Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1869-04-30
NJ Pollor5 made lengthy argument to tn.

Foster, who knew of the stealing and concea'
ment Of the goods, has disappeared; hat Mrs
Potter. by the evidence adluced by the State,
was clearly innocent; that the goods concealed
in the house had been introduced there with
out her knowledge; that the prosecution had
shown by their own witnesses that She did moi
leave her chamber on the floor above where Inc
goods were concealed, and hence as matter
of Justice the jury were bound TO acquit her
Mr. Roberts in reply combated some Of the
points Of law made by Mr.. Ballard, that be
cause Mrs. Potter has been indicted on another
CHARGE she cannot be tried on this; that the
goods were not in Mrs. Potter's possession but
in that Of her husband, which he characterised
as absurd. He denied that the State could
have kept Foster to testify, or that his testi-
mony was necessary in this case; and called
attention to the dilemma his argument placed
the counsel in. namely, if Foster could not have
brought in the goods unheard, Mrs. Potter
must have been knowing to It; if he could,
the falsity of Mrs Potter's repeated declarations
showed her guilt That any one could have
broken through the wall to hide the goods he
thought absurd that he should get into the
the house without the consent of the owner to
hide the goods, equally absurd.
Mr.. Roberts denied all prejudice in the case
with some warmth. and ayerring his intention to
Try the case fairly, babe the jury acquit if they
could in good conscience.
The Judge then delivered his charge to the
jury 1T some length babe them especially, and
it, r.r 10 allow any predjuice to in
fuence them, or lnything outside of the evidence
presented at this particular trial. He charged
that the theft If the goods was proved, and their
discovery in Peters house; that if the jury find
they wer- stolen by Mrs. Potter herself, she
must be acquitted under this Indictment The
evidence only shows that she had access to
the place Of hiding. Foster also had access to
it, and for all evidence to the contrary may have
been the only party concerned. You are to look
at all the circumstances and see whether it is
probable he did i; alone If so. and without Mrs
Potter's knowledge, she must be acquitted. II
-he did know, she is guilty-yet not if she on
" knew the fact Of the goods being there with
put knowledge that they we're stolen or intent to
id in concealing them. And for concealment,
no overt act is necessary; the saying that which
would mislead the officers is aiding to conceal
/ gu must find whether she has a guilty knowl-
,dge in the matter, whether the stolen property
vas so placed that she would be likely to know
t, whether it could have been put there so
luictly as not to arouse her If alseep If you
ave rational doubt whether SIC was guilty
# concealing or aiding To- conceal the stolel
property, you must acquit her.
As to the non-introducing Of a certain witness
I is not question for the court or You. You
re to take the evidence As given aud find ac-
orliugly.
The jury then retired and the court the took a
ecess till 9 a. m. to-day.
SAuRDAy. April -
The jury in the case Of the State rs Adeli
'otter-came in at S O'Clock this morning and
.iloHiiy'l 'u1' 'i,e! VolIi r'' re- ul'" 't4-
lcl' II was uhI I,5i 'n.l 'Hty were ABOUT
rem! H'llel' me- bon 'n'! were 'iS'''' g
d lor me term ana inc Gaze e9h'inuei
Opon me applcA'o1 oi Nr- henry hA.inrI'
q Gnsel iot the re- p'ho,h' lht court hAei me
an Oh tAe IeSponieH' a' ? ~ "..'A - iti-
lel'"'Siy Ilrhl7n.d anu -r' -Nrs. I,'''' was us
haIgst from arrest !ue court men 1'J '1rhed
nun NouuAs 'ne -N.u ms. ~ Two % gu. OK "Aen
le court uuSiil'ss is I'D '' ''Ae" up
NoNnAY. April 49,. .
Tt. Cont no ...,...l ,l ,t. fl.-,.., MEL.
- ,I,s ss,or,i - ,-l .'I;-,,,--..f -
-. - -.
TUESDAY Apiii -'-
The calling Of the entire docket was finished
bis morning with the following results. OF the
4sas rgf r,rt.yi.tls1v if-rrsal If IN az the .fI