The sun., 1861-12-25
The Matthew's Murder Case.
JEFFERDS CONVICTED or NE'RDER
IN THE fIRST DEGREE.

Al tho opening Of tho Court, Mr.. Holmes
one Of the counsel for the defense, moved thn,
tho evidence regarding the confessions of the
prisoner, Jtherds, made at the store of VIM. I.
Walton, should bo stricken out, on the ground
that no was lntoNicat' at the time. Tho Court
DID not render d'ciion, and Mr.. James T.
brady proceeded TO sum up the case for the de-
fense. lie spoke for nearly five hours. He
claimed that thorn was not a single thread of
evidence To conn, ct the murder of Mr. Walton
with that Of Mr.. Mathews; that charge of
murder could lUr 90 Sustained in the latter o,A,.
as there was clearly an attempt TO MAIN and moi
70 XII on the part OF the fugitive his only aim
being TO escape arrests he bad never found in
the whole eouise OF his practice, go much perse
cu'ion against any criminal as had been eNor
cised by the prosecution against this young
mani and he dsiiod tho pros cution 10
show on the pages Of the most infamous
fnghsh trials, any thing equal to It.
~ was, he said, in violation of the proyi
sions OF tho Constitution of tho United States,
tne constitution OF this state, and the Bill Of
Rights. According TO these provisions, a pri.
soner had right TO an impartial ar d speedy
trial, and yet Jeffords was kept In the TuInba a
whole year before his first trial. Tho theory of
the prosecution now was, that Mrs. Walton had
hired her son. Chas. Jeffsrds, TO murder her hus.
band, John Walton, for the sum of ~, ,OOO-this
was the only theory the prosecution had a right
to prove. There was not single motive sd-
duced TO warrant such theory and no proof 10
sustain II. TIE only motive Jeherds had wa,
the s2,OOO. he admitted that there was con-
troversy between the deceased and Mr.. Jenforis.
but the latest time anything occurred was a
year before the murder-there was also a per-
feet reconciliation shown by the evidence of Mr,
and Miss Walton. All would agree that the
same person killed the two men, yet ii the do
fence could show that this person could not have
hoen Jeiierds, his sO-called confession must be
considered as nonsensiCal. Pascal was tho onlv
one who knew who had killed Mr.. Walton, and
why, as Pascal WIS an enemy of IchoIds, hal
he not accused him. II was shown that the
culprit had light clothes on, yet JeiIerds was
shown to have had dark clothes on even up 10
the very evening Of the murder. Ono witness
swOre that the murderer was 3 feat inches in
height, whereas Jeffords was 3 feet II " inches
in height. Another swors tha' he was of dark
complexion, whereas Jciierds was a pure
blonde. Mr.. Walton, he said, had given 52Oa
liom bis private funds TO hire a sne,k-a spy
uot a detective 10 fdsten the murder upon this
prisoner. lie did not believe that Mr.. Kenne-
dy had ever given Moore instructions to get and
keep j, fierds drunk 10 induce him TO make such
cOniessiOrs After reviewing discrepancies which
he claimed existed in tho testimony Of some Of
the Witnesses, Mr.. Brady closed his appeal in
ehalf OF the prisoner, and the Court took a re-
cess.
At I o'clock the Court again conyened. and
Mr.. Waterbury, preceded to sum up for the
prosecution, occupying in his remark, several
hours.
The charge of the Recorder followed, and tho
case was given to the jury at o o'clock in the
evening. A. a quarter 30 IL o'clock they came
in with a VERDICT Of "GUILTY or MURDER IN
TIK FIssT DtGRRE." On the announce ment
Of the verdict the prisoner remarked, "Gen-
llemen, you have convicted an innocent man."
llevas then remanded to prison, and the Court
adjourned 10 Friday.