New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-04-27
TWENTIETH DAYS PROCEEDINGS
washington, Tuesday, April %, Is

WASHISGTOS, Tuesday, April 20, 1917.
There is general feeling of relief manifested this
morning by the Court, jury counsel, spectators and
indeed by all concerned at the prospect of arriving
to-day at termination Of this protracted case 1t is
exp,cted that if the rulings of Judge Crawford on the
instructions prayed for be not very adverse TO the
ursoper's cause, the case will be submitted to the
.Iury without further summing up in which event
verdict will probably be returned on this, the TWEEN
tieth day Of the trial.
The District-Attorncy renewed the argument on the
instructions prayed for. He had been endeavorng Ia
show he said that the rule adopted III Mannlngs case
was not n tightening of the prime pies oi the common
law but was rather in the nature OF an alienation
than otherwise The doctrine had never gone further
than that no act Of insult contumey, and no uespasS
or property would justify the slayer in taking the life
Of the respasser and would not reduce the crime from
murder 10 mansluughtcr. The determination OF the
bench in MBrung's was IN conSOnance win the
principles of common law, long established As
adultery was not assault on the person
of the husband, but was only combined
of the two provocaiiOns of Insult and OF respaSs,
then to regard the construction Of the law a. UNDER
stood al that time, would have convicted the party ci
murder. The law then, for the first time, declared
that adultery such provocation as would reduce
the homicide from murder 10 manshughter FROM
tina, time To this the law had never gone further. IL
would be very unwise for Courts of justice To relax
tina, rule. Ii woud overurn the principles OF com
mon law in regard to murder and would establish the
principle that man could kill another from motives o
revenge Besides il could not he restricted to the single
crime of adultery but would also have to extend 10 The
case OF the defamation of mans wife; the prlnciplc
that would allow one would necessarily embrace the
other He referred to Blackstone where It Is iaid
down that insult constitutes aJusncatcn Tor hoh
eide No species Of contumcly no species OF mere
trcspass ana no combination Of the two, had been rec
oguzcd in either ancient modern times ms an alicN-
aton ot the crime of murder to manslanShtef' lie re-
lrcd 10 the case of Smith, ted IN 1871, where lhd
l.. emo q ~
brought in verdict of manslaushier, but the Court
refused 10 receive the verdict, and the jury re-
tired again and brought in a verdict of gmhy;
These principles had been uniformly recognized ana
adopted in This country lie referred TO the case d"
RYAN "a Wheeler ia, and recapitulated the circuIu
stances Of that case and the rulings OF The Court
The law there laid down was the law which the pros
ecnton here recognized, and the law Dy winch thef
were ready 10 stand II the theory of the defense were
truehai adultery was Justification Of homicide a. well
as provocation how could the learned Judge IN Ryan
case have said that the circumstances there might
constitute the crime OF murder. might constitute the
crime Of mansaughtcr. There was an entire uniform
v IF judicial Interpretation running through al Inc
case, reported. In the case oi Jarboe, the question
WAS distinctly propouuded Ia his Honor, whether, II
the deceased had seduced the prisoners SISTER, and
crp,nitt.d all the turptude charged in the case, Il
constituted either prov ocaon or Jushcaion ana hS
Honor had decided thu; ii amounted to neither. In
the tive Virginia cases, Bowers aud Hoyi = cIted
Yesterday there was no trial before Judge.
Mr.. Magruder-Before five Magistrates.
Judge-They were tried before an examining Court;
District Aitorney-They were not 10 b. controlled
in tbis bv the Dsf dirg' ot magistrate Court, com
uosrd probably OF men who knew nothing about ia~'
IN singleton Mercers case, the whole energies 81 the
defense were directed to the solitary and extensive
issue of insanity. ~ it in smith case, IN rhlla
delphia As 10 Stamps, in Maryland he an not kuo"
what the facts were-but If Judge Legrand there deer
dcd that adultery conitued either lu>tihcstion or
legal proyccation except where the parties are causht
in the act he would Ike 10 see such decision
Mr.. MsgrudeT-The jury - held
District ATTORNEY was argued here that the de-
ceased was virtually killed in the act Of adultery and
that therefore the homicide was committed on ie-a
proyocaton In the cited 10 support that theory
the question was what constituted proof OF adultery
But the question here not what constituted proof
Of adultery, but what constituted proof Of " nndins
in the act of adultery. There could Do, be any proN
innate fact with regard to that-there was but one
method of proving il. The proof mn.t be that the
partv was found, caught, surprised. in the at
Of adultery The waving Of the haaiAerch'9' aud