, 1876-07-01

u the Government, i he tcsttf1es fully and fair.
recciye comnletn Ct tnm,,n,ty. II @ h. In. m f,, hsnn
fo,,rs .-,,t,t ~, 49, .n.r - "' nu9 ueen
ho as no hcen "' fonnH rtv tae
Indictment .ha1i In dt.mts.n1 Tho rr,o
:. ~. 49, ~ .,,s,, .,u. sst ,ss,.a ~ lu.S
but M punishment That Is tic rulc. That il
the mia whtat Tn ran.,sr,s ,nra.,,. ~ s ~
casc lis innppl,cab,tT Is appasent ,sf from, M a.,
II. H. w., n ~. log ast se
pleaded guilty here, and that he cannot rctract
that ntea 1T p1ttltv md ennnnt aa1r IN have +hta
indic.ment dismissed; il, before entering hIs
plea Of guilty, VIC had called upon his client to
testify. and va were satisaed TINT hc tc.tifr1
rule Of i.w md IL n,abt ,sY ~ TINT ho va, % sn,ttr
to hare the Indictment dismissed. Dat that i. not
.at' eaho' neiotc no u aeeep'eo Us "tness ~
tho Government It ts required that lo shall plead
Gnlltv: md he asks now that the 1!ghtest scnsence
shall be imposed, 1nc Of Il, ooo and \ nominal
lrrrr,,o,ment Thfs i. ororoh ~ ~ - 80 T.. ~.
,1 - w.. tsa.,..n,. @ ~ ~ ~! ~ ls
r!y 70 tae gcnneman argument npon ihis point.
anal, analogy an Te @ a5c @ Willing thss Thy gentleman
ofit
ALL THAT HE CLAIM HEnE
" 70 NJ natssr M u ts: faat ~ under.
that tlie gentleman nag cited. beiore vo went
into TIL, IN matter: @ " went into i with cur oyes
1fst intcrvlow Tint was had in Judge Bangs onice
between Judge Lawrence on the ono aide and
Judgc Bang+, Ms. Aver, md myself upon tho
oth9E. ailer Judge lawrence had mahe h's prop
esnass aades s any e% g. nes%
replied, In words TINT j rotnc,nber exactly: ssWo
dent exrcetit we don.e ask f9r t." subseqnenty.
when an Interview was had az NJ; Gasnpholrss
TFLt IN htx1h kH411
ssIese !est;fyeg: fJast .seS. p!ts!ssiy VIII Yrs
In the mihde Q! a tntse parties: Tint tumpcts in-
n!unity waa not neked fo! Wo DECLINED thnt psprD-
enaee e P Pa1tss dd L. tS t sse etots tho
to impose until = lad heard tue Testimony Of tho
uelcnuans. ahat "aa aoaaaonco. FIna.iy caae
re @ lnservtsw ,s where We were ali present At
the oole6 OF those gentlemen whGfo these vaF!ons
ihom ha: been aver, snl med not 70 ovtr them.
thors is
ONE M1srAKE AKE,
M m ssa; @ u 4 TX ,sf aos h ' s h.
which tho Court cou1. impose under the lazy.
pF!sonmcnt-, "
Mr: Houtel-Ah, ynu meant To connnc It to tho
nns: ha ats.cd thaty wod not sna
longer torn than six months. and you wcnt Oil to
speak Of tho imprlsonmont. md ,,on tad your I'M
for the lowest term Of imprisonment. but nothing
was saia " him q myself y rclesencc to tug
Lawrence In reference . to tlo matter u ano
highent lne which the law would allow. That
was nut objected 10 by them Thu position which
they took was that the highest nnc WAS $40, coo.
Wctnh!ssod TINT the Court might propsr,y hold that
tAs1s wese At least swo ocn*ss M ct + fotih IN ss
the othor under tho Inv Of 1s74 land That through
thom We had the right to claim q line 1F at tcast
SO 900, and It WIS agreed that that sho1d be sub
United to TIC Court - question o. INV. Upon
looking at tho indictment tho Cont wau to Hay
whether there wore ono or two olenscst and wo
were 70 nsk for tho highest nccanfary fnc mhct,
tho Court could impose under tho law. Tint 10 tho
only modification ! desire to nsaks 10 your anlla-
vit In reference TO
THE IMPRISONMENT, .-..
| while there wns no ngrcamont, we conccde that
they had tho right 70 Infer TINT, IN opinion, II
Iohm testified fairly In view Of all tho lacts In tho
case. tho Court would not think Of I'm.
fiat dnay w should recommend 70 The Conrt that
the imprisonment should n0s be In tho rsnfteft!ArY.
And they did claim tho right. ami We conceded 4,
| that they Might nsk to h4vu thai Imprisonment
| H. trhf