The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-09-27

the circumstances OF the parties making
them. You do not expect the same ntegct detail from
ignorant, weak minded, uncarned man, from
man with greater gifts, and with experience and
learning You would not expect the correct details
OF history of the transactions from the victim OF mob,
who, during the time beaten and bruised, alarmed
and excited in fear of his life, besncared and blinded,
bewdered and frightened as you would from the cool,
deliberate spectator Of the You would therefore
make the allowance for all these things yet you will make
the due allowance. Your good sense will SO dictate
shall no gentlemen attempt to recaptue the evidence
in detail, in its application to the several defendants
You have heard all the evidence have noticed with
pleasure the careful attention you have paid TO it, 1t
has again been repeated, with all its bearings, with
great skill and ingenuity by the respective counsel
Of the parties. You have seen, from this source the
best and the worst Of each view Of The case-he
law has wisely made you the Judge Of its effect
few Illustrations Of the rule Of law IN the applica.
ton Of the evidence will suffice Take for this purpose,
first, the case Of the defendant Eting. The plaintiff thinks
he heard the voice Of Fitting directing the action Of the
other witness saw him there-no other has so sworn.
Citing himselfswears he was not there. IT, then, Engs
yefaeiiy is equal to the plaintiff sand there appears to
me to be no reason TO doubt it-then the rule OF law
which the defendants counsel asked me to charge and
which do charge, must have effect The plaintiff has
The affirmative fails But in addition to this one oath
against oath, Etng's CASE Mr.. Benedict another
witness equahy creditablc Citing in his store five
ten minutes after the mob started for the square. This
weight q evidence will probably prevail, to him,
less you find some other circumstance in the
clearly to contradict this 10 show that Citing nstgated
the act Take now another case-that Of the de-
PENDANT Wenchell He is proved only by the plaintiff
but by other witnesses and by himself TO have been
present. he saw the whole proceedings he heard the order
given for forming the ring; he of the ring he
himself gave the word open the ring, and opened
Indeed he stood alone and the plaintiff dragged from
his shop; he saw him thrown down and beaten in the
street, he followed wrihe crowd TO the square; nc wit
messed this whole outrage he raised his voice
dssuade; he made appeal to the citizens prevent it,
All around him citizens Of character and standing
and influence he never made appeal TO the mob
TO dess from the beating, the brushing the tarrng and
feathering. This too all happened in the midst of po
pulous city, where hue and cry could have brought or
ought 70 have brought hundreds to the relief If you be-
eye such OF facts be true the law will east the
presumption Of guilt upon him, and the burden of proof
unlike the Of Eng is upon him. Then the afr
native burthen of proof is upon him and upon the
plaintiff will not follow out the other cases in long
detail I have perhaps given you in Citing and
Wenchel the two extreme cases ! viii not say
YOU must Judge. all the cases are alike YOU must try
each by itself The feature the against
the defendants is that boy not twenty years of
the midst Of such community could conduct such dis
graceful proceeding unnolestcd and undsturbed Never
tbeless Gentlemen Won must be careful ON the other
hand that Won do moi by your verdict nnnsh mere IN
nocent and curious SPECTATOR of snoh scene You have
heard each of the defendants testify as 10 his own
cence and f Won see no reason to doub their
unless the circumstances and weight Of evidence out
WEIGHS their statemcnts Won will Give them craJ, IF
YOU do go no matter how much the nantf has suffered
you must not visit his suierngs upon the innocent
natural for man TO exercise his curiosity to know the
rsoanina NJ crnrJ Tar th,t oona he o,b. 49, - t ~
punished II is onv when thai cnriositv has hean ro,,
od ana ,han tba sn"ca,or s ;,;n ~ an, e. W.
neu anu Mne, ne SPECTATOR II siVlns te ransacuoh MS
.h. au mh9, MI, INV ~; a' ~ oeoones an sc'
i,, ;b ny s ,,' h,' . .l anu , uo
each ndvlus IF von find zach and every daandant IN
nocnnt If be;nc an actor and ;nnocan, ~ od;n a%,
nn ,n "a,S,anansa :, hs so.;o -; ~ az ~ .h
a yon S ronder aensra, rardc IN ao ~ al 'e
H., ,.afnndam.s re- ,,r shai, anS 80 20 IL " ~ y.
io yua s ,h, .h i Se VI .lel Y, naye
% he Ia ne The rot has barSod ,h @ =, h tha
vour verdict ;i, be acans, thos aon whom Won ~, INA go
i;orio T., go ,am Ga = ,.ndio, $3.50, ha sa.
or aco;nst INV NJ ,han, vnr ,sriict s o., h ~ @
in several amounts sbood Won % &c cons One ~
The cnncnsion that e ,nrSict 10 ~ ha :, Sr s .
n non In that nas tho n,,;n,T m an d y
CONDENSATION for ali he has lost MS direct conseouencs
of he transaction hs pronertv his business hs ho,
ninrv his Ines If time hs main his sn.r;n is
9ns' and @an,laan' n aa,;ti,n \, his h .d =,
verdict that shall stand as an examne bv way Of nnnisb
r tb desendants WIN aro rnn ana =; way d =. o.he
fre the Of e e 70 onefs
Tho Court would also CHARGE ma renres,ad hv tho do
PENDANTS, counsel thai If the nantr that
tain marty was nrcsent M the time and that M rv
he was not each being eqsay credible then the plaintiff
fails TO make out his case as to that defendant as the
plaintiff is bound to prove the affirmative
To the first proposition OF defendants, counsel the Court
charged that to be liable the defendants must aid or abet
as he had already laid down
To the second-Tbat as a general principle is true
To the thrdTha is true il he does not act in the
per the Court has explained
To the ourth-Taiis So IL that was all he did but II the
jury find that after the plaintiff gave him his watch he
(Bogardus) stayed there in the councnanced
the affair, he is liable; but that is for the jury to
To the nh-That true, il the jury assume was not
able to do anything
10 the six,b-Tlle Court had already charged on that
To the seventhThe Court declined to charge all of
this To the first part he would charge that If the witness
false instance the jury might that he
false in everything On the other portion of this
proposition the Court would say that it is under the
circumstances on which he had already charged
To the eighthThe Court cannot charge that TO be law
To the ninthThe Court did not know but to the loss
Of the wife and child the proposition correct but the
Court should charge that the plaintiff il the jury should
find verdict in his favor entitled to compensation
for the loss of the society Of his wife, to the plaintiffs
property, the Court charges as the defendant asks
To the tenth-The Court had already ruled upon that
and already charged upon that is not legtmately in
issue here; the jury have nothing to do with it.
question OF law they are the judges OF the acs and II
.e Jury uo .o he s raw on, ' ~ sou r ey woulu uo
its propositions Of law il can be remedied by higher
Court
yhors ,he Court states ba, The nain m citizen Of tbe
state of New York The Supreme Court has decided
otherwise