Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1869-10-20

at lhat ume without the orders of hi
conductor was gross negligence. Fo
this unfortunate man no one svmpa
thises more deeply than myself
have taken pains to secure proper
acquittal or conviction. His Honor
then gave Webstcr's definition of ncgli
gence, and applied it to the case. anC
stated that the Act of Assembly wa.
made to apply to signal and specia
acts Of negligence. The excuse which
Is offered for the act of Griffin is tha
he was asleep, and that in half un
conscious state, he pulled the throttl,
of his engine. Evidence has also beer
brought forward TO show that il il
customary TO sleep while lying on ,
switch. | regret TO hear such evi
dence, and that it is a common prac
tice. If the Company keep such mer
in their employ, would il not be wei
to enquire if they arc not guilty o
gross neglgencey The evidence i
that defendant slept, but it its sTggel
that he was not responsible. ] wish
could so charge you, but duty will not
admit Of it An employee charged
with the safety Of human life must not
sleep at his post, nor while on duty
and be must use all his senses to keeT
awake. The dictates of humanity
require it, and the rules of the Com
pany demand it. Why did he 20 tC
sleepy lie had ran only 2S miles, Of
duty a number Of hours, knowing
trains were following freigbtcd will
human souls, and to pass him on that
switch-why did be sleep? 1t i;
stated the night was warm and murky
and calculated to produce sleep, but il
required greater care and caution on
his part, and the law exaets it. IfthC
rules OF the Company had been lived
up 10 would ten or twelve lives have
been lott-precious TO somebody
Admit that be was competent engi
neer, what apology is offered when he
slept at his post 1t was negligence
TO sleep that offers no apology. Iii.
friends have brought forward his good
character, but this evidence is to have
no weight so long as it has beer
clearly proven TO you that he was
guilty. Character is only to be ap
piled in doubtful cases, not where
guilt is rendered certain By evidence
We have discharged our duty, now
dischargu yours. If aner reviewing
all the evidence ard you are in doubt
that doubt should be cast in the pris-
onor's favor, but you are not to look
for doubts for the purpose of acquittal
Tho jury retired about halfpast
five O'Clock TO consider their verdict
and the Court, meantime adjourned
TO seven O'Clock at which time, on
reassembling Of the Court, the room
was crowded With an eager, anxious
jury. The prisoner bore up well
although deep anxiety was depicted
on his face, which feeling was shared
ia by his counsel and friends.
At about eight O'Clock, after two
and a half hours absence, the jury
returned into Court Amidst breath
less silence and expectation THEN
names were called-thcir foreman
handed their verdict TO tho Judge
who broke the seal and then handed
il TO the clerk; and when the clerk
pronounced the words "Not Guilty
q burst Of applause resounded through
the Court room. which was taken up
aud echoed by the people outside
indications of the hearty public sym,
pathy for the prisoner. The Judge
promptly checked this outburst. aud
severely rebukod the unseemly dem,
onstration. The Court then adjourned
TO next morning.
MmroRp, Pa, Sept. "a, 1869.
At the opening of the Court this
morning Judge Barrett ordered the
clerk to call the names of the Jury in
the Griffin case and directed that
they be seated on his left The clerk
then proceeded to call the names, and
the Jurors responded as they were
called, until the whole panel had taken
their seats.
This unusual proceeding arrested
the attention and excited the Interest
Of every porson in the Court room
and eager curiosity was aroused as e
what was coming next.
The jury were attentive and oxpoc
tant, aud there was profound silence
IN the Court room.
Judge Barrett, addressing the jury
said.
Gentlemen: You last night returned
into Court, aftera hearing Of two days
with verdict of Not Guilty in The
case Of the Commonwealth against
James Griffin. This was not oxpec
ted and your verdict was agansl
law, aud an outrage against humanity
You violated the obligations Of your
oath-a plain, simple obligation e
render a verdict according to the evi
dence. Instead of that You rendered
verdict against every particle Of evi
dencc. The case Of the defendant wai
abandoned by his counsel. Drowning
men will catch at straws. The theory
of the defence is unknown TO the law
. and the counsel for the defendant die
not believe it themselves. | was, anC
still am, astonished at your verdict.
am astonishcd that you should in thi'
way set aside the law and violate YOU
oaths and ! trust that the spirits o
The dead, dying, bleeding aud burn
victims Of Mast Hope, will rebuke 20,
as long as you live. We have n,
power to cure the great wrong which
yon'hav inflicted on the community
What was thoro in this case e
excite your sympathy TO such degree
for the dcicndanty Did his presence
before you destroy your reason anC
, all sense OF justicoY Have you nC
sympathy for tho victims who wer,
driven in en- mdSso and crushed be
, tween the seats in that terrible hour
when the kissing flames were torturinl
, them, inch by inchj when the cries o
a diving mother on one hand, and The
wailing of her infant babes on th'
f other, were heard, as has been define
, ated to you in the evidence llav,