The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-06-11
A Letter From, U.e OF the JUrvmen on the
100000 Breach Of Premise Case.
Eu, rua
F the EVENING ssws.

ST. LOUIS, Jone q, 1859.
In your edition Of Friday last ou rather severe In
com ens the the case Oarstang va
sna~ ana attributed motives 10 the jury whien
them, END or self, cannot leave pass uncnaengea.
tei Tbs owe II 10 ns Ee ns well 10 tne community,
80 explain the motives which induced TO give my
Gent to the verdict ano, possiDs, to clear myself from
The charge Of reg epopicsnsm and serbTahsn, which
you were sind and geatemgnly enough to cAge ne, IA
common with tie rect of The jury, with Nor sir, aos
10 ssy that those Dovcs you cosse tne athest
rom my Thoughts tet while on the Jury as feel now
ard truFt shall al~ay feel-tnal | would 60 far
as the law would permit III defending virtue
IN punGhip crime All Of the paruet coluected
with the Euit, tae principals es well as those gentle
men ef,ea alluded 10 by Mr.. 5atee having
regulations, Dot only total strangers 20 me- bu,
4 fb sui ii a a ICE DAY YES called
one OF the regular jurors for ,nat week the
case which thought was duty hsd 10 perform, ou,
wpcn, can assure you, at the time regretted very
much Not having aus thing 70 guide my judgment bat
the evidence before The jury, bad 20 To
sioD LhaL tue defendant bad not ony broken Contract
wito The ptaDtI, bDt had made miserable attempt to
eVidencel couscersa vrtuous but, although that
tempt Odd excite mo against tue defendant, will only
here, Leu nae do NOS nnk then that there any
laceIafeo feelings tog not romantic enous
that there could be any fDity, between September
and January" | nave always thought tnas before
WOMAN could briig such Gaze into court, shB w0nd
have 10 leave her eens home. ine aot being,
a. / tbougnt proven cOociusively and the plant II
Character being las SAID beore) proven 10 be good
locked on 1t as would any vii couraot,
up my mind b. sskiDg myself what the plaintiff aai los,
coo'rsct, CT, ia Ct1er woros, by h not marrying ner
contend she ost shrd interest n his property; bat
you may Say the CONSIDERATION 70 be given By her
enlrey dspI opo, Tomato to that 10 be received. Grant
IT.; the believe, would allow her that interest
ne SAW Ut 20 make the contract giving him credit FOE
knowing tne Jaw, aud having COCA least he
old enoueb) do not think ought W tad fnu With
hin for doing he vita for making him pay the
penalty for The Honfurlnien, Of contact WITH lar
the evidence proves virtuous AID honest woman. |
ask, wat contract woItafor in toat hight vie ged,
add shall always yeS, such case when bfvashs
into couts Of justice If / have erred l.,
az error OF judgment, and not Caused by
any Aquarium or rod republican tendencies. In
copclusion, allow Inc 10 cay that, judging from
wnst have hear since the conclusion of ths Iral, ao
tree 10 confess that have only bceo badly SOD but
that have helped to render uni verdict. Unjust
rot account OF the amount or let exoress il
my humble opinion that she justly entitled oae
cent she was entitled 10 anot only account Of her
loss ltterest IN his property bat also account of
iLeu attempt end utter failure 10 blast her character
The wtoe blame, charge, rests with toe Defence
proving QDstead OF nsuuating) that People mad reputa
lions, and not using .le the evidence that
understand was Gl iaeir command. l. beng entirely
ignorant said before Of the reputation OF any Of the
parties, felt indignant that taef regulations should IS
we've, be staboed IN the dark. Can a1mire bold ami
manly style Of attack which style, thing, the defence
entirely ignored. In this assertion, Aoae who the
trial tDough, and knew more laau known 10
The jury, viii, feel coniident, bser out.
". N. MACQuEES,