National Republican., 1877-12-07
A..lsnmen.. for To-day.

CIRCUIT coURT-cHiEr JUSTICE cARrTER.
No. $50, Morrison, Herman 4 Co. Va Denver.
garnishee Of Ryback: No, 36S, Sinclair 70. Wash.
smith smith vs.. Bel.sier; No. @i. oBrieh !. Richie;
No. 36i, Nc Pheron 4 Caflisle vs.. Cox No. 3s6,
s safs Ss S ksGGS knss cs rU%sr
smoot vs. Walton. No. 81, Hughes Va IAuritIen.
New Trial for Ex-Assistaat Secretary Saw
yer, Ex x-Comn,isslonsr Of Customs Haines,
aud n. w. Brooks.
In the case Of the United States vs.. Sawyer,
Haines. and Brooks, convicted In September last
of conspiracy TO dcfraud the Government by the
passage of false and fraudulent claim through
the Treasury Department the argument for new
trial commenced last Friday, and was continued
yesterday by ex-senator Carpenter for the defend
ants, to whom District Attorney Wells replied for
the prosecution In opposition to the motion for a
new trial. rr ".r.r..-
The defense had the right to close the argument
but upon Mr.. Carpenters rising to do so the Judge
(MacArthur) said:
Il have heard this motion argued quite as
much as desire. ] shall now proceed to act upon
point that really does not require much discus.
sion. have thought II proper that counsel should
have an opportunity TO present their views upon
side without intending myself TO pass upon most
| Of the questions that have been discussed.
so by what has taken place since that the defect Of
trial TO which the defendants were subjected is,
perhaps more palpable than In any case that
has been presented for my consideration. The
simple question is, whethe, they are 70 bear
an opportunity In which to remedy the dis
l advantages To which they have already
been subjected and / must confess that
/ aner trial has been contested 10 earnestly and
| occupied So much time that II Is a very serious
question whether the defendants, having had an
opportunity. should be peImitted second time to
have trial for reasons which they could have con.
trolled in the hrst place. But from some cause OF
other, perhaps not exclusively owing 70 their own
| neglect these defendants have not had the advan
tage Of q null defense.
ment and since the papers were read, and, upon th,
whole, ] am Of opinion that II Is the duty Of tn,
court to grant trial and TO give these partie
what they may consider aful opportunity 10 defent
themselves.
"As to the propositions OIL that have been ar
gued here shah not now decide. I desire To hav,
1t understood that inasmuch as this was the fins
OF these series OF hatwe have tried here tina
perhaps there was some excuse for the manner II
which the defense tried the case. The want O
preparation was evident from the first mo
counsel appeared to be wading and feelin
their way through, and although the counsel
one of them now prcsent-k usual
| characterized by great industry and for cxtraoI
dinary preparation, In the present case there AZ
assigned is that the trial was preciptated upo
Il am Inclined to think, upon the whole, that
would be exercising just discretion on the part
the court under these circumstances, to give thes
, Views which expressed TO the Jury on the fac
as they hen appeared think l will make thi
order in this case.
1he order then may be made granting 4 new tria