The Pulaski citizen. [volume] (Pulaski, Tenn.) 1866-current, 1867-08-23
Hoekery Of Justice.

illustrates thu vindictiyeness and prejudice
which still prevail in some quarters against
the colored people A colored man, see
ing three strange hogs, unmarked, passing
by his cabin, turned them into his lot,
and afterwards killed one Of the porkers
Sometime after. the owner of the hogs
came and claimed his property. The col
ored man readily gave the hogs up and
paid for the one he had killed. Neverthe-
less, he was indicted for larceny in the
Criminal Court. Judge Brien, on hearing
the evidence, told the jury that 1t was not
a case of larceny at all, and the negro was
clearly not guilty of stealing, and must be
discharged on that indictment. He told
them the case was too clear for deliberation
and that they need not retire from their
seats. The jury consulted for a few min
ules ana chen told Judge Brien that they
preferred to retire for delberation. They
therefore retired and after long absence
brought in verdict of GUILTY with three
gears cOnfnensets! az tie PenitentiGy ! Judge
Brien promptly told the jury that they
were discharged, and their outrageous ver-
diet was set aside. The counsel for the
defendant then moved for writ of habeas
corpus, which the Judge granted, and the
boy was turned loose. II the owner Of
The hogs should Low shoot the boy, the
same jury would be just the sort of chaps
to bring in a verdict of justifable homi-
eide.
The above article is from the Press and
Times of the 2lst inst, of whose editor the
Banner says:
''He is a foul wretch in his own person,
filthy poltron individually, and viscious
black guard politically, one who would stab
an enemy in the dark, pick a pocket, or
rob a vault-in short, an open prostitute,
whose virtue. like his quinine, is always
open to the highest bidder" We suppose
the article to have been reported upon the
authority of his co-laborer in infamy. the
Hon. Nj. NJ. Brien, who went through the
mockery of trying CHARLES PRINCE for
stealing hogs, at the late term of our Cir
cult Court. The reporter, whomsoever he
may be, and the author of the above arti-
Gle, are alike guilty of perpetrating six or
seven distinct lies.
We do not intend to make any attack up
on Judge Brien's official acts for two rea-
eehs, viz {: First, we think the acts of the
Judiciary should be reviewed with great
caution, and then only by a competent law
yer. Second. We have discovered that
the eyes of honest men, the more popular
he is with the clique of jayhawkers who
are now controlling affairs in this State.
We intend only to give the facts we
heard them from The lips of witnesses on
the trial, and then the public may judge OF
Judge Brien for themselves.
CHARLES Prince (oolored) was arraign
ed for stealing hogs, the property of THos.
J. WILKINSON, Esq. The prosecutor testi-
fed that he lost four hogs, and that he
found the head of we'll known SOW only
half cleaned and in his mark, (to-wit an
uaderbit and an overbit in each ear, and a
smooth crop off the right,) in the posses-
sion of CHARLES Prince. Mr.. Dickey,
the officer deputised to arrest defendant
and search his premises, testiies that the
above described head was found in the
house of defendant, sailed and in barrel
of fresh pork, and that he heard Charles
Prince confess to Mr.. Wilkinson that he
had killed The hog and at the same time
propose to pay for it.
MATILDA Cor some such name) a coloreC
woman, testified that she was living will
defendant during the first two or three
months of this year, (the time by the way
which The theft is alledged to have beer
committed, and that she saw him turf
three hogs in at his gap and deliberately
slaughter them, at different times and il
the course Of few days The first h
carried Of to town and sold. The second
was large SOW, not strange and unmarked
but marked with an ander5a and az Oper5i
"a each ear. and crop Of tie right, which
he sailed away in the barrel behind thu
door. The third, like the frst, he carried
away. Witness helped defendant clean tn,
hogs.
Upon hearing the evidence, His Houor
Judge Brien, instead Of charging the law
like an honest man, presumed to instruc
the jury about what their verdict should b,
said tbey could not find the defendant
guilty upon such evidence as this. Th,
Jury, however, composed as it was of hon
est men, having been sworn TO try th,
cause in accordance with the law and evi
deboe, saw proper to end the defeudan
guiltyof stealing. This the radical Judg'
thought outra yeOas. The verdict WIS.,