The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-03-01
La w NTELLHENCE.

CRIMINAL CoURT.-Hon. Henry Stump. judge
Milton Whitney, Esq, Deputy States Attorney,
prosecuting.
The Court was engaged in the following business
yesterday
James Craft, charged with the larceny on the
2Sd of February of six pounds of metal castings,
valued at 40, the property of the Northern Cen
trail Railroad was arraigned and pleaded ssnot
$500 '-'''''''' ''' '''sH'e' na'' was 'nHea at
Ellen Webb and Anna Mcdonnell, charged with
the larceny on the 18th of February of three pairs
of CATERS and one pair of boots, the whole valued
at S.. rs, the property of James F. Gardner, were
arraigned and pleaded "not guilty." Salmon and
COwan for defence.
Edward Murphy, charged with the willful mur-
knife, inlicting wound on the left Side of the bel
~ on the night of the l4th of February from which
he died on the I'D, was arragned and pleaded s'not
guilty lie had no counsel, but said his friends
would procure counsel for him in proper time.
Mr.. whitney here remarked that there were four
indictments for murder yet to be tried: the cases
OF Miller, Barton, Connery and Murphy. He
would like to dispose of them during this term.
Two cases had already been continued until the
next term-those of Lemon and Duvall
The Court said if there was sufficient of other
business to occupy the remainder OF this term they
better lay over.
Mr.. Whitney.-''There is business enough, but if
these cases are continued there will be six murder
cases to be tried during the warm term would
like to dispose of two of them this term at any
rate"
The Court-"Wel, lay them aside for the pre-
sent"
The case of John G. Schey and Henry Weig-
host, charged with aiding party to escape from
the Penitentiary, was postponed on account of the
sickness of Mr.. Hack, their counsel.
No cases being ready for trial, the Court asked
Mr.. Cowan if he could not proceed with the arpu-
ment on the motions or petitions, which had been
filed by him, in thr case of William G. Ford
Mr.. Cowan said that Tuesday had been set apart
to argue the motions, but if the Court desired it.
he would proceed to give his views in regard to the
matter at issue.
After recess of some fifteen minutes the Court
re-assembled, and Mr.. Cowan proceeded to address
the Court in favor of the motions which had been
Fl led
Mr.. Cowan briefly recapitulated all the facts sur
rounding the trial, Convection, and Judgment of
this Court in the of Ford and then referred to
the writ of error sued out of the Circuit Court to
the Court of Appeals; the judgment of the Ap-
Court below, and the procedcndo addressed to this
Court directing this Court to proceed to try Will
liam e.. Ford for the crime for which he had been
indicted.
Mr.. Cowan then read the latter part of the de-
cison rendered by the Court of Appeals in revers-
ing the Judgment of the Court below and then re-
ferred to the procedendo, which directs new trial.
by virtue of power received from Acts of Assembly
lie SAID that he could lind no Act of Assembly which
gave the power to the Court of Appeals to issue
procedendo in criminal cases. in civil cases they had
that power, but not in criminal cases.
Mr.. CowaD then argued that the Court of Ap-
peals had no power to issue the procedendo and
order new trial in the case. He asked, therefore,
what disposition should be made of this case If
they have not the right, how will this Court pro-
ceed. The man has been tried and convicted, and
the Court of Appeals have issued procedendo with
out the right to do it, and then the man can't be
tried again; how is he to be disposed of? The Gov
ernor can't sign the warrant because the chief Judi
ciary of the State sa ys he can't he banoad il b t
be incarcerated ON account of this cong;o3 ,f ~
law? The rights of the citizen here conc in and nG
these rights ask that he be tried for his offence or be
DISCHARGED If he can't be tried AGAIN tho wbnJe
proceedings are at an end, are gone Can he be
indicted again if he can't he is entitled to be dis
charged. Mr.. Cowan contended that his client in
this situation of the case was entitled to his dis
charge.
Mr.. Whitney for the State, said that he would
have wished that the motions would have been
put in form which would have presented tho tacb
nica questions involved in the case the naner loo,
filed was mere petition, embracing a prarer that
the rights of the citizen might be nrotccted Tho
State was not here to argue against or onnose anv
such motion as that; this is exactly what the S.ate
wants; it is desroua that right and Justice shall he
done. But the State can't arpue this ouestion in
the form presented The nrsonar bas hean ;nd;o, -
ed tried, convicted, and Judgment passed unon him.
writ of error is sent to the Appellate Court and
a procedendo issued to try the case agaip: tbis
power is denied This petition involves a legal
question. Let the counsel enter a plea that a
mans life once in jeopardy cannot be putt ieopar
dy the second time for the same offence. and then
the State is ready to argue that points anxious
to argue it; because whatever disposition is made
OF it, it would be reference and guide hereafter.
Mr.. Whitney said that the proposition that mans
life could not be put in jeopardy twice. was nrin-
ciple of Common Law, but not of the Constitution.
this case, the prisoners life is not put in ieonar
dy twice, because the Appellate Court has decided