The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-03-26


obabi tiles. Why, has been asked, did the prsoaer,
II desous Of preserving bis wfe's he not send for :
physican2 Or rather why did be, q. the most critical
moment direci-f such was the aca dscontinulnce OF
the medical vsp confess TO you, genilemen, that With
% 10 Ds s ays
"hs poverty, his will, copsen:ed But why not make
at least eorp Why, with the terrible sueripgs Of his
wife before himthe mother, too OF his only chd-suf
ferpas sufficient to excite the sympathy Of the coest and
10 prompt the most ndolent TO exertOnwhy did he not
Re could not buy, him 70 come 70 her rsief2 The
act might have been inefectoal, but would At
| least have been demonstratve of kindness and
hope. Instead Of that the prisoner through ole OF
his Witnesses tells us that yielding to mis- wies en-ely
he retired to an adjoining room, aent to bed and DID not
return till the lapse OF five six hours at tho moDen
the sufferer drawing her last breath before ctso'u
ton. The prisoner at the time, gentlemen, 1t via b. re-
collected not giddy, thoughtless youth. He was
man thirty two years of agea father, member o. the
church, teacher in OF i.s Sunday schools. What,
cumstances ndcate9 Does indicate merely apathy and
ndierenceY Or does ndicae with other circumstances
transfer OF the husbands affections from his wife
to another object In this connecton must DO observed
that the defendant himself has proved by his wit
nesses very srkng intimacy, both before and after
the DEATH bctw himself and his wifss nece-an
timacy which, in anonymous letter, he willing to
nsnuatc had reached or nearly reached the point Of
actual criminality AZ j. is your province, however,
gentlemen {t being criminal CASEY TO determine the
meaning OF that letter, in the light of the surrounding
circumstances, and to ascertain with that aid the nfe
ing upon the questions in Issue is deemed TO be OF con-
trolling Importance rejecting its shadows back upon tho
few moments by laying before you its literal
contents 1t was addressed, you will recollec-I mean
the eDvelope-to Mr. Samuel Cardwell, the supposed
suitor Of the LADY,
know that was informed that Keeping company With
some her good Behavior was Brought on trial on her
@ n we PIT S bis hand @ n then Y h '
spaAe until there witness against him and he had TO
and he Lady told me about her wsh Il no. very good
would not Like spak for tim Longer and ask
how her nights when her was in the country
went to The dora and herd IN bed and she got up
you that Sa ssss s1s Gi h '% viii M
n bed @
% %s | S es . In ~ r he Ss
he the bis know what and
sfs then n Ell % on
Brought where he ss he ruth very
Let you Be wise and you find all out for Live
dw make example Of him apd her for never knew e
nice for the ncel raskel snd she
Better for she knew was Trong win say no more now But
don't be fooe for she could not pass herself
Good BY am your friend when he was asked TO clear him
self the Present OF five he could not do TOR there to
many Say witnesses WITH sas, ssai against sda him
If then, gentlemen you find that the deceased died Of
the effects Of arsenic that the poison not given 10 or
taken by her through mistake accident, that it was
that there reasonable ground for attrbutng the
deed any person other than the prisoner, you will still
have 70 consider whether the case against him. calmly
viewed in all its bearings, is clear TO admit Of
unhcstang verdict Of conviction. Hesitaton in capital
cases. you well KNOW is the property Of the accused
lurking anxious impression OF possible innocence,
should such impression exist enough to stay the hand
Of criminal justice. better, says the law, that ten
guilty should escape than one innocent suffer BY this
however, you will not understand me as expressing or i'm
plying opinion the offence with which he is charged
for or against the prisoner at the bar That your
Ia ali main dutV nd In ynuv
leave IT,
Mr. Gushing then asked the Judge to charge ths jury
the points submitted by the Defence those to which
4 his Honor had not adverted.
The Judge read the points (already publshed),
and submitted them to the jury with some slight modia-
| cations.
Mr. Gushing then made several exceptions the Judges
charge and particularly to his introducing the anonymous
| letter and his comments thereon.
The Judge notified the jury that they were the Judges
had been sufficiently proven to be the production of the
\ prisoner.
| The jury retired about'hve o'clock, and not having
agreed at ten O'Clock the prisoner was removed 70 the
lombs until this Saturday morning, when the Court
viii again assemble.
| The Suit Against the San Francisco Vigilance
| Committee.
| COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
Before Judge Daily.
MARC 25.-Woloney Dous.-A the opening of the
7,
who recognized in the Ala California newspaper of June
49, 1851 publication of the affidavit which he made be-
fore the Coroners jury the inquest of Jenkins hung by
the Vigilance Committee in 1851. He had recollection
of having in 1851 the published articles of
ganizaton of that committee; he might, might not
have seen paper purportng to be such, but had
collection on the subject (r Cutting excepting TO all
these questions, and 70 question what the be-
lief Of the witness He thought he should have II
if had been published in all the daily papers, may not
have read this one don't rccolect OF having
such publication in my e (The Court ruled that the
witness must state his belief if he had any. Mr. Cutting
excepted) He believed that he might have seen some
such publication but that he had not the publication
shown him in that paper. mr. 0COnor insisted upon
direct answer as 10 the witnesss beief) He had seen
something in the paper resembling the paper shown him
Mr. OConor proposed TO read the report OF witness te-
tmony before the Coroners jury and the articles of or
| ganzation of the Vigilance Committee of 1851.
Mr. Cutting excepted, and the papers were read by Mr..
| O'Conor.
Mr.. Cutting before he rested his case, moving first 10
strike out the alleged evidence Of Mr. Mooney before the
Coroners jury and the articles Of organization of the
Committee The motion denied Mr. Cutting excepted
Mr.. Cutting offered in evidence the statutes of California
Mr. OConor then on behalf Of the defendant moved
for nonsut in an argument lasting four hours He
held that no subject or citizen OF any other State civil
lied country having suffered personal tort at the
hands of fellow citizen in his own country,
can import his personal quarrel hither, and place
his fellow citizen on trial in courts in actcn
in the nature OF cspass, and compel courts apply
the proper rule TO the case, and compel urics 10 s
upon the evidence and determine the amount of damages
to which he may be entitled He cited cases 10
show that the courts OF State towards another would
not permit this interference 10 determine between c
OF foreign State when the ground Of complaint was
based upon revolution insurrecton, whatever cir
cumstapces like those which created the Vigilance Com
mittce, might be called He argued that action of
this CvIl nature could be decided until the criminal prose-
cuon for the treason or felony q the Vigilance Committee
had ended
The Widening OF Reatie strect-Important 10
Property Owners.
SUPREME COURT-sFECfAL TERN.
Before Hon. Judge Cerke.
MARCH 25.--jn he Mater Of tie Widening Of R.ode
Ssree-rhs Court has been occupied for two days with
motion to confirm the report OF the Commissioners as
to widening Rcade street the north sidc