Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1863-10-10

b. L
does not constitute perfect proof but 1t consti-
tutes no proof at afl-not an item OF proaf /
agree with the prosecution thai 1t is the privi-
lege OF the Count to examine the evidences
Internal as Well as external, of this book, to
prove its identity with the defendant.
II THIS is internal evidence, il is internal evil
dence OF nothing-simplv and absolutely moth
ing in connection with the identity Of party.
The title Of the book is referred to as the only
remaining ear-mark of identity, and that is a
diary of somebody calling himsalf Adam Gu
rowski from March 1, 1861, to Nov. IL, 1852. A
diary is utie to given description of literary
work--patchwork that men drop by the way
side from day TO day-a sort of memoranda
literature-ipd II is the title of class of liter
AIRY productions that any body NAV write and
baptlze in this name. There Is nothing in the
term diary and nothing in the period of
from March 18th, ls6t, to November 18th,
1862 to identify the book with the defendant
1t is a common title -common 10 this class of
productions here and everywhere. Ia every
language with which an acquainted a SINH
lar title is given 10 literary productions of this
description. That is all we have between the
covers of the book
Now as TO TIE outside OF it. What is the evil
dence then For If there was any evidence in
any degree, IL would be my pleasure to permit
this book TO go TO the Jury. What mean by
"eVidence," is "legal evidence not "pre-
snmpIiors for men are no; tried for crimes
by presumption. They are tried by legal
proofs-rauonal testimony. Testimony that
does not work in dreams or fancies or guesses,
but works lly-matheInaticalIy.
E He resided IN the same city, 1t is said Now,
thcTe as no evidence in that. There are g., gHU
people living here, il is repogted-proha hly
1eO,UOO-and there are great many persons re-
siding conveniently around here. Now III the
argument would hold good FOR Washington il
would hold good for Baltimore. They are only
two houIs apart, and from Baltimore to Phlla-
delphia there are only 4 few hours more, and
SO from Philadelphia 10 New York city: and for
that mater YOU might embrace the continent
There is nothing in the argument of the neigh
borhood TO the book Ii is not competent a. an
to nj tpS " N ttx-
neighborhood of the book.
little question were made "do you know
that the defendant resided IN the city of Wash
lngton," with the purpose OF proving his idan-
tity with the structure of n book, the Court
would not hesitate a moment to rule il out. L.
would prove simply nothing: aud 1t has never
been resorted TO as proof Tor that purpose, as
the Court has ever heard of; and the remark
that "some of the Jury might regard it as evil
dence. does incorporate on my mind at all. It
would only prove TO the CourC that such a
iurvman not fit TO discharge his duties
and had no business III a jury box if he could
be moved by such considerations.
1t is said that the defendant was clerk i'll
the State Department. That would permit
any OF the clerks OF the State Dapartm mt ex-
cept MIR. Hunter, 10 have written this book II.
would not have recorded q libel against him
self, but any other clerk il the Department, or
any mind v-ell-.Ittormed as to the machinery
Of its operations. might have done it. 1t is
significant OF nothn simply nothing but the
ability of party either truthfuily or falsely,
artiully or iuartiuliy. to work up out OF the
machinery OF thar office Il libel, ana 1t may b.
done outside or inside with the same precision.
Again it is ia proof that the de tenddut CON-
muncated to two Witnesses, both Of them pre-
Nlous to the publication of this book lit il hears
publication 1T its 6ael of his possession OF Il
diary and his nurnose TO be 10 publish il in the
one instance il some fcrn-the form being diff
ftT"nt from the present so far as have any
light on t.. subject What that diary WAS We
do not know. The ruling of the Court, for
good reasons in the Judgment of the Conrt, did
not permit witness 81 parole and upon the
StreEGth of memory TO give the contents OF q
printed document because the pruted do.u-
ment was the better evidence Of its owE con-
TENS.
Tic court having ruled 1t out, that branch OF
the testimony stands here simply and in 70
ether light, that hp " as the author OLA diary"
or had Gle IL his possession. without any proof
that 1t was Identical with or resembled the
present one. Now this embraces i review of
every item OF prcof which the United States
has presented III this case TO Justify the Offering
OF this book 20 the jury, and the court did not
hesitate 10 pronounce that in no single item has
the United States offered legal proof APP
pToach thereto, that the defendant was the
author and pm Disher of this book.
And while the Court holds sacred the privi-
lege of jury and always SO instruct them
when it communicates upon this topic-whiie
it holds sacred their right To pronounce upon
facts which have been delivered to them by
the court in proof an issue--while the court re-
CARDS them as The judges of the force Of proof
thus committed. and while l personally, as q
judge, very much rejoice that am relieved Of
that great responsibility, and that it is upon
that branch of the tribunal il is not for me to
shrink from n Ealpable responsibility address,
ed exclusively to the court on the competency
OF proof. While yield the other, meet my
own responsibilities Just as chPerfully, and the
judgment OF the court is, that the work cannot
be read to the jury for want of proof of author
ship and publication on the part OF the deten-
dant.
Mr. Darlington said the Court having decided
the book was not evidence, he would enter
nOtte prossqut or continue the cas-. L MIR.
GurOwski was not the author, greaL i'll ms tic
had been done him; and if il was due 10 Mr..
Hunter and the public that il should be known
who was1he author: and GSked, therefore, thu.
the case could be contin ued or postponed until
the publishers can be brought ON from Boston
and New York.
Mr. Bradley never heard of a case where
jury could be adjourned over after testimony
had been given.
Judge Fisher said he never heard OF such
case OF a court being adjourned over week to
fn new testimony.
Judge Cartier said this could not be done
Mr.. Darlington said he would then enter
noHe pros.
Dir. BRADLEY objected that he could not do
that the testimony having been given.
The Court SO decided, and the Jury returned
q verdict OF not guilty.
u ORPHANs COURT, Juiye Purccu.-This morn
ing decree was issued on the petition oil John
S. Paxton, Sarah A. Paxton, and LIE Roy Ed
WARDS, guardians to the infant children of
Geo. S. Neil, deceased, ordering the sale at
pupllC AUCTION toH tie itilHctitou u the d--
cree by the supreme Court, III chancery,) OF
the interest of their wards in the real estate OF
deceased, which is situated in GeorsetoIy n.
- Thomas Sandiland obtiiued letters of adj
ministIation on the estate OF James Reid, iat8
OF South Carolina.
Jas. d. ClHry obtained letters testamentarY
on the estate OF the late VIM :. Clary.
Thomss Thornley, obtained letters of admin
istIation on the cate OF the late Charles De-
Veney. .-es ..-t-1-s. zaa
The first and final account of Eliza Jane
The eker, administrative OF VIM. Henry Theck-
er, was approved and passed.
John w. Dekrafft presented his final ac-
count as administrator CT Mary E. UeKrafft
tiormeriy Mrs. Barney, but the approval was
withheld Until Saturday next. .Ga4. sa