Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1860-02-24
About that Trial at Barton.

Mr.. STANDARD,-In your last num-
Der are two articles purporting to be crit
icisms upon an article published the 10th,
respecting trial at Barton. The first
article by "One of the Six" informs the
public that there was riot" "a dis
graceful affair" on the 28th December.
He calls attention to the point in the ar
ticle respecting the respondents swinging
his arms with violence, and AYERS that
the evidence was that Smart said, Stand
back, gentlemen, and give us chance to
put on this baggage" What then does
that declaration justify him in seeking
and provoking quarrel with Little !?
There could be no other object than a
desire to get into fight in doing and say
ing what he did. That in reply to his
request TO ride, J. F. Little told him TO
hop on" and that blows instantly en-
sued on both sides no decent man will
deny. But says Zone of the Six
Capt. Little in his testimony did not
claim that he received any serious injury
infer from that argument that this " One
of the Six" has the idea that man NAV
engage in brawl, and push and pull, and
scratch, yet if there is no serious aBjurg
there is no breach of the peace. A
knuckle murder, broken bone, black eye
and perhaps bloody nose, would do tc
be called breach of the peace. Again
we learn that if the defence had put il
no evidence, the jury were almost unan
in'ous that they mould be justified in rem
der5ng Verdict Of not guilty. 1t is {
little unusual for jurors to be looking af
ter justification for rendering a verde
of not guilty, instead Of enquiring afte
the truth of the facts" This " One O
the Six" hopes that the case in the coun
ty court in reference to this same row vii
be smothered, throttled, and of cours
that "mean riot" that disgraceful al
fair" as he calls it, will never be invest
gated, or the DULLES and ruffians engage
in it punished. 1t is no surprise that thi
"One of the Six" should be in favor c
acquitting these rioters.
Judge French heads his article " Re
, ply to Falsehood," and then says the al
. ticle under the heading Trial for As
E sault and Battery at Barton" is mainl
tissue of misrepresentation and To-
breeding-not having enough of the sa
of truth in its composition to prevent pit
trefaction." He must of course regar
this rhetorical flourish as a specimen {
high breeding" and literary refinemen
and all tue "reply to falsehood" that
, necessary, as he makes no other. II
passes over all the falsehoods, or as
calls them, foolish perversions of the te
= timony and eulogises the jury and ass
ciate justice. A singular " Reply
Falsehood." He then says the court d
} determine that the prosecution shou
{ elect on which count in the complai
they would try the respondent. Til
y fact was stated in substance in the artic
to which he is replying. In that artic
. it was said that the discretion and wisdo
OF the court was unappreciable and I
. most incOmprehensible, aud we are nc
g told by the Judge that . the testimony i
" dicated three separate and distinct Z
" sauits npon different individuals and
:. different times" and that " brevity, pe
splenity, and justice to the respoude
)" called for separate trials" Few N
can understand bow three distinct inc
E. pendent trials for assault and bate
N could be more brief or perspicuous tb
70 one, or bow it is that respondent who