Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1860-02-24
CORRESPONDENCE.
Reply to Zone of the Six and
F. S French.

in court, and presume the same rule |
will apply in the trial of cause in your
columns. Hence desire to be heard in
answer TO the two very spirited articles
in your last issue, in defense of that
worthy gentleman who was tried here
few days since for breach Of the peace.
"One of the Six"-which I suppose
means one ofthe jury-and f. S. French,
the justice on that occasion, seem to have
taken it upon themselves to vindicate his
acquital. This is more than / presume
his counsel would do; but when court
and jury speak in behalf of prisoner, it
is not necessary that his counsel should,
and / submit to the candid readers of the
Standard if the article from zone of the
six" does not wear the impress more of
the Interested advocate, than the i'm
partial juror; and certainly l regard
his capacity for misrepresentation as
being extremely well cultivated, when he
says there were " four lawyers engaged
on the part of the prosecution, and if
there had been as many for the defence,
the jury would have had to sit two weeks
instead of one to get their order of twenty
five cents In the first place there were
only two lawyers employed by the gov
eminent at all; and for the truth of this
refer to Maj. Pierce, our town agent,
and Mr.. Cutler, our grand juror. 1t is
true other lawyers were present, but one
informs me that he took notes for Mr..
Steele, in assistance of the defense
And, secondly, l believe those who at
tended the trial, will agree with me when
| say that only a very small part of the
four days, over which the writer signs,
when he thinks of the twenty-five
cents" were occupied either by the
counsel for the State, or the State wit
nesses. But that large portion of the
time was spent in delay by the defense,
and in the examination of large raft
of the respondents witnesses, imported
( at distance, from various towns in this
County and Caledonia, and some even
Y from foreign governments. The writer
t declares lin behalf of the jury" that
they were conscientious. No one pre-.
tends that they were corrupted; only
that it is little inconsistent for them tc
say in their verdict not guilty." but it
L conversation to state, that Smart, and hal
i dozen men ought to be fined for theil
conduct at the depot that night; and thi
h | have heard as coming from more thar
{ one of the six" Mr.. French however
{ in his "reply to falsehood" comes to tn,
o relief Of the verdict with the broadest o
assertions, and says that the article il
your last is mainly tissue of misrep
- resentation and low breeding, not havin
:. enough of the salt of truth in its compost
49, ton to prevent putrefaction." This
presume the readers of the Standard wi
understand to be what the lawyers ca
in an ertra Judicial opinion. Courts some
e. times give them.
OF This is the beginning and end of NJ
. trench's argument; he then falls bac
upon his immaculate conception of tn
law, which he says has absolute r,
NJ quirements upon the point" of putin
- the prosecutor upon his election, whel
K a complaint contains several counts fC
u several offences committed at diferel
nd times by the same person, which IS ce
to tainly immaculate, if innocence of tt
OF true rule governing this matter can NAL
n it so. The counsel for the State, elaine
er on this trial-and / believe every lawye
IA or jurist, who reads this, will agree wi
er me in its statement here-that there a
mi no absolute requirement." in this pa
pt ticular at all, but, that at most, it is
NC matter only in the discretion Of the coul
Sc, In the trial of offenders for high crime
he | am free to admit, that courts will usual
nd exercise this discretion. In the langua
lie of Wharton'S precedents, " In felony
'pi charges requiring an essentially diffrre
nj state OF facts TO support them, though 7
ct, ferring TO the same transaction, be ioine
is the court will in general compel the pre-
pe ecutor TO make an election" This is
On in genera, says the writer, which lea
ert me to say that it is not always so.
Of submit then, if there is anything like
ing absolute requirement" upon the poi
al even in trials for capital offences. Z
'ne how is it in regard to misdemeanors,
wn which class is an assault?
- Manifestly the rule is not only grea
IN relaxed, but seems really to favor
W. jOinder of counts, even where there s
oy distinct offences. Says the same autl
Of above quoted, page l A, an cases of n
I