE JOHNSON MOTION FOR
A NEW TRIAL

A NEW TRIAL.
In the criminal court Yesterday after some minor cases
had been disposed Of Mr. Norris proceeded argue the
motion for new trial in the Of George johnson,
recently convicted Of manslarghter The motion for
arrest Of Judgment abandoned, and the court
asked 10 set aside and annul the verdict and grant
tria on the following grounds First that there
evidence produced against him the trial 10 establish
hs guilt as an alder and alettor IN the murder Of the
deceased as changed in the Indictment, upon which to
fund such verdict second that said verdict against
the law as expounded and delivered TO the jury by the
court and third that there no evidence in the
10 support verdict of manslaughter Ia looking
the evidence which he had all before him, Mr. n said
that he only found the If George johnson used
once That was in the testimony of William Johnson
in which he speaks Of Heisslers proceeding from
tain building aud coming up to where he standing
with stoops He says Hessler came out and George
Johnson came out directly after him There YVES no
statement to show that George johnson present any
further than that he of the building after eiss
Ier William johnson does say that George johnson
was there at lcnst he docs not that he said did
anything will be mere question: then, OF his presence;
and how that presence makes him alder and abettor
in this homicide If the evidence generally suf-
foent convict the principal of murder the evidence
against accomplish could not be. Geo johnson
Indicted alder and abettfr and Of could net
suffer greater punishment than the principal in the
cline and if the principal guilty of murder he
could not be- Looking in the whole record Mr. N.
marked that he could find evidence upon which TO
ground a verdict of manslaughter. 1t admitted by
the counsel for the defence that most atrocious and
ton murder had been committed Ii contended by the
prosecution that the crime murder and nothing but
murder and the prisoners counsel conceded it, Ia the
instructions asked for there mitigation of the of
fence sought to be set up and allusion not
tanned in any prayer of those instructions, the
ments accompanying them, TO mitigation Of the crime
charged II was alphabetically stated that If certain
Jar.
Jury believed that they did take place. the offence
committed murder; and if they did not believe or
in any uncertainty about it, the parties must
be acquitted, Now in the evidence there was nothing
duplicating George Johnson with this transaction to an
extent to make him alder and abettor or
plice in the remotest sense to the murder commit
ted. The mere presence of party it true. under
certain circumstances suspicious but it could be
membered that these three parties who spoken of
by Vim. Johnson--Brown Heisser, and George John
not in company with himself and Meades when
this difficulty occurred between him and Stops They
inside the building and we have reason to con
cude that they did not know and could not know who
there SO that completely between them at the
time they standing upon the pavement and at the
time these parties in the house could be possibly
inferred They had separated and the door closed
that there could be no communication. difficulty
then occurred witness says that words passed be-
tween the parties. George Johnson out of the bar
ber shop but it is not stated where he what
he did it is simply stated that he There
evidence that he spoke to the parties that he
looked at them, did any act at all but he merely
out and Manyette was knocked down and Stops
shot The fact that Johnson with Heissler
matter Of consequence, long completely
proved.
The jury have returned verdict of guilty of man
slaughter Upon what grounds did they base that
dict They either believed William johnson or they did
not believe him If they did not believe him ALL his
evidence not being corroborad in any particular, their
verdict evidently wrong under the instructions of
the court because the court told the jury that unless the
M nm y-as rata1
point, they must aciuit the prisoners. Then, in order
TO convict them of any crime, the jury must have be-
eyed part of William Johnson's evidence What part
did they believed If they did not believe him at all the
prisoners must have been acquitted. If they believed
him. and his evidence confirmed in any material
point their verdict should have been equity Of muir
der, as Indicted
Under the circumstances the verdict which they rem
aered was an extraordinary The newspapers had
been discussing this matter, and Of them very
tonally There was evidence in the case, from the
opening speech TO the pcroaton at the close to show
that manslaughter had been committed 1t said
however that the jury judges of the law and of the
facts. This was only true in qualified Where
the advice OF the court not asked and the whole
mixed question referred to the jury without invo-
king instructions the whole under their
troll in reference to the law well the facts but
where the court invoked to instruct the jury any
proposition of law connected with the in question it
the bounden duty follow that instruction
Here however they have assumed the perogaiye of the
court and have disregarded the instruction They seemed
to be little doubt whether Heser killed Stoops
not they rather thought he did, but did not like
hang him Uncertainty and found him guilty Of
mansIaughter in order to be the safe side In finding
him guilty of mansaughter they express belief that he
did the deed but they disregard the instruction Of the
court to the nature Of the crime Mr. N. then said
that the court IN the exercise OF its discretion not only
had the power but the right set aside such verdict
and he had doubt but that such power would be ex
ercised in proper The verdict arbitrary
If Hesler had been found guilty of murder would
any pretend that the evidence sufficient to
Wet johnson Of murder also Then the effect of the
compromise Of the jury to pnoe Johnson In false
pOsito for he should have been acquitted instead of
being placed upon the came platform Hesslcr who it
said fred the fatal shot, while johnson did not do
any act at all.
Mr., QpIp thought his friend was mistaken In saying
that there was no evidence against George Johnson In
the first place. it was certainly competent for the Jury
under the instructions Of the court TO believe William
Johnson, the witnoss upon the stand They were In
structed to the effect that tho question whether he was or
was not an accomplish question entirely for them
to determine They also instructed that they
believed he was an aocopcc he Should be corroborated
not only as to the material facts in the case but as to
the parties who fired the fatal shot, and who aided and
Allotted In the alleged murder but if they believed he
not accomplce they could convict the parties of
the offence charged in the Indictment upon his
tCboraed evidence The verdict returned by the jury
shows that they were satisfied that William John
son was not an accomplish, and therefore they
gave oredence TO his statement. The counsel
the other side admitted that if the jury did be-
lieve him not to be accomplish, ii competent
for them to find a verdict of guilty Of murder: and