Daily Republican., 1884-05-14
County Court.

Court commenced at 10 o'clock this
morning, with the Chief Justice and
Associate Judges Houston and White
lev on the bench. This Is the first time
Judge Whiteley has been present since
his appointment, and the Clerk Of the
Court, by order of the Chief Justice,
read his commission from the Governor.
The trial of Charles Blake was re-
sumed, and the examination of wit
nesses for the defense continued.
Wslter Cummins Judge of the NUM-.
cipal Court was sworn, and testlhed
that at the time Blake was heard before
him on the charge of larceny, he did
not say anything about pawnlng the
umbrella, but to the best of the wit
ness recollection he denied all know
ledge Of 1t.
Henry Il. Pennington, Clerk of the
Municipal Court, was sworn, but he
testified that he heard very little OF
what was said at the hearing.
| William M. Pusey was recalled, ana
testified that he was present al the
time Blake had his hearing before
Judge Cummins, but he did not recol
| |,ect that the prisoner said anything
about pawnipg the umbrella.
Joshua L. Pusey was recalled, ana
testified that although he was present
at the hearing lie did not recollect what
Blake had said about the umbrella.
The defence called two or three other
witnesses, but as neither of them
answered, Mr.. Higgins said they would
be obliged to close.
James l.. Hawkins was recalled by
the Attorney General in rebuttai, and
stated that he did not get the articles
the first time he called at Nathan s
pawnbroking establishment, but re.
covered them on the Goth. When the wit
ness asked Mr.. Nathans who brought
the umbrella and spectacles to his place
, of business, he replied that it was i'm
possible for him to recOllect who pawn
, ed goods, as there " ore so many people
coming in.
The State closed with this wit
ness, and the argument for the prOsecu
tion was opened by Walter Hayes Esq,
who review ed the evidence, and claim
ed that it all pointed to the prisoner az
the one guilty of fcommitting,the offence
Mr., Hayes spoke about fifteen minutes
: and was followed by Harry Emmons
ESQ, for the defence, who claimed thai
the State had totally failed to connec
, the prisoner with the offence, and sal,
l the crime for which he was indicted
j, was one of the most .henious known
= and only next to murder.
? Mr.. Emmons made an ingeniou
argument, and cOntended that the rob
Z berry might have been committed b,
,. the servants themselves, and said tina
it would not be the first time tina
servants had robbed their masters IL
closed at II 40 by presenting severa
8 points of law, on which he asked TIN
| Court to charge the jury.
Anthony Higgins, Esq, made tn
= closing argument for the defense. h
(contended that nothing had been showl
T by the State to prove that a burglar,
had been committed, and that it wa
the duty of the prosecution to hav
i brought the servants into Court to shop
THAT the house was fastened the nigh
!, the robbery was committed.
Mr..Higgins said the fact of thes
goods being found in the possession o
! the prisoner did not 90 to show that h'
had committed the robbery, for al
j though he might have had them will
= the knowledge that they were stolen
4 the jnry could not, under any OF the evi
|dence. adduced by the State, sbrng hin
in guilty rs indicted.
',l When Mr.. Higgins closed, at l2.1
+ tIo'clcck, Attorney-General Gray com
" menced his closing argument for tn
State by calling the attention of tn
! Court to the law bearing on circulnstar
tial evidence.
Mr.. Gray then made one of his tel
ing and convincing arguments to tn
s Jury, and did not conclude until
81 clock, when the Court, without charg
u ing the jury, adjourned until 3 o'clocl
this afternoon.