The Sun. — 1841-10-27 (London, England)

STANDARD.—ShouId the United States Attorney-General succeed establishing the allegations contained in his address (and we agree with the Morning Herald in dissenting from the estimate which has been formed of the tempei and animus of his speech by some of our Contemporaries), be has no case on which an honest and intelligent Jury ought to convict. The various counts comprised its the indict.. ment differ, not merely in the description of the weapon employed in effecting the imputed murder, but in the especial identity of the presumed criminal. One recites that be was shot with a gun ; another with a pistol, discharged by Alexander M'Leod ; " whilst others affirm that the shot was fired by one John Mosier, and that M'Leod was aiding and abetting him." As eur Contemporary has shown, by an extract from " Blackstone," "a precise and suflicic;nt certainty as to the identity of the person • must be indicated by the indictment, which must set forth the Christian name, surname, and addition of the state, degree, registry, time or place, and tho country of the offender, and all this to identify his person ;" an authority which ought to have the more weight with the Utica Jury, seeing that the whole argument of the counsel for the prosecution professes to be based upon British law. With regard to the temper and animus of the speech of the American Attorney-General, we confess we look in vain for the passages on which such qualities hay been attributed to it. In the excited state of mind in which the American public bas been kept, and after the flood of falsehood and misrepresentation which has been poured upon it, in reference to this case, there was surely no necessity for the Attorney-General to call upon the Jury, if he did not " press the cause with the vigour essentia ho the development of truth to redouble their own vigilance, lest truth should be crushed by error." No reluctance to see matters in the most unfavourable light need hate been anticipated on such an occasion, nor was it likely to avert such a verdict as the Learned Counsel thus significantly prayed for. He tells his auditors in effect to mistrust their own judgment, in the event of any inference favourable to the prisoner, and impute to his (the Attorney General's) weakness or misapprehension any impression which his statement of the case may lead them to entertain of his innocence. Surely there is little either of generosity or justice in such an appeal. If, however, the allegations contained in the address alluded to be not much more effectually supported- than they were by the first three days' testimony for the prosecution, a legal conviction will be impossible. However this may be, it seems perfec ly understood on all sides that the life of Mr. M'Leod is in no sort of jeopardy. If found guilty, the reversal of .his sentence is certain, notwithstanding the exposition of the law entered into by his prosecutor. Whether he was or was not a party to the death of Durfee is of comparatively trivial importance. We were assured, however, a few days ago by a gentleman who assisted at the cutting out and destruction of the Caroline, that M'Leod was neither present at, nor aware of, the exploit, until the morning after its achievement. We presume that there will be no difficulty in satisfactorily establishing this fact.