Daily national Republican., 1863-10-10
LOCAL AFFAIRS.

: "a atfluI II Isa----ah-la=- % "a .'tH aIN
fHz GuaowsKI LIssL.-1his morning IN
the Supreme Court, sitting - Ortainal Court the
case Of the Unissd statsS Against kdsm Gurowski,
indicted on TIE charge of publishiAs hbsi on VIM.
Hunter. Chief Clark Of Tie stats Department, was
oostiaued ~ yesterday, Chisf Justice Cartier
was % the bench and Jos X. 1rsdisy, sf., Vas the
dsIsdant's counsel, ...-..t-. ... ...4 ''.H'
Nj. cAsriasssn, having proved 70 his sAtsfast,on
the enistass Of ssssaia prsst shssts AaA the pss-
sessioa Of them By the dslondant, gsvs TIE follow
ing written notice to the dsfsndAat %, sa @
asssssnet: o. pseeEshsst. pssssstsd 81 Tou %
sls.nssa ns.s :sa so.:..a Co g. Lin
bsisg resS n ths sass efskS uslle xSAN . SinsS
6a.,s aSsT ~ ~ ssssS:
uial II csihse aDd nisdsmeanors.
M. nrsAasy sAsAs1 lhas the elsr Was sonswhat
modiAsd 'ffou ysssstdsy. To Day hs ionstsd to
pcovs that ths pfoofshaets ysse delivered 70 D.
fsndant. YssterdAy, not W. proof Assfs, butt$s
substsnes. He statsd that one N " npostshasas
contained the title pass-" Diary ben l1assh,
the prooEshests were, aceording 70 the testimony,
presented BY tAs dslsndAat n September, iesa
,rhs libel matter y 9nsiAs tsa spsstAs forn.s n
" spsc,hs aiseEssios ~ spseias iissi snd nust
cs.s q. .hs qss..io.; I, .ss, sS.sS.r
ne sotisN 70 prsssntsd asrins Tbs pssAing q Ne
trial, 10 In order. 70 .'.'' -ai To- -a r.1''al.,
M. Rradlsy rsad from GrsenlssG to show that
Ne neaaes shosid b sprssestsd before the son-
mencemept Of the trial aiso, ssresgsr extracts
from koseoeAs Csimihal Evibsnoe, 70 show that II
should bs presented not only before the con-
nsnssmsat Of The trial. but reasonable tns should
be givsa for the ts1sadAat 10 pro1ass u 10, fstu
The Court then - staseA That ssssss nesis should
be given. L,p,Is sss5 iTI ,Is,,st.gI .,.s IN
! asotss .e.pdsI tssaasd = an - sJppvr,eatios
s,sss, OAR be ): esSs % ne q lso. .sssAs sSs psSii.
:. ~ y "a: "a 4 90! y 2 .. .. ~ xs.s.s I
fishing in 6sek torn afssrvsrdss I2OgGIT
Mr.. Carrington put the indietnsnt In the haeds
ol ths viAasss, and aftsr The Witness hAAssAd, he
asked Inn whsshes hs sesd tAafih tie work.
H:ys ySS stSc e sssS Az Y: Y seSs " 49, I,
= SMsctSd tSslni1HTd 3a5 90 1sr IUi l1,is,h bOs /
WI. IA Moo.s tessinea-I an . printer, 4 knd~
ia I'D s:ssS ss y ss s y 10 s.sss bsSsil MT .
s.ssI .sS sssS e, ,sy Z; s.ss ~ eS
Issy booS this morniss =. As!ts- :
=. S.:sss l:sssais: y. @ scs. !. s.s % as,!.. Z.
'aiE ssiy VA ~ lis any oayss.,sa win
MP GurowIki siaos s.ptsmbef iAst. 7Sh' ~
Mr.. Bradley objected to the calling bythe Distfict
Attornsy sf . witness who has tssttdsd, and inter
TSgsting him eoncerning the Zane fAsts and ctsrun
stances 10 which he nrst tsstined 50 alJ ,sai
- oWn. Huatsr t,siis al Al sAisf eisfi "a tbs
was sppsis,sd sy psnlsi WehstsI, I % Rot kaow
never ;S;S g q LsSv s.y: issS
9. H so0oas. % n ~ sSisS hs Solss &c
30. k.ow y. snyaeySsst, soppSs. that h hs wa:
SIss.ss n ~ y. N no one siss "a tSs United s.ts.
could .sts,..ssI 1 knos no Other man BY the Aans
Mr.. Bradley tAsa stated that no evidence had
been produced 70 prove that the dsssndant II
guilty OF the alleged libel. The prosecuting attor
nsy argues TO show that, bsesuss Count Gurovsk
west 70 pristlng once In August, issA snt
hurried up o work IN the press, the Count WA
there fore the suthor OF bork Sdtitlsd I" Dtary
from March, 1851, u Novsssbet, 1884, ~ The pis
trtot nov o1ss 10 put the book ~ aviAsAse utsA
oct sonnssting Count Cupossskt with TIE osa
position OF publisstion thereof, .,.,, ~
M. Carrington said that 10 the questioa Of th,
Cevrt, vhsther the book was sdpissabls ~ svi
dance In court II ~as sufioient to know that th,
book contained the iibel charged In the Indictment
He had 70 prove, the authorship. Il was proc
sufioient TO know that the book had large etrpu
istoa In ths city Of Washington, the name Of th,
Count CuIowski importing on Its fsee 70 b hi
vesk. II " possihle, but not probable, that tn,
work 10 . losgsry. .,ur r. " l76 100 ius
Tue Coust wss In the stty during the sisouistloI
Of ths work. He was in the bsokI stores Of III,
sity dsTlnS ita SALE and made no objection. '-- G
Ar. hssdlsy statsd that II wss the arst tine II
his life he ever heard proposition 70 monstsous
a work y published with certain name On II
tass y The desisnsted authoSship-ergo; MAJ
bsaxthg . similar nams 10 guilty Of The ilibsiou
matter sontaiued IN the work There u not VAs
tisie 81 proof 70 show that the defendAnt wAs 4
ths city st ths time, or that he knew u Wa bsas
circulated, that he was In store when the bool
wee sold-thoush an attempt to prove saehwa
mAde. l.-,,,y,... ,......,.' ,,.-. ..g.ass-h
Ch.sf Justice Cartier delivered . phAtss 10 Ii
Jury In whieh, at considerable length, asd Wit
Characteristic ability, he declsrsA tAss the suestao
/ was simply whether Count Gurowss authorise
the publieation OF The volume, or thAt p6rttpA n
lattas 10 the libel charged In the iaaistnsatlos I
Ths District Attorney wished 10 hsew n u
cess could not be postponed, TO enable him tosuH
aep tbs publishers Of the book tfoR Nsw Yorl
and BOSTON. aIy IH" VI Tbid Va 10 ynA iaIlsI
Mr. ssedlsy objeotsd, asd chs Court sustains
me ohjsetipp. g .aiiA ,, "a saiSSa,. .sl.
Ths District Attorney thsa desired to satsr
xsgs pses, which The Court ruled was imp ,ss bl
undsr the sireuustsssss, ~ sviasass he'd sssa az
/ Aittad. seANIt a4Al7ol9O