The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-10-26
THE STRONG CASE.

|
Procuring or an Abortion Upon Hss
Wife-A witness for the Prosecution
Fails TO Approximation Termination
OF the Case-The Jury Rend.r ver-
diet OF Not Guilty. DC.
COURT OF ckNEaAL SESSIONS.
Before Recorder Hoffman.
The trial OF Peter K. Strong jointly inicted with
Eeca ~ Potter for manslaughter causing the dcai
OF child by producing abortion upon Mrs. Mary T.
Strong tho OF the defendant commences yes
tefday N the General Sessions This is been bv
fore this snd the civil courts for the last year r
Strong having instituted suit for divorce sganss h,s
wife for alleged adultery That trial Is pending
the superior Court and will not be disposed o. Hnta sis
criminal charge Is tried
The parties TO the transaction move in higt life, tho
deienaant occupying a high soca position wsue Mrs
strong said TO be daughter OF Ma John A. Stevens
the President OF the Bank Of Commerce A. there was
not much publicity given the time when tie trial
crowded.
Before the jury ernpaneiled District Attorney
Hall stated that IN his absence Atorner General Eoch
rane would conduct the prosecution Mr. Geary WA
ISOLATED with Mr. Cochrane. Mr James Brady appeared
for Mr.. Strong.
There was not much difficulty experencet4n obtairins
jury The following gentlemen sworn to try mo
George Falk, James r Dennison Jacob P Smith,
Lewis Frank, Thos Mcdowell Philip ster, Michaet
Schwab Henry J. Quinan, Joseph Merrill, lauritxs
Brandt John A. Dahn and Christian + A. Damhnann
Assistant District Attorney Hutcings opened the
Potter for procuring abortion upon the person ot
Mary Strong his wife In the latter part OF Ftbruiy
1862 was charged that Mrs Strong pregna5t with
q child months old, and the testimony he believed
would show that Nr. Strong visited hrs Pottsr AMI
wanted some instruments with which 70 procure an
abortion on his wife II stated that he consutet
with Mrs. Strong in the presence OF witness
named Ma scy, and Mrs Potter furnished him with hess
instruments The abortion was performed, the child
destroyed, and IL born dead some might ark
what motive had the defendant IN doing thats Were
pied that if the crime was committed by him, In con
Mrs
charge which he had made against his wfethnt she WA
pregnant with child, the fru of an adulterous lntor
course with his brother, of outrage committed
by him upon her Madame Barber an expericncei
midwife would be placed the stand To tcsiy ns to
the child being delivered dead and that II was PREMATURE
in size and To certain declaration made by the de-
PENDANT TO her, a. regards what would be the result
when he called upon her An immediate relative of tho
wife OF the defendant would state certain decaralions
made BY Mr. Strong before and after the delivery, ana
also the father OF wife declaration made be
fore tho delivery TO the child being born dead Mrs
Massey would prove certain declarations made by Mr.
Strong in reference 70 instruments being furnished TO thu
defendant which could not be used for purpose
If the defendant proven guilty he should be pun
ished but IL the evidence should fail establish that
charge against him. he should be cxoneruted by alury
OF his fellow citizens.
The frst witness called WIS Nathaniel Wilson, an un-
deraker who said that at some time he houss
In Twenty first street. between Fourth and Broad
way the request Of DR. John Watson since deceased
The witness produced Cote written to him by Dr Wat
son. which prosecution desired to put in evidence 10
show TINT this Mr. Strong house Mr. Brady objected
and the Court ruled out until the prosecution connect
could remember the year when he received the note
and could not tell whether was 1t Mr. Strongs house or
not.
Madame Barber was called but failed TO answer The
inor counsel stated that she refused TO appear where
upon attachment issued and the court took re
until the officer could make return
The junior counsel for the defence stated that Madame
Barber the midwife of the Stevens family, and shs
therefore entirely witness for the prosecution
Officer Jacobus attache of the District Attorneys
Office. stated that he got into the house OF Madame Bar
bier saw the servant girl and on asking what his busi
ness Informed him that he could not see her He
sent several messages stairs and they finally informed
the officer that hs presence no longer wanted aud
requested him 10 leave the house On further inquiry
IL found that subpoena had been served and tho
Recorder said there was no way OF compelling the wit
ness to attend until that was served.
The Attorney General said IL impossible for him
to proceed without her testimony, and asked TO have
Juror withdrawn
The Recorder said thnt could not DO done without tho
consent OF the defendant counsel
Mr. Brady said IL vital TO the interests Of the do
fcndan that the criminal prosecution should expire IN
manner, being doomed TO sure death before the
divorce suit should come on next month in the Superior
Court The Indictment was found In February last,
nearly three years after the preparation OF the alleged
offence and FROM February until now Mr. strongs cOun
sci had been bcseeching the Court for trial.
The Attorney General replied that tho prosecution
taken by SURPRISE and asked the Court to postpone ths
case I'LL tomorrow morning
The Recorder on nqurng Of the officer found that he
reported the fact 10 tho Office that he could not find the
witness before tho opened, and then said that
s the prosecution had answered ready no did not fce
justified In Keeping the jury another day In expectation
Of finding her. er Ia. rr
the accused whereupon the Recorder told the jury that
there no evidence upon which any conviction could
be asked upon the trial Of this indictment and II
their duty matter or law 10 render verdict OF mot
guilty The Jury promptly complied with the d!rec-
tons OF The Court acquitted the accused who i'm
medatcy surrounded by his friends who congratulated
counsel persstently desired TO submit the tribun Of
. jury.