Viewing page 161 of 243

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

3

Court - for not calling him when the case came on. In a voice almost too thick for utterance, he next requested of the witness under examination to repeat his entire statement. This he proceeded to do, but was checked promptly by Mr Irving, when he arrived at the first part of the Prisoner's confession; and an appeal was here, very properly made, to have this portion of the testimony excluded. Mr Bernard - presiding Justice - Hudson's uncle - replied, however, that it would be impossible to do that now, since it had been already heard by the Court;  the witness then continued: nevertheless, it was afterward twice adduced, that the Prisoner had likewise said, that when he abandoned the horse, he did so "thinking it would find its way home" - and, naturally, if one part of this statement were to be received as evidence, the other certainly should; and more especially when borne out - as in this instance it indisputably was - by clear and strong corroborative circumstances -  And here I cannot fail to call particular attention, to say the least, to the wide disparity between the above described action of the Court, in this particular case, and the position assumed by this very tribunal, composed of the same members - less the two last named - the same day, in another cause, as will be found detailed in a concurrent Report, herewith submitted. It may be well to give here, however, a slight synopsis of that case.

"Peter Brown", freedman, was on trial, charged with having received of his wife & daughter, "Zylphia" & "Susan Brown", two and a half bushels of corn, alleged to have been by them stolen, of Mrs. "Lucy Brown" - white.  An attempt was made by Defendant's Counsel, to prove, by the verdict of a Jury acquitting the two last named parties of the charge of stealing this Corn, on which they had been previously