Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-05-19
serzt,ons The sah,ect a. .s,a t,is, cam. nm

versations the sdbject OF aid trial came t. and m
WHICH conversations the said Maakins Joined, and
%hleh conversations The PROBABLE result Of said
Wal was discussed and that at one Of said con-
versations did the said Mankins say anything
about The said James Fullalove any opinions the
said Fullaiove entertained. 20, =. asssfsas.l
Sworn to, In open court, this 10Th day Of Nav
| 1859. "a (. Test: JoHS A. SMITH, Clerk
On this 10Th day of May, 1850, Ia open court
appeared John J. Camniack, and made oath ON
the Holy Evangely Of Almighty God that on the
Saturday previous to the beginning of the trial of
| Ililleary Hutchins and John Jones for murde,
/ he had a conversation with James Fullaloye one
Of the jurors on said trial in which said Fulaloye
declares that he had not formed or exnressed an "
opinion in the said case of Hutcbins Inf th.t ~
hoped he would not get on the Jury in sajd case
although qualified, as he, the said FuIlalove did
not like To get GA murder cases 80
Sworn to in open court this 10Th day of M,y
i@o9. Test JNo. A. SMITH, Clerk
MT Ould also presented the certificate of large
number OF the citizens Of Georgetowp of IN
doubted resPectabiity aud character as to the es-
Ia re- and nrm integrity Of Jas Fulla-
love, The Juror In question.
Also the following afidavit:
On this 18th day of May 1859. In open court.
aPpeateo deorge Gray. and made oath on the
Holy Evangely of AlInig hty God. that about the
uhe OF the conclusion Of the trial of Daniel Is.
SIC kies he. the said George GRAY had CONVEX
sation with James Fullalove, one OF the Jurors In
tue case OF Hllleary Hutchins and John Jones
relative to the case Of Hlleary Hutc bins and thai
| In such conversation said Fullalove with whom
this dePonent Is very familiar declared his igno-
rance OF the circumstances of said Hutchins' case
and further That he had no opinion about It,
sworn 10 IN open court, this 18th day OF Nav
| 1859. Test: JSo. A SNIrp CLERK
Mr.. Radcliffe then opened the argument con-
inning his remarks to the motion for an arrest of
Judgment, in the course of which he laid down
three propositions, which he argued in the follow
| ing order:
/: : In an Indictment for murder when the
killing is alleged To have been caused by bat
4 n all urpa an
| In support Of this proposition Mr. R. read from
cases cited in Wharton's Criminal Law 1, Osi5:
| W harton,s Homicide, 26U; Lester agt State in
Sth mo. Reports 65S; and To the fora Of the in
dictnent from Sd Chitty 1903
/ 2 a relative pronOun, referring with equal
| certainty To two antecedents. will make the pro-
ceeding bad In an arrest Of jud yment.D
In support Of this proposition the speaker Quoted
| from LIST Chittys Criminal Law, 2jI, LIST Leech $
| Crown Law, 81.
3. This indictment bad for uncertainty An
! Indictment ought to be certain to every intend
mont and without any intendment to the con-
| trary." -
fo sustain this proposition Mr. Radcliffe quoted
from cases rs laid down in Croke's Elizabeth 400;
also, from Crekes James, ~, and LIST Chitty's
Crown Law, I72.
| Mr.. Ould replied at length to the propositions
| above detailed. and quoted many authorities TO
refute the ground assumed by the other side
| Upon the conclusion of his remarks Mr. Norris
continued for the defence setting forth the
urged by them for new trial Of the case as above
set forth, which reasons he urged at length and
In susfainment of which. he quoted from numerous
authorities. He was addressing the court when
| our report closed