The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1860-02-24
CRIlE IN NEW YORK.

CRIME IN NEW YORK.
---~~>~~~-~~~>~s-o-~~-~>-
More Gentences 70 state Prison.
CouRr OF 0YHR AND TRIMMER
Before Hon. Judge Mgraham.
Fsa 2aThe District Attorney said thas this being the
last day Of the term he moved 10 remit the following cses
The Sessions for trial. which was accordingly granted
The People va James Penuegrath, assault and battery
With intent to kill the People W. John Burke, 40 the
fsops vp John rp do s rSOpis y: hs psonls va
The People VS. LOUIS obsrbossr and John linden do the
the People VS. James Adams, do the People Daniel
Kelly, the People Hugh Reilly, do; the People VS.
Patrick Campbell ct ais the People w. John Fiaiay'
DO. the People James Smith and Samuel Tying, do
the People vs. Eizabeth Byrnes and Mary Smith, man
0S s =,
may hem the People John Howe, manslAnghter the
People vs John Allison, murder; the People Henry
Ssaub, msnslaughter; the People vs Daniel Driscoll,
murder. .4
THE FOURTEENTH srRKr POISONING
Who S,s bss~ s aos ss q
last On charge Of poisoning Isyese Robinson and Mrs
Hesihan Hs Jssd tAe and.vt. tAs prisonsr in which
Vas done y sons person uniSswn.
The District Attorney read hh own sfRdavt in which
be states that he believed the woman guilty and would not
nsept 10 her discharge There was important wit
for the prosecution In Illinois, whom the District Aor
ney wanted to see and whom he hoped to have here at
Mr. N. Ompbell said public justice demanded that the
prisoner should be either tried discharged, and that
the District Attorney should not be permitted 70 keepa
person in jail without limit 70 time. He suggested that mol
pros shood be entered
The District Attorney said he was 20 convinced Of the
womabs guilt that she would in prison all her life
before he would enter mol pyo& In her case He would,
however spuate that ne not able TO procure the
witness from Illinois At the April term Of the Oyer and
ha hapA ASnp
The Court directed order TO be entered to the effect
that the prisoner not brought 70 trial during the
first for,nghtin the April erm she should be discharged
THE CASE MORTIMER SHAY.
In the Of Mortimer Shay the Court denied the
ton for trial and the motion for arrest OF judg
meDt Sentence however, was deferred until the case Is
Judge on the two motiOns:-
The P.ople D. Mortime- Shoy.-Ingraham J-The coun.
sci Tor the prisoner moves for new trial on the ground
that the verdict against evidence and that the facts
proven only warranted conviction for mAnsaughter
Upon the trial OF the cause the jury were fully instructed
ss 10 the distinction between murder and manssughter
and they also told In what the killing OF the
declared could be justified excused 10 the charge
exceptions whatever were taken, and the jury also
charged as requested by the prisoners counsel all
these points There can be, therefore, no ground for
asking trial for Of law in the Judges charge
upon this motion whether the facts proven will sustain
the verdict andne the prisoner guilty Of murder feel
case and that Of Shor,sr Cones 1 10 that case the
parties engaged IN sudden ARRAY In the street. No
iBerered After several blows the deceased Disco
vered that Shorter hsn knife ana refreshed The prisoner
followed him. and blows passed between them he
sot 10 The mdc Of the road when the deceased fell and
asa lhss vas 10 positive evidence q blows ,% Sy the
carried knife that the deceased had several wounds
his body, given by knife the prisoner was convicted
present case the evidence aganet Shay Of posi-
tive char acter the Of Shorter justify
M = . % nS Out
deceased and Smith quarreling and Shay inter
He struck the deceased the first blow the head
this blow was returned by the deceased who then re-
treated, folo~ed by Shay Shay secretly opened bis
knife Which led the deceased again to strike 1t Shay and
again 70 rer.a There evidence tnas sne oeoeasea A.
from torbe that he had knife. The latter evidence.
both M The and the appearance Of the witness
ieve. Tue question Of fact arising thereon. wa.
lett to the jury. after this Shay. struck q
.'sss .s win Win TIE ss ss .e.ssa ss sss ss.pss as
| to Tee, and Shay was approaching the deceaset
when Kirby ran IN between tnem The prisoner STRUCK
Kirby with the knife who jumped out Of the way, and
the then followed the deceased One OF his bro
thers called 10 him 70 take care he would be killed
looked round 70 ses his DANGER the
prisoner knife into his temple with such force
s 70 render 30 fast there that with three attempts
pull on, mae by the prsoner he was unable 70 DO H.
the Unaer these the question was sub
mted to the jury whether the prisoner before striking
the last blow had formed the determination TO take
LIE OF the oeceaseoS The facts, In my judgment, WIRE
fully Sufficient warrant said conclusion BE was tho
aeeressor He used kofe when the deceased hsd none,
he opened the knife secretly After the blow he gave had
been returned be pursued the cased he threatened
and attempted 10 stao Kirby, who interered he again
the deceased while running and he struck such
blow as would have struck In such place II he
haa not determined to take life In Shorters the
Court Of Appeals hello that under such state OF facts the
question whether the homicide UNSTABLE not could
lot are and there color for submitting that
question to the jury and that where the proper instruc
slaughter and the ary found the prisoner guilty Of ur
der, the gueni should be affirmed In the People
Clark % Seloen, 394) which similar to this in
The interference between others who were engaged
fct the Court say ' there be sufficient dehberaon
to orm desgn 10 take lite and 70 put that design into
con sy aslSyIg he there n Is sscsns ven csos,saon 70
athe instant Of striking the fatal blow, whether IL
be contemplated for months It enough that the inten-
ton precedes the act although that follows instantly" So
also IN the People Sullivan % Selden, $685.
GRAHAM, jim this case the prisoner has been tried
and convicted OF murder No objection was taken on the
motion Ia made on behalf Of the prisoner 10 arrest
Of judgment Tor the omission Of the word "wih' In the
Indictment before the description Of the weapon used
by the prisoner The mistake " evidently clerical ons
but still, IL material 70 charging the offence, would be
available. The clause in the indictment reads fol-
ious-"Tbat the said Mortimer Shay . certain
knife which be, the said Mortimer Shay Ia his right hand,
then there had and held him. the said John Leary,
felonously, and Of bis malice aforetbousbt, did
beat, strike. stab, cut and wound, giving unto the
ss John Lesry then -, snd there ~ vs M ne me knife n
Asry one mortal wound, isc " cauuot conclude that
the issoD the word "witho before the words 90
CERTAIN kne such defect eubssance - 10 warrant
granting this motion. The Indictment would read -
charge the offence, those words included in
parenhes That the said Mortimer Shay (he the said
Shay then holding knife in his hand) DID stab, beat
strike and wound the saio Leary, and giving the
FAD Iesry, then and there with the knife Aforesaid
mortal wound, &C" fbe offence h fully stated without
the word omitted and although 10 necessary<o name
the weapon with which the death effected De indct
me.i sufficiently shows II Notwithstanding the omission
OF the word complained Of The cited by the prison
er's counsel none Of them applicable 70 this
They relate 10 cases where the defect in charging
the off, nee; here II merely in relation 10 tho weapon
With which the cnence committed and In that respect
the obercn sYemed,ed by the snbseqnent part Of tho
count IN the II cmen which charges expressly that the
wound Rven with the knife and that Of such wound
TIE p-eoner died. Il that the offence fully
charged ip te Indictment Notwithstanding the omissou