The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1872-10-30
The Tammany Ring Trials.
TRIAL OF MAYOR HALL.

New YoRK, October 20.-The Cour
was greatly crowded to-day. In h,
opening Mayor Hall said, he had been ad
vlsed by his counsel that with the cxcep.
tion Of some documentary evidence re
quiring argument, there hos been no tcs
timony which the law does regard as ab-
sOlutely tainted, therefore there Is moth
ing In this case calling for an answer by
way Of evidence. He then said he would
waive the defendants right Of being hearC
by counsel before the jury, but was will
ling to submit the case on the evidence
Of the prosecution under charge of tht
Court. The prosecution announced they
should address the jury. Mr.. Buckley, O
the Mayors counsel, submitted requests tc
the Court TO be incorporated in the
judges instructions 10 the Jury. The par,
ties for whom warrants were issued yester
day are ex.Assemblyman Isaac Robinson
and Edward Costello, both members Of
the Board Of Aldermen. They are
charged with attempting to obtain $75,,
600 from the President Ofthe New Haven
road to defeat the passage Of the ordi.
nance regulating the running OF freigh,
cars.
In this connection Mr.. Buckley sought
to offer for the consideration of the Court
arecord ofthc indictments against Tweed
but on objection the Court ruled 1t mad.
missable.
The case made out by the prosecution
Is regarded as very weak by Mayor Halls
counsel. The prosecution do not claim
that Hall had any share or participation
in the ring plunder.
1t Is understood that Mr.. O'Conor has
declined to be one of the counsel for the
prosecution, owing to his belief that the
Mayor is not guilty under the indict-
ments. A speedy conclusion is looked
for.
The counsel for the Mayor requested the
Court TO instruct the jury that there can
be no conviction, because there is no evil
denCe Of willful or fraudulent breach or
perversion OF any lawful duty by the May.
or; that none OF the acts Of the Mayor con.
stitute any evidence at common law, be-
cause under common law it never was
part Of the duty oI the Mayor to audit the
accounts for any demands against the
county; that there is no competent evil
dence OF neglect Of duty, and that no con.
viCtiOn can be had unless evil intent is
established; that the duties Of the Mayor
as a member Of the Board Of Audit were
Judicial, aud consequently he was not
responsible under this indictment un-
less proven corrupt in his action; that
there is no evidence of corruptness upon
which the jury can find conviction;
that the jury must discard all the evidence
respecting the conversations not directly
connected with the acts charged in the
indictments; that no evidence connects
the Mayor with the fraudulent making OF
any accounts; that no corrupt intent is es.
tablished. Several other points Of sim
liar nature were urged by the counsel for
tho Mayor as essential 10 be given 10 the
jury by the Judge as instructions.
After hearing the counsel for the Mayor
the court took recess.
On meeting again the COusel for. the
prosecution asked the judge TO charge
the jury that tho Mayor was responsible
by reason Of accepting the office
Of member of the Board of Audit,
and that the Mayor willully neglected his
duty in said Office and must therefore be
convicted. Peckham went on at great
length, citing authority and precedents;
he dwelt upon the fact that it was con-
Ceded that the Board of Audit did not
meet; and argued that the delegation Of
their duties 10 another was proof that the
defendant and his coadjutOrs had made
up their minds not 10 perform their duties.
At the conclusion of Peckham's address
court adjourned. Tremaine will sum up
tomorrow and SIoughtcn will reply.