, 1865-04-10
Mt BE. ~ ILL.,
wa ~ ME COURT at OTTAWA.
syllabus OF Casea

fsr> |e'a1 Correspondence Chicago Tribune,
,o.. Ora ~ Apzil7. 1855.
One Of the /. veg referred to In II, dispatch
nt1aa o. thig afternoon. sat nt th, ~, Carr ys
eoverd Judgment aca 'est The a defsnd1rFee naa re-
ne me case of Addfx VS., Fahn> "stoek, 18th hi.
4ssP, ?. $40, was cited to show TINT the par
view Wiz WITH hoh th entitled to such au appeala
s,i9sion 11 to.the act Of tde lust IeeIs,s*urpe ~
| neld that # it was applicable tn rsaas ~,
1n.ep ne p5eseat at all, yet certainly it was neYcr
haTe and esct pem 9sa and could only
SAGE, Which prec!uded its application he he,ap p4s-
another case Of interest relatej to ~ nv.
dereommitted in Iroquois county. ~ ~ = mus sI
nns'n !umms o9tlne viii probably be acceptable ~
iSSi Wea;ngs: W;1,'as: n tne month Of September.
o. o. me town Of Askknm, and asked oIGe ~
disn,!; me postmaster, for letters, Some
dispute took place, and eventually A aer;nna
VIE iins knife m With 9n;c tynch struck stngham
matejy result 1esnited d1t1eans tn dSssth "0qna Thiep ul
1es1eo , and indicted before The grand inr1 e.
W1llfnf murder. A true bill Was fnnnd ~ 1oa
te1nanded TO jail to aWait his trial. Hia
and also ea moad am application for acontinuanee,
10 ! oail, and that the Court hear evI1enca
against him with view to determine euee ,rha.ee
e. me ofte9se WAS bailab1e one Or n"t "petn n
~ st.,is IN nis oehalf. that the grand IN
,yna = 1noofa " nass indicted him for tie lesser
,nlJ IN sell defense, and to save h{s oxn 1;a
.nat ne Would be able to prove th,t I. ms
ana beaten upon varions narts VIZ It
III LIS neaa and body, with large uniiresssa y
sagoa-sppke, % unt1 he became delirions ued and =
Vas glFen and that It Was don 1;.hn.s. I
~ non, n,i,,E, ~. ne court granted the motion
xounsel for the prisoner eycented % tn +h
hnng, ~ ana sued out writ Of error. benna @ De-
ne present proceeding. nence Ste
The opinion Of the Court vas a.,,u.. An.
tssseHe, sse, ~, and Was as follows: ~ 7
We ore obliged to dlamias th;s vii,
q e !e1aon that the refusal Of the rnn.t 1''
~ s.pm: b; 10 near evidence upoo the apnlicatoa a
= on,l, Is not such final Judgment a. mor 4
ray tEat tSe nsse 1or,t lot ,1eGiew a Bnt desIre
:a5a the evidence, and inquired intn nI,e iIe r,
aqe Of The alleged ofIense. with tha ,,i tue II
aAoTlng or refusing bail, as m1rht lew htsH
,peaFea = proper upon the facts. The ns-e p
IN - t9at the Grand Jury has found an in1ict Rho
tn tba ~ mdoef H9s aoea not preclude IN IN 1ujrv
aether the oftense may be Of such nea5 esaln o.
enctle e. the prisoner to bail. s'Ao' rs II
onoutd an innocent man be Indicted f., IL
ataer. rs ts sometimes DONE II Wonid ~ ~ 7
p uss ~ t!n)osnce to ask him to lie In fail. na. !
r. Nitbnu4 VT oa'ns, u.s. nnnl trial could BE- I'D:
.esngation Of the case with tbe 1919 ~ N {
tanning ball. We know that na-tv ,'Im , u &
oeT an Indictment for murder. b. cory;nt!y, +
mansiaughter, and doubtless rrnnd fn1;as
o.en controlled by that Consideration in E:ih
using, as Is generally the csse tn find ~, - au,p
e tments ior the lesser oGeuse. h5ee
II would be very unj1st, when thc1aua. Ms
res tnat II the offtnsc be Of q loWer GrnSa dfe.s
~ mHoef, II aha1l be bailablc, that H.. ac. os oBN