The New York herald., 1877-09-13
"JIM" BRADY'S FATE,

THE CRIMINAL MARKsMAN FOUND GUILTY
REMANDED ron TRIAL ON OTHER IsDIcT-
MENrs.
The court room or the General Sessions Part !, was
again crowded yesterday morning as Judge Glider.
sleeve resumed the hearing Of the o: "Albany
Jm," alias "Jim" Brady, alias Oscar d. Peterson,
whose trial commenced Monday last for fconi-
assault Edward Bromlcld on the ID of August
last At the opening ex-Judgo Dittenhoefcr, OF coun-
sci for the prisoner called the attention OF tho Court
the fact that Justice Wandes clerk, for whose at
tendance attachment had been issued had not put
In appearance. Under tho circumstances he would
the motion for an Adjournment until tho clerk
could be produced Judge Gildcrslceve denied the
motion and counsel then intimated that he
would be compelled to adopt tho disagreeable
of placing his colleague, Mr. McCleliand, on
the witness stand, in order 10 show by him what
would be proved by the clerk in attendance.
Mr.. McCleIland, one of tho prisoners counsel, then
testified that the bullet In evidence was the
that Bromled identified at the police the
which struck him. II was different in weight In size
and IN color. An effort was made to prove by the wit
that Justice wandell's clerk mad remarked that
the bullet exhibited him large TO come from
Peterson's pistol me Court however, decided 10
rule out this evidence. Assistant Dstric. Attorney
Herring sscxamined the Witness who testified gen.
then endeavorcd show that tho bullet in evidence
the which had been Identified before
the police magistrate. Mr. David NJ. Dore-
mus OF the District Attorneys oince, stated
he had tho bullet produced and had placed
mark upon 1t; 1t given him by Assistant District
Attorney Herring, who directed him TO put nick in II
Ex.JuDGE prrExHoEyER's ADDRESS.
This closed the evidence In the case, and exJudge
Dit,enoeier proceeded with his summing up. lie
said he was nsensibe the Of the
task he had undertaken 10 perform. Ho knew full
we'll the difficulty OF his position counsel for this de-
fendant He felt all OF them had ielt that the at
mospnere they had breahed the last lew weeks
been surchargcd with preudico against this defendant
He thought had heard the echo of that cry be-
hinu the desk OF the District Attorney, even IN these
sacred hulls OF Justice. Yet the wild beast hac
Bersh 10 defend hm-to see that justice Is done him.
The counse then reviewed the testimony and showed
how the witnesses Tor the prosecution, Paddock and
Pratt tradicted each other fatty whether the
defendant tred shot IN front OF the barber shop OF
the Hotel Brunswick Paddock swearing distinctly he
diu; Pratt swearing distinctly he aid not He then
asked only that II any discrepancy existed between
the witnesses Tor the deenco ana the witnesses for the
prosecution, such discrepancy should be Judged and
considered by The same rule by which the discrepancy
between the witnesses Tor the prosecution are con-
sdcred.
Counsel next dwelt upon the difference existing be-
the bullet produced IN the Jefferson Marke, Court
and that lhon before the Court maintaining tnat this
was not the bullet, ana that. consequently, tne
evidence deduced thereirom should not be allowed TO
the significant absence from the OF Mr. Murray,
Judge Wandell's clerk, who had been subpGnaed and
concluded by saying he had done his duty TO his cen
the District Attorney would do his duty to his client;
the Judge would perform MS duty, but the jury
client also to whom they must 40 their dutyJusticc
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
| Assistant District Attorney Herring replied be-
halt OF the prosecution. He claimed that The for
the people mad established beyond the remocst
SHADOW of doubt-a clearer one, hc submitted, had
never been presented to "A jury. OF intelligent
The theory of the &C was absurd from beginning
and nd hn N q "A i'm nj fhp
prisoner loose upon the community rested with the
Jury. He had reraned, he said from referring 10 the
character oil the accused for the reason that his
had not opened the gates 10 such an investigations
but he contended that the evidence IN tins alone
II nothing else were known OF the prisoner
ample to convict him OF the crime charged ia the
count OF tho indictment-namely, ielonious assault
with intent 10 kill.
MI Herring then proceeded to rcc,te the details o.
the shooting sct forth by the witnesses Tor the
prosecution He claimed thar the prisoner in his des
perate fight from the officers Of the law could have
other INTENT when brought 10 bay, than that OF killing
his pursuer He tired deliberately at Bromhed when
within q feet him, was therefore a fair In
ference that be meant tako his liie The prosecut
ing counsel ridculed the idea that tho bullet produced
m cour was not the same inat tell rom Bromied's
clothes alter the shooting and picked up, sub
miited that imsier defence had never been put for
court OF justice He asked for simple justice
Oh behalf OF the people, and demanded rctrlbutOn
tho outrage Which, ne camed the prisoner at the bar
had perpetrated. He concluded by calling the jury
to vndicate The law IN THIS frghtfu instance OF Grim
| inal defiance.
THE CHARGE AND VERDICT.
Judge G!ldersceye IN charging the jury warned them
to take calm ana impartial vicN of tho evidence
spective OF any theories that had advanced and
alter briefly referring 10 the salient features OF the
testimony both sides, lucdly pointed out the law
bearing upon the case, mainly as 10 whether there
intention to take lie or to do bodily injury, as
charged the two separate counts OF the Indictment.
The jury retired shortly after O'CLOCK and an hour
later returned into court with verdict Of guilty with
intent TO do bodily harm, the extreme penalty for
which Is five years Imprisonment.
On motion OF Mr. Herring the prisoner was re-
manded in order to DO tried on other indictments
found against MIN by the Grand Jury.