The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-04-24

po'ocson bs prisoner took .ae lie Of toe deceased su;h
does nsty the reduce such 1llng
from murder 10 rnsDsiangbse,.
privately aa TO the 1hcb tns discussoo woald tk.
rDe pros cnton wond ADD close; ba, matter
Introduced IN the c]ospz speech the privilege wouf
be Civ sen 10 the defence 70 respond
Mr. Brady then proceeded 10 read the Instructions asked
oy ine defence las pnbiahed Saturdays HEsAD) and
handed them to the Judge
SUMMING Up FOR THE PROSECUTION.
Mr. Carlisle stated the grounds vba. he thought the
Instructions asked by the pross cuan should bs granted
and those asked by the Defence or some Of them should
be rejected Tho frat point made by the prosecution
that the homicide wful and Intentional and were
induced BY the belief OF the prisoner that deceased
bad criminal intercourse with the prisoners wife,
heess murder; IL the jury believe that voleucs
assault offered by the descased at tho oen, Of
the bomcde that presented alphabetically the whole
evidence IN case O wiful and intentional killias
without provocaton law. II presented the propo
sop that previous seduction of, aduery with tue
phopers wife, 10 DO provocaton IN law, even II
the jury believe 10; but the Instruction further pro-
ceeds to guard the jury against the CONVICTION OF
the prisoner he were insane NJ the time or the killing
Re Did kpo~ that be ought TO the valuable
time of the Court in Discussing the FIRST proposuou-
namely that previons adultery Ia not provocation 10
law. The care Of adultery a. leading 70 homicide, ~neD
IL s referred TO N the book s referred 70 solely 10
cmes where the husband catches the adulterer ~
fogvanfe defto. All the authorities condne ~ further ex
cusvey TO the case Of an instant killing;
points in tone that the parties must be caught
forante dectO, and second that the homicide must
be snianeous. But there authority for saying
that adultery bad been held tending 10 establish
justification Of the act Of homicide They had heard
reasoning and eloluence the subject but hat yet
heard no authority cited on the other sde rney we're
told that every man 70 judge when he dnds himself
agreved whether the law Of the land gives him adequate
relief and does not then he s RENTED 70 his natural
rights In other words they told that there
conditions In every eoc'ey- state Of nature, and state
Of society inpertu IN impevto he would no. argue
thar oposton It's mere statement was s own rofutaton
It also argued that human Law must be in cousonance
with Divine law He would not 20 into any argument on
that subject but would concede for the sake o. Argument,
anywhere authorized the taking Of human life for ang
wrong, by the person wronged Tho Divine law did not
make adultery a. peat crime a. murder That sacred
letters of living light denuncatons OF such acts Of vio
lence tnn and he further sa that at no period Of the
Of adultery by death other than judicial punisnmen
He denied that any text in the Bible counsenanced
sed to- to take @ the life Of r. the sdutersr Dr. pasy in
discussing this sin Of adultery bad referred TO that most
touching Or all the iDctdens recorded in the Nsw res-
brought to the Saviour tho taken In adultery.
They said to him, Mastsr this woman bath beon taken
10 adultery IN the very act the law Of Noses says ,ns:
The Evangelist adds that they said tnis temptng nm
How tempting him9 Tempting him to take upon himselt
judicial authority that they might have an oppor
tuny Of accusing him. Finally, he gave them that nota
bic answer "Let him that is without cast 6rs,
stone at her." Then one by one The scrbes and Phari
sees SUNK away and tho Saviour turned aud asked the
woman "Hath any condemned thee ~ She cad,
"So man, lord" "Then," said He, '.nci.hcr do con-
dc mn thee 20 and sin moren said He, rououncs
no Judgment take upon myself judicial authority Go
and sin more" his Honor wQnid refer To the Greek
he would And that the verb was cdchrino equivalent 70
the Latin j,dico, TO pass sentence against one. II
showed that that there such thing among
the Jews a. private authority TO punish adultery. What
could be more shocne-whst ;ilable With the
eYiat Of doctrine
that he who erievousy wroneed Is 70 take into his own
hands the knife, as TO execute -. summary judgement
doctrine. Il were established here In the
capital Of the nation, the land would pre-
because the principle would be confined 10 the sing
OF adultery but would extend 10 all other wrongs
PREPARATION. Be Old not know that necessary for
him 10 argue these inssrucsoos any further In gard 70
the other ns,rucone prepared ny hs colleague he would
discuss the second third and fourth because they
copied the instructions Of his Honor the
As 10 the Hh instruction the proposition was although
aialte,y did not osr legal provocssou o,
ferrous intercourse with the prisoners wife, and the
prisoner saw the signals and knew their meaning,
Iasson excited would make legal provocaton reducing
the grade Of crime from murder to mansanghtsr. II
merely asked bis Honor to repeat in tus the old AMI
we seSa ar on n, sDas suec h As 20 the psopo
them, II not al, liable TO the objection OF oefng
abstract propositions Of law, and did not CONFORM
to the practice here. The counsel read them The drss
proposition, be said, abstract prop,ston was
liable TO the objection that his Hoaor would have
hde to the jury the functions Of the Judge Tne effect of
laying down this proposition TO the jury without thing
your Honor who placed there for the purpose Of
nsuctDg at the bar and The jury as TO tue law sud
10 whom the community look for declaration OF lay,
leaves 70 the jury 10 find whether there any proof Of
alienation, justification rising Of the defence
Does the aleyaton mean 70 say IN general terms with
regard TO the feelings with which men are disposed 20
look at the fact Of killing under these circumstances that
they may find something Of alleviaon ex suse or jusdc
Of the actY Il is 10 the alienation which might
be drawn under other and different circumstances there
fore that they find in the cir ;umsances Of tue made
by the prosecution. There some aevaton is it meant
10 say, the jury find that the presumption OF
mahce s rebutted2 presume not. Your Honor Is to
say 10 the jury What 70 s and circumstances t compe
tent for them they believe them, 70 consider ale
Walton, justification In this case for be
alienation, excute Justification the eye Of the law
ton, excuse or justification and would be, hnk tax
ing extraordinary not the usua! course 10 drog the
whole case before the jury without giving instructions
jury are presumed TO be acquainted with tho Law
further than what other men know of it. Without
presumed what Is the law which will amour, or ex,eod
70 aeviaton or Justification object to the FIRST
proposition on THIS ground will say nothing about the
abstract proposition Of law, but will add from the fact of
killing whenever the law presumes malice, il may be
buted by certain facts and circumstances, circum-
stances and facts Of certain Sort which the Law regards
as alienation, justification. As to the
proposton-naney, the existence OF mslice-t Is not
presumable in the case If, on any rational theory
with all the evidence the homicide either jus
tilabe, excusabe, or an act Of manslaughter must
express my admiration mt the singular adroiness with
which IL has been prepared think see ia this PROPOSE
ton invitation 70 TIE jury to consider whether all
they have heard in this case the theory Of my learned
friendalthoueh don't mean 70 say II Is hs theory ooe,
but may be that Of the gentlemen associated with
whether the theory Of tho homicide excusabe uadcr
these circum Stances and whether II is rational theory
and sd that the 1Try nE Who Is sSsn s1s o.
fullest extent the right Of the jury 10 give general
dict Of guilty Innocent they may think the facts aud
the law require deny Is the province Of this any
court to invite the jury, TO submit 10 the jury on the
application OF COUNSEL toe question whether TIE law be
thus or So We bad bettcrI say with the most per-
feet respectabosh the bench entirety II such practice
to prevail and trust TO the jury without any Interference
OF the Judge know OF no authority or precedent,
the face Of t. by express terms, which includes submis-
jury by the Court 10 what Is the law nf the
They and not your Honor are TO determine whether
there be rational theory OF justification in Ia any
view OF the evidence OF this case. Your Honor tell
them what IL justification IN Law, and IL is for them 10
form their opinion.
As TO the third poini-uamely, that II there be any
rational Hypothesis consistent with the conclusion that The