The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-05-04
BALTIMORE, FRIDAY, MAY 4. 1860.

er prefer to wait for them, or have the Court here
to assign them counsel. The Court-"Why did
you come here without counsel? The Court can t
compel counsel to defend all you Balti-
more people for nothing" Roten-"As for
myself, | am not able to pay a lawyer"
The Court.-"Then what did you expect by COM
ing here in this way. The Sheriff mav however,
give you list of the members of the bar, and If
they choose to defend you they can do so. but if
not you will have to go to trial without them
Mr.. Sheriff, please give these men a list of the
counsel OF the court and let them select, and if the
gentlemen choose to defend them they do so,
but the Court will not compel them. The
Sheriff gave them the list and Jones selected JAS
); Franklin and Rotten selected Oliver Miller
VIM. Alexander, ESQ.,, counsel for VIM MYERS.
whose case was removed from Baltimore, appeared
and desired to go to trial, but an agreement was
finally made with the States Attorney that Mr.
Alexander should be notified before the case was
called The following cases were then assigned
VIZ George Rotten for tomorrow; VIM. G. Jones
Tor the 9TH inst; and Charles Vogestine Mary Ann
Burke, Mary LLOYD and John LLOYD for the Sth
inst.--State as. VIM. Lynch, of Baltimore city,
lndicted Tor the larceny of one and square. the
property of John Hetzel alleged to have been
removed to this court The prisoner was
placed in the dock for trial, and in
reply to the Interrogation of the clerk said
he was here without counsel, money or friends,
ana desired the Court to assign him counsel; that
IN Baltimore Mr.. McAlister appeared for him, but
that gentleman refused to follow the case here
The Court refused to assign counsel and said he
could not compel the members of the bar to act
The prisoner then consulted Mr.. Franklin, who
SAID he acquiesced with the Court that to defend
all those parties was rather tasking their generos-
ty little too much but this prisoner had here
toi0re employed counsel, he would defend his case
and see that justice done him, but he was not
prepared to go to trial to day, owing to the absence
OF TWO witnesses. The case was then assigned for
Monday neXt-State as. Peter Brannan corner
OF North and Bath streets, Baltimore in
dicted for selling liquor without a license
on Sunday, the 1st of April, 1860. Thorn,
he went to Brannan's, got the LIQUOR from Mr.
Brannan's daughter as gift not paying for it or
getting it on time. Verdict of the Jury, 'not gull
ty." Mr.. Snyder for the defence.-State u.s.
Michael lgo, of Baltimore city, indicted for selling
liquor on Sunday, the lst of April, 1860. The evi-
cence in this case that the liquor was sold and
paid for. Verdict, "guilty." The Court remarked
it had been in the habit of imposing a fine of from
$50 to $50 in cases of this kind where thew orgna
ted In this county, but where a party swears he
cannot get fair trial in Baltimore for selling one
glass of whiskey, the party themselves or the par
Dad; and further, by bringing the cases here they
take advantage of the witnesses not attending:
therefore, the Court will fine the party SlOO and
costs In default of payment Igo was sent to iail.
-Ihe case OF the State as. Roast for similar of
fence, was continued until the fourth Monday in
May.-State Us. James Oldfeld, removed from
Baltimore city, indicted for the larceny of thirty
pounds OF wool, valued at $3.50, the property of
the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore kali
road Company. On trial. Mr.. Snyder for the de-
fence ~