Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1872-11-13
THE JEWELL TRIAL.


Judge Nico read to the jury the insti uctions,
prepared mostly by the counsel, with such cor.
rectious ashe deemed necessary. The instruc
,ions are very long, and the crowded state OF
our columns, to-day, compel us to omit them. The
following arc some of the instructions granted,
prepared for the defence First, If at the time
the prisoner committed the act charged upon
him from IN association OF the deceased with
his real or fancied troubles, arising from the
abduction. dcbauching, or abandonment OF his
sister after she had been debauched, his mind
became so deranged that he was deprived OF
his memory and understanding SO rs to be IN
aware of the nature, character and consequent
ces of the act he committed, or to be unable to
discriminate between right and wrong IN refer
ence to that particular act, at the very time OF
its commission, he is entitled to acqulttal
Second, If at The fine the prisoner committed
the act oharged5upon him, he was by reason OF
che causes aforesaid thrown into4a state OF ex.
element and frenzy, in which he was Invested
of his reason and Judgment, and was from
mental disease incapable: OF governing himself
in reference to the deed, he is not responsible
for the act Third, lt'by reason OF the causes
as aforesaid the prisoners mind was SO con
trollcd and operated upon that he could not
resist, or that ne could not control the impulse
which prompted the act complained OF, ne Is
not responsible, provided such impulse was not
of anger or revenge, or other kindred evil pas.
sions. Fourth, Ii the prisoner was deprived
Of his reason before and at the time the act
was committed. and on account OF the conduct
of the deceased in the abduction or seduction
of his sister, the jury have the right from Their
own knowledge of human nature and the tcnuch-
ces of the human mind, to judge whether the act
complained Of was not the result OF an unsoT-
ernablc frenzy, sufficient to unsettic his tacul-
ties, aud by an insane impulse deprived the
mind of its controlling and directing power,
thereby rendering him legally irresponsible Tor
what he did Fifth, If the jury believe that
by reason Of the abduction or scductlou OF his
sister, the letter which deceased wrote to her
the card of the prisoner issued by him whilst
in custody, and all the circumstances attending
upon the abduction or seduction as came to his
knowledge, and the declaration of the deceased
that there was no law to punish him, the prlso-
ner committed the act, then the jury have the
right to Judge whether the moral or mental
faculties Of the prisoner were not so diseased
by reason thereof rs to deprive his mind OF It's
controlling powers, and to render him lrrespon-
sible therefore.
Mr.. Mcnifce then commenced the argument
before the jury for the prosecution
Mrs. HYSsoN 5 AFFlDAvlr.-As Mrs Hyu-
son was not allowed to testify yesterday, she
was DESTROYS that history Of her connection
with the transaction should be made public and
with this view appeared before Geo I. Roand
a notary public at Manassas and made au atl-
davt, from which is extracted i synopsis that
will doubtless prove of interest in throwing
some light upon the particulars OF this painful
affair.
The instrument, after giving her reasons for
not appearing in court in obedience to ITS sum
mons, recites that it contains, without abrldg-
meut or extenuation, what would have been her
evidence had she been suffered to testify, and
relates that she has known both Of the parties
to the alopemcnt all OF her life, and that while
she does not know when they be came acqualnt-
ed is inclined to believe that the Introduction
did not take place at her house; she remembers
however having seen them both at her house.
at dancing party given in the latter part OF
the winter of ISL.
The Jewell family, it sets forth, had always
been very intimate with her, and Fannie had
always been a constant visitor at her house and
she had always looked upon her in the light of
very near relation, but she does not think the
number or frequency of her lf.'s) visits in:
creased after MIR. Clark came TO the village and
often became guest at her husband 5 house;
recollects that Mr. Clark and Miss Fcwell were
members of fishing party, of which she was
one, that had gone to Milford Mills during the
month Of May, and that they conversed on that
occasion. 1t states that she had never encour-
aged any intimacy between them. and that she
never told Miss Fannie that she knew Clark to
be separated from his wife, and had papers IN
her possession to confirm that assertion; that
no money had ever passed through her hands,
either directly or indirectly, from Clark to Miss
Fewcll, and that she did not know of Miss +. :
having a sum of any amount in her possession
until she was informed of that fact by another,
to whom it was entrusted one day when Miss
Fannie took drive with a young man; that she
had never correspondent with Mr.. Clark under
her OWL name or fictitious one, and was not
known to him by the nonme de plume of liz
zie Twyneman; that she had never inquired at
the postofice for letters for Lizzie TwynemaD,
and had never seen any SO addressed on but ouo
occasion, and under these circumstances: Miss
Fewe was at our house one morning, and ask
ed me to let my servant girl, BERTHE Robinson,
70 to the postofice for her. Fannie told her to
ask for her mail and for Lizzie Twyncman s. on
her return she brought one letter for Lizzie
Twyncman and one for Fannie: | saw the for
mer letter and noticed it was postmarked Al
exaDdria; | asked her who Lizzie TWyneman
was; she replied, the girl at Noonnie 5, (Noonnle
was pet name she had given Mrs. Merchant:)
| did not know the name Of the servant at Mrs.
Merchants at that time nor do know it now:
she then put the two letters in her pocket and
walked out of the house" The affidavit con-
tinues: Il had never heard Fannie speak in
affcctioaatc terms Of Mr.. Clark on the con-
trary she told me several times, both before and
after she became acquainted with Mr.. Clark,
that she intended to,elopc with young man
who was then living in Fredericksburg. not
only never dictated any of these letters, but to
my knowledge none Of them were written at my
house. Mr.. Clark did not leave his clothes
with me; he took his meals at my house after
his wife left, and remained during the night
once or twice; was invited to stay much Of
tcner, but generally declined, and would leave
about or l0P. d. on the plea having some
visiting to do, and 60 to his own home; often