The daily press. (Cincinnati [Ohio) 1859-1859, 1859-03-23
LAW REPOR r.. >.
Order of Court to Prosecute Jesse Beck
ley, VIM. Beckley and Others. t.i.
YEsrERDAY-EIGHT DAY.
COMMON PLEAS.

COMMON PLEAS. i bl.r.Y .,
Before the Jury were called In from their room,
Judge Carter said: In goycrOn1ent like ours the
SSny and ssSSffy s TSsse remarks TRS MAKE
the obsenes Of the jury, to signify to counsel the
Judge or rather as an individual am morally con-
Sse Nth 81 c that ss there s sss
gSSny S at g9Sf do not say that the gsrei r. Mould
II they were put to trial the state Of facts now
S mimi o , Bg ~ aS psrs Ss so
tanpering with the witnesses Three witnesses haye
JsnSy soS Mar
tho a"P.tt9 i. Gas she was saed One witness @ STAT at,
called TO- take his place on the StnesS stand was
Spd % S not since be 69 ST9d y the who'll P
Enough has come forth to induce ne 70 make an
order that tho Prosecuting Attorney Of this county
Beckley, VIM. Becklcy, Geo Hughes and Samuel
Gordon and II will be seen whether the law is pow-
Prosecuting Attorney viii snderstSHd that he Is al.
rected to Institute proceedings Immediately. This
9iuer % may, however, yet be changed TO more sum-
The jury were then directed to come in from their
H Directed e SS SS pGas n III the once
going TO establish, less, directly the guilt Of
IN and d iSa otSd t9H SSG
wound on the Italian The identity Of the pistol found
!sstlmony Of VIM. Beckiey, Sri, that he had before
mains w6Oc and perfect, being clrCumstaHcS su;
also to the IN S the evidence Of the
Tltn,esses for deiepse who we're In company with
bsrrassng position Of the sate from the sbsence Of
witness, Jenny Bowers, who must have seen the
fhSPRSS hs b the EsatOn The S The.
Gotween him and snySody e.e there had not BEEN
Rs sSs sht StnSS 70 wS s
nrcd It rnexpeCteay e the deceased The testimony
Jads KSS %aS Ss at @ En-
sn,S In ths ostSet he SllpdsS t9 the ohsrseS Ot
matter, sven i true Which should operate to the
ths 81 prSGhhcr unless the Jury shoHS n S
prisoner to ROsS Se a ' Of sSs
o1 existed & to connect him With their supposed
to adduce any such testimony; and he as the adyo:
cate OF this defendant, entered his solemn protest
ter offhs description unless theywere first by
proof the defendant was connected Herewith land
the Prosecptlng Attorney told them expressly there
Ta sS Sy limit S hG yys
be respectful to the CourtNthat is that he shall not
esTity., Within these limits speech is freely sasrsn
teed He SJudge k) did not purpose to violate this
st he brOsss hs boest
every thing that had trsnsProd IN their end
cedented In his experience, and unprecedented, he
believed In the history ofcriminal trials in this
try, or the judicial history of that country (at leas
within the last hundred and fifty yearsl whence they
derived the body Of their lawg-a collateral ISSUE
brought before the jury the witnesses called agair
and again to the stand, and the whole Of this col
lateral ssue Investigated in their presence, calcu
lated, as IT was, TO prejudce this Tperhap
to death. he submitted the propriety the dignity
ned electors OF Hamilton County, mon who, knowtnt
their rights, had also the Independence to maintatI
them. He appealed TO their honest, thor intelli
gent, their independent judgments, on behalf OF tht
man. il he was TO be prcjudiced by what had trans
pircd except the testimony charged him personally
directly and conclusiyey, with these acts, thu
/ by testimony suspicion brought under their no
tce What was this supposed testimony these partie
said to have suppressed? Counsel here adverte
to the absent witnesses and the nature of their sup
posed evidence and remarked that portion Of 10 th
defense offered to admit, and the balance was who'll
unreliable unimportant. If there we're any testi
mony kept back, 1t was an outrage on the jury. III
Judge Key) did not say whether he had or had no
+uspcions this subject; that was matter outsid
Of this case hut the man ceased to be client of hi
duct, and did not subsequently establish his entr
| Innocence. But IL it was fraud on the jury, til
| counsel, how much greater was Il on the prisoner
for If enemy sought to do him the greatest injury
| 1t would be by infusng into tho minds of the jury
while he stood on trial for his life, suspicion tina
| his defense unfairly conducted, through the me
| dim of his nearest friends. Counsel then discusse
the evidence, and contended that IL wholly failed
| make out the guilt of this prsoner.l
l Judge Spooner makes the closing argument for tn
| prisoner, and Mr.. Gaines closes for the State.