The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-01-14

account OF the work done by him outside Of the
Connecticut, to Woodward's house In Connecticut,
and to Roach's house In this city, all OF which was
stated on q previous trai connected with the case.
In concluding counsel said that the defendant
WAS CHARGED WITH MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE,
leaving aside the charge OF corruption, and the
offence was brief imprisonment and q small lne.
TO be snre there is statute OF the State called
same character OF crime. The reason that no
higher punishment has been provided for this
offence Is explained In this way:-In those earlier
times when the people were not familiar with
the commission OF enormous frauds, and when
they dad not dream of such things as that public
charge OF and protect their interests-lhat a man
elected to a high and honorable position, could
descend so low as TO become a common thief We
had not arrived at this state OF affairs then, but
with the cycles OF time crime goes on advancing,
and the punishment therefor falls short OF the
ouender's transgression. And, therefore, the law
TAILS short in providing an adequate punishment.
And about the only consolation That exists in this
case is that up to this time 1t had not occurred TO
the American people that the crime OF a public
officer could possibly reach the magnitude and
proportions attained by this defendant; and the
defendant, in consequence Of this, is simply in
dictcd for q misdemeanOr.
The Indictment is for two separate things az it
were. will explain TO you what these counts are.
They present in different lights the single charge
OF misconduct in office, aside from any charge OF
corruption: The charge Is that he neglected to
perform the duties imposed upon him by the
statute. The statute provides that whenever any
he he neglects to perform it he shall
be guilty OF misdemeanOr. For this offence the
ST. and that he shah be imprisoned one year or one
hour, at the discretion OF the Court, so that really
all that we have TO try now independently of the
nature OF the OFFENCE so lar as the statute provides
for 1T, Is fine OF $3.50 or 81, or imprisonment from
one hour up 10 one year. The other matter which
with 1t by charging him with so abusing his posi-
ton as public onlcer as to the result and interest
Of the community by deraTdng them in that posi- s
have been corrupt intention in the act.
these bills as his duty required himf Gentlemen,
you cannot try. this question with regard to the
We are not here To try BETTY
petty with regard to the nomenclature OF the
ference OF the Attorney General aud in which
other counsel beside himself was Called or
string of counsel Is retained that almost occupies
tue whole OF the bar Nor are we here simply for
the purpose, OF determining whether this small
fine should be imposed or he be kept
in Jail for the full term allowed by law.
It assumes far greater proportions than
that Why Is this trial brought into this high
Court Why all this long array OF counsel to de-
lend the accusedY Why, because this trial is one
which attracts the attention of the entire commun-
ity, involving more interests than any issue yet
tried here. 1t is question OF the peImanency, 1t
is question OF the safety and, would almost say,
question OF the existence Of the institutions under
which the community IL now organized, and under
which we now live. If it be true that we had no
who violates public trust and rObs the treasury,
If evidence to satisfy jury cannot
be brought to cOnvIct man of tnat
kind because the amount he has stolen
Is enormous, and that he has hosts OF friends from
tine position lie held say that any issue that
could be presented to you would be trihing to that
which you nave now TO try. We do not ask for a
conviction as conviction. Above all things say,
for myself and associate counsel, nothing could give
us greater pleasure than that the defendant should
be acquitted If we failed in sustaining the case
against him. If IL should turn out that these state
ments can be met, can he cOntradcted and ey-
planned away, none would be pr0uder than we and
no community could be better satisfied than that in
which we live if this should be the result. But
If 1t should turn out, If by any reason
whatever, by friendship or memories OF the
past or by any improper or unfortunately
wrong means, that evidence which rightly and
truly should call from you conviction III the case,
that then you dare to say that man shall not
receive punishment, slight though 1t be- for crime,
tell you that never could blow be dealt more ter
ribly to o community, and never can any question
be presented TO a jury, more momcntous to them
selves and the community, than is here pre-
sented to you. We ask you only to act as your
duty and conscience dictate, wen knowing that
you will act earnestly and faithfully the evidence
before you and II that evidence satisfies you, as
honest men, that the defendant Is guilty OF the
charges preferred against him. that you will say 80.
The Court then adjourned till this morning