The New York herald., 1872-12-13
THE pHEIPsDopGE-NELsoN CASE.

Recorder Hackett's Charge-vvas 1t
burglary or Larceny s-Thc Jury Cam
mot Determine, Disagree and Are Dis
charged.
The trial OF Abrsm Nelson, charged with burgia-
riously entering the premises OF Phelps, Dodge 4
Co., was concluded yesterday in the General Ses-
sions At the termination OF Judge Fallertons
speech Recorder Hackett charged the Jury, as
fonows:-
RECORDER HAcKETr's CHARGE.
Although upon the facts this case Is important to
the people and to the class whom the complain
ants represent, as also important TO the prisoner
legal dinlculties According to the view you
may take OF the peoples testimony in credit
ing tt-if you do credit any portion or all OF
it-you will I'm law be justified In render
ing verdict OF burglary. in the third
BILE doubt OF the burglary, but none Of the petty
larceny. you may acqut OF the burglary and con-
vlet Of the petty larceny. hyonr reasonable doubt
should further affect the question OF petty larceny,
you may acqutt altogether. Good character avails
metimes, says the Court OF Appeals, In creating
doubt The old rule used TO be that good charac,
ter only avaled for consideration In doubtful
case. The new and much more merciful one is
that good character may create a reasonable doubt
where nothing else in the circumstances OF the
case creates 10. Yet the doubt must not be fan
cifal one, nor generallzng one, but such kind OF
doubt as may arise In mars own mind when con-
slderlng special facts of life ~ doubtn has become
al much mental fact as Il believe" and yet it
bly,. Each applying the phrase to hts own
mental operations can best appreciate the
me whence Of the depends e
testimony OF Peterson solely. Ichsrge you that II
n Ne = an n a.
evenlf Il be uncorroborafed yet, in considering
his testimony. the utmost caution should be OBJ
served by you. II you believe that the accused
induced this accomplice to allow him to enter the
store and Ofiice OF the conlplainaHts, Phelps
intended to commit the crime of larceny, then. al
tAOugh the entry was without force, l charge you
as @ Ss ny door e Ss o
plainant's store or done any other physical break
ing upon the store. II you believe, however, that
the accused at the time In question, when he en-
tered the Office store, did SO without intention
to steal or take any property or papers,
under the circumstances Petersons story that he
admitted the prisoner without violence, the latter
was only trespasser and not n burglar yoa
while inside conceived the idea Of stealing the um
brella described in the Indictment he is guilty Of
petty larceny, Notwithstanding he was not burg
lar when he entered. The intent Is pure ques-
tien Of iact for you. The pleading pins the people
the burglary. A housebreaker may be arrested
before he has chance to touch an article OF value,
yet he will be burglar the circumstances OF the
breaking and entering convince q jury that 10 was
done with an intent to commit such crime,
whether executed or not" say the old
be gathered rom all the circumstances OF
the case The intent whether trespass or feonious,
whether immoral ana not lNeHa mas Dcen al.
mirably and exhaustively argued on both sides,
and on the evidence and arguments leave the
case with you for your determination: 1t can be
bat regretted that the Legislature In these days OF
ingenious CRIME had not taken into consideration
the gross offence against morals, decency and hon
Orable instincts similar to such are charged to
have been committed by the accused in the Infamous
course he pursued to obtain the business secrets OF
the compliments, and enacted law making such
acts criminal, and upon conviction attaching
severe penaly; but 1t becomes my duty to charge
You. as matter OF law, that such facts alone do
not make the accused guilty Of any crime against
our laws, and further that no prejudice should be
worked against the accused by any such considera-
tOns.
THE JURY DIsAGREE-THE PoLL-sEvEN FOR BUR-
GLARY, FIVE FOR LARCENY.
The jury retired ut one O'Clock for dehberattOn
and were summoned into court at four O'Clock.
AS the foreman stated they had not agreed upon
verdict and that 1t would be impossible for them
to agree, the Recorder discharged them from the
further consideration Of the case. 1t was UNDER
stood that the jury stood seven for conviction for
burglary and five for petty larceny.
Mr.. Field moved that Nelson be discharged upon
his own recognizance. The motion was denied.