Newspaper of The New York Herald, May 20, 1857, Page 5

Newspaper of The New York Herald dated May 20, 1857 Page 5
Text content (automatically generated)

So?!Siy^'^&5*kl!aJ*^'*** <VM **lrtrlftl11 * BuM Mi-UMpllW. 4 Ud you pay the pun|t utm the Mm o* tagiart, Bodard, or Mefln, or any other person who has haea and n a wltnon, or whan ? lion har# hoaa employed fcjhto proceodlnyf % Did yon briny to thio oouatry (Tom Frame or Boglnnd, any toMcra of credit drawn by the Rottwahilde, opanAaynoto Belmont, or upon any other penonf % Did you briny more than one? 4 Since your arrival have you ootrooeWod another lottar of credit drawn by HothaehiMa upon Belmont, or an on^ other hotuaf Mr. Bnsteed often to ihow that In addition to a letter of redll morn u> by one witness, for 30,000 rrauus, be bee atoee resolved two other letters of credit, eeah for 30,000 toliM, drawn by Rothschilds on A. Belmont, and paid to toe witness for has services and testimony In Ibid cause. ft Mare yen got in your possession or under your eootoel what you sty is your appointment, In writing, as the attorney in feet of the Ra.lroed Company? tome. ft Jit there a seal to that writing? ft ton you state tor what specifto pun*?? ?r purposes yea are by that writing constituted attorney in foot for the saiiroaa? flame. ft Is not the appointment of power In that writing eoaflned solely to malting you an attorney In tool for the rail rid company, in a civil suit ooramenoed by that company the Supreme Court of the Stale of New York, agaiiisi Charles Garpentier, louts (irelet, Eugene Urelet, Fellcito Bobud, Augueto Parot, and Guerlnf tome. ft Have you not sworn that this was the whole extent of the power of your appointment under this writing? flame. [Exhibit SHJ is admitted to be a copy of the complaint In the above entitled suit. 1 ft Did you swear to or verify the complaint In that actionMr. Bustoed oill-re to ooutradici the testimony of witnenas to Carpentier. Vitnees?I did, sir. ft Is this complaint true In every particular ? A. There Bight bo some words which I would not suggest or take, bat tlie frame of Uie complaint is true. Q, Did you fay " yoair" A. I said "yes," but uot without this qualification. Q. Is every statement of fact contained In tbat complaint true, as therein alleged ? A. Yes, sir. 11m affidavit annexed to copy complaint, exhibit 00, Is admitted to be a true copy of tlie oeigiual affidavit. Q Did you make this affidavit? A. If Mr. Morrogh says Mils Is a true copy of the original, then 1 made it Q. Is every ftutement of fact contained in this affidavit brae, as therein alleged? A. The sense of the meaning 1s mm. Q. Repeated. A. 1 have said that the sense and meantog of the English then appoared to me truo, when I Mgned It Q. Repeated. A. The facts are stated therein, but if nbmltted to me 1 could suggest a different translation to wi bets; I never meant to say something that can be taken fiom the last paragraph of this affidavit; the phraseology in English Is different from the Freuch. but Bm meaning is the samo to mo; I see some words tnu I weald not exactly translate from the Frtnch as they aro tare, but the frame Is true. Q. Tako the paper and state the words to which you VOfer now? A. I will tako only one example:?"The deponaot further says that the said Eugene tirelet, Felicite babud and i'arot, combined and confederated with the MtdCarpcnticr and IxiuisGrelct to deceive and defraud the Mil plaintiff, and aided and assisted the said Oarpentier ad Louis tirelet in discing of the said property, know* lag. Ac. ' Knowing' Is very far from tbo name, aad I would say, knowing, as far aa I believe, as regards ffchcile Dubud and Eugene GreleL " Q. With the exception that you have now stated, Is very allegation of that affidavit true, aa therein alleged ? A. Yes, it is true; 1 see the word "fiduciary" almost agtble. Q. Did you read the original affidavit? A. I did; I am aallsfied in reading an affidavit to underhand what It OMana, and I certainly understood this one. Q. Aisiumiug this copy affidavit to be an exact transcript ?f the original, in every word, do you understand this In reading It now ? A. C rtainly. except that I don't understood the precise meaning of the word "fiduciary," but aderstaud its meaning in the connection In wbiioh employed here. How do yen know tbat the Northern Railroad Com paay is an incorporated company ? Ruled out. lnj juu * juw wuciucr u us ?u luwi^mwu (ajui j w&ujr, nder the laws of companion? Baled out. Exception. I What book* of lite company hare you had acoou to7 lad out. % What vouchers, bills, bonds, shares of stock and tfhar valuable thing* belonging to aald oom juicy, or derted a lib them (or aafs keeping, or otherwise, were In Bductary charge of Carpenter and Grelot, as sworn to hi the complaint? A. The books of the company In the Aee; vouchers were other kinds of memoranda; cannot Iran*(ate It Into Kreuch; bills meant rcoetpts; bon<ls meant tligation* and coujiods; shares referroi to ?tock?the Mil of share* In that railway, (moan generally every ling pat up there In the office of the company; " other valuables" meant " papers of value." <t I)o you know David? A. I know him now, since I have seen blm at Court, since th* beginning of tho cause? lv?or alz weeka; I Irst saw him at Court; I don't remomhar In wbtt room; I made a complaint against David as hag ago as September 27. 1641. Q. Was It before a Unltod States Commissioner, under Mtfc, and In writing, and different from the complaint unher oath and In writing which forms the basis of the pre ant proceeding 7 A. (don't remember making any belbra United Stales Commissioner. Q. Do you know George W. Morton 7 A. I know a gentleman by the name of Morton, don't know bis first name, thick be It a Commissioner. Q. ind you ever make an affidavit In this case before htmf Objection?sustained. <4 Did you ever make ono before Richard E. Stllwell 7 A- I don't remember Q Did you make one before J. TVldgham or O. T Delta 7 A. Don t remember having, whether 1 did or not. Q. Did you ever talk with David 7 A. I never did, nor ear heard him talk with anybody; I don't know who told Bte this was David; can t recollect. Q. How do you know that David wee ever in tho employ if this company 7 Baled out * v *.,? i itm> shMhor TVtrld was ever In the emidov ef the company; I don't know Osp'. Isvtnard, I have seen Ma very likely I don't know whether David ?M present m wot when I talked with Groin or l*arot. Q. Ware Ureiet and I'arot together ? A No. Q. Wu anybody with thcmf A. When I ?*w rarot MM were present; I don't know who: whoa I talked with relet some one oarae In the room; I don't know who. Q. Did not you In Court yesterday tell Christmas that David waa prerent ? A. 1 mentioned all the prisoner* by aaae; when Christmas came In we stood np talking be Mad tne rail; 1 think we talked In French; I didn't tell Ma where they sat; Christmas didn't ask me which was David; bo asked tar only where CarpenUer wu, I oould at see him; I told him be was there; I don't remember whether or not I pointed with my linger to where the rtaouer* were; my recollection Is very good for cor am Mtags?for Interesting tilings wbiota strike my mind; I Should recollect s conversation for three months with Has teed; I should generally remember s conversation three a Win In word for word; I know UarpeuUer a few years; aaat recollect exactly, ay four or Ave; I don't know Which. first at hte office in l*arts. Q. Do you recollect distinctly the (hot when you first aw Mat A. 1 donl. t& Do you wbcref A. In his office; I don't know how hag ago; a few years; It wu more than a year ago; It wu (bur or five ; I talked with tilm when I first saw him; Uarpentlrr gave me some money, and I said "thank you." <1 How much money did be give yoof Objretloo sustained. KxcepUon. Q Where did you next see hi ml A. I aw him two or three umee about this business at bis office; next six assail is allerwsids, and a Intervals of su or eight aeaths Q. When did you tart see him In Partsf A. It la a year aad a half ago; I knew Robert; don't know his first name; I anppoee you inru Uio oaebier; I Know iu>ocn to out Mmi Mm*. I dntn't attend hU funeral; nobody wm caabier at Ik* Umo, ( wm last In Parte, In September, 1S6<J; I b?<l bean In I "art* In July, 1RM I oldo'l en* Uarpeotier Wen. I don't know of my own knowledge that tiarpcniier wm twn'l caehler wbon lplret new him, four or flro nan ago; I never mw tho mknuUw kept by the Board of ptrenor* of lb* Railroad Oomtany : I don't recollect who fear Onrprnllor woro glaaeee wbon I drat oaw him at I'arta; I don't recollect whoUior he wore a rooimtarhe or wblikera, mar color "f bi< balr, whoiher ro<l or black, don't recollect Whether lit* ryee are black or blue- I IIret mw Chrpentler fe the I'm ted -hater, October 17th: I recollect the datehy letter* 1 wrote to my director, and I remember the 17tb be oanee 1 remember be waa arreeted on the 10th, I think the hrel complaint Included Oarpentier, but I don'* recollect; all thai I know at>out terpen tier bla being oaahier, and the alleged taking of nharne, 1 knew before September 27th; I had tnaUucUooa to proceed again*! ChrpcnUer at that Q. FMdn't yon bring with yon any letter from the for rwment of Kranoe to any peraon la Uua country la rotor nana to Ihla oaeeT Baled oot Kiceptlon. wuneaa?1 nr*t ??w larpentler m uie police staiion; ?r Oimimaa servant told me he wee arrested: I went with htm lo Til Ion* office; don't recollect whether we found llltou or not; It wm about eight o'clock In the morning, we remained there about an hour or two, the eery ant went, I didn't wall fbr Tlllou: we bad tho warrant of March to be made for the Stitranth ?Ueet house, very likely Chrpen Mar's name wan In It; navld's name wae not, I flret taw Ike warrant of eeerch at the magistrate's, when I awora my affidavit, to make my affidavit I suppoaa Oarpooller g aim eae In my affidavit; Morrogh drew that affidavit for me ItiTtltou'e office; It was read to me there, I didn't elan M there | think (hrpenUer'a name wm In It, but not auro M wm a vearrh warrant against Oourret?no body the; I Hi anre <f. that, I think so: don't remember Oourret * (Irat ame, ?wor> to the affidavit before the maglatate and then aama to the kitsentii etreet bouee of Oourret; went directly from the magetrate to Oourret'a. don't know the name or the magletraie.doo'l know who be irave tho warrant to. ha gave It t? tone person who went up In the carriage with <ie he bad to etar on hie perenn, he had no poltoe man'a dree* on; . think It fat Ryor. very likely, but am HI anre; I know no ghor, the Ryer that wan etamlnod as wttoeee here; there were two policemen?Ryer and another; and I don't kntw which took It; I think I have ewer eeen the other ?Dee: pretty en re; I don't reoollect haw many rod# up Inaku the carriage, n<>r bow many on outride there were haadea Ryer, myself and the other ettceman,! don't fwdlert that any one rode up Inside: mare were not seven or Ave i<*ide; we were three or four tosfcle; there were not Ave, thei* wm not a woman there; (here wm nothing iMtde but u? ordinary furniture, no pedes, nor crowbar*, nor p Aav. law some ouMde; I mw rome tools; 1 cau l recollect pickaxes, ahoyoki or grow bar* Adjourned to April 7, ?t 11H o'clock. Aran T ? Admitted by counsel Tor the defence that lout* and Eugene Orelet, Angu?te 1'arot and FellcltA Pu hud name orer In the steamship Atlantic, from IJ verponl to Haw York, In September, 1AM; that the Orelets came by Me name of Vanblone, and that Augusta Parol came by Me aama of Dubhiit and FeltctUt as Madam I tub but, and MM they were known by three names on board |hlp> MtminU to Apti) 9, UX A. M. WW Y< nwn?11?w (feu-lee (hrpeoOer; Mwtauiue bin)jl WH |MMim with kin fro? Frnnee L (tmumbtp Fulton, Ckpe. jWetten, from Butt* rte Southampton; we Mtle4 from Jfirrre, August 36,1166; we Iter m u? ?w" >? i" written by me, part ef *, en the entry book of that hole); I wrote "Oar pen tier;" nothing the, no ehrfalian name Q. At whose request did yes write itf Objected to. A. It was of my own aeeord. Q. Who was present? A. Mr. George Barp, of PhUadelphia; no one else. Q. Had you any conversation with GorpcuBer In rotation to hfc nainef? if so, state when and where? A. 1 had on board ship one evening, his namo was not the spoelal sab ject of conversation; it came in incidentally. Q. W hat did bo suy? Objected to. Exception. A. He said bis mother's name was De Iaunay; and that occasionally, as I knew,some firms took the mother's name after the father's, and that aoino of his friends knew him under that name, I should know that entry in that beok if I saw it again;exhibit 87 is that entry; as to "Otwi?onU?r, France," 1 wrote It; this was written September 11. Q. Do jou recollect whether Can mutter was present Ruled out as too leading. Mr. Tillou states that Mr. DcVoo wishes to make an aaplaiattion of some part of this testimony. Mr. Bustced objects at this stage. Commissioner allows Mr. Do Voe to make the explanation. Tillou asks the witness? Eli Do Voe. what is the explanation yon wish to make? A. If the counsel for the proeecutk n recc Heoto bis question to me on this subject, perhaps I have answered correctly, and that was, "Was you promised any mjney tn this case)"' U that so, Mr Husteed)?that k the ques lion as I understood from the counsel, Mr. Busteed, I mean, by tho ''counsel for the prosecution" abovo, Mr. Bustoed I 1 only say now thai 1 wasn't promised beforehand any mon< y that I know of in the case. I don't say that I I didn't receive money tn the case- that question was never [ asked mo to my recollection; that is all 1 can say about it ; now. Q Did you receive any? Objected to am examination, and not under the privilege of witoess. Objection Busted tied. Emanuel litranuler.?Cross examination by Mr. Bueteed resumed and continued. y. On the afternoon of October 17, and during the second conversation you bad with (Arpcutier. who was present besideB j ourec if and Ourpentierf A. Mr. Mathieseen; ho speaks French Uuoatly; the room was vcy dark; 1 saw his hand* together, and 1 understood afterward he wae handcuffed. Q. Old you give any order or dl> ection In respect to bis foodf A. I gave no orders; I complained; It was on l*o second visit; I saw h m dine; I ssid that It was a very poor dinner; it was bread and wate.', perhaps some milk; i taw nothing but bread and water; I taw tho tin box wblcb was found In Sixteenth street, butoulj at Belmont's, about 8 by 10 inches; about 5 or 8 Inches deep; I saw it opened; it had no handles; soldered up; lhe60 wero in it; japers, French bank notes, American and French gold not much, and jewelry; about $600 in French gold; hall as much in American; the bank notes were of different values; there was a bur die of l,000f. notes; 100 in the bundle, and 6,000f. or 6,000f. wtre in small bills; there were tome letters and some promissory notes; a let1 or from bis nephew, aliUo boy; a memorandum was token of all, and ail was put In a bog; I at first mado a special deposit, then seit themto Franoe to the Itrectors of the Northern Railroad Company, all together, lotion* and all. Mr. Busteed applies to cross exunlne witness in regard to other and general matters, same as made before. Overruled on the ground that general cross examination has been conducted by Mr. Townshrnd. Ovorruled. Eli Do Voe, recalled to rectify his examination. Objected .o. 1st That ho was callod this m inting for U)at purpose, ana won exnausieu nw privilege. mi. nisi if the CommlBhlonor bo against defendant on this point, till defence offer testimony to Impeach testimony of De Voe, evidence oannot be callod to sustain bim In advaaoe. 8d. Irregular and unusual, and caUmlalod to defeat Justice. 4tn. Being againit tnc courso of usage aid practice, and In violation of common law Commissioner bound to reject the offer. Objection overruled. Exception. Q. Did you receive any money for your services in this case? Objected to as leading?exception. A. Yes, sir. Q From whem. and what amount, and when, according to v our beet recollection? Objected to?exception. A. All the money that ever I received that I supposed U be Tor extra serv ces was from Mr. De Angelis, four bundred dollars; 1 think It was near the 26th September, bul 1 havt a receipt which will settle the date. Q Dave you the consent of the Mayor to receive that? Objected to?sustained. 0 Did you obtain any official authority to rooeive I tr U so. from horn? (ibjec^d to?sustained. q. Did you receive any money fbr expenses' and If so, frera whom and when, according to your best rooolleo Uoc? Objected to?exception. A. Yee, sir; from I think Mr. Matthteesen, who drew t?? check to my order a fow days after 1 got the " *?"'7 front De Angelis. Q. Do you remember the amount? A. I think aboul 640 or 660. Q. W hat did you do with that money? Objected to?euilalncd. Q Did yoo return any part of It? Objected to?overruled. Whereon first objection wa withdrawn. Q. What did you do with that money? A. I spout par of it and returned the balance. U To whom did you return it? A. To Mr. Matlbionsen I returned about $3?0: I have got ths acoounts, but don' remember the particular amount. q. It Is understood by the Commission jr that you don'i know that you got any extra pay la this esse; what did jeu metD by thai? Objected to?otoituted?exception. A. 1 never wished to be understood by sny one that 1 refused to tell that I received s reward; I understood the qui stlon to be at the time whether they made any previous bargain with me, and It was that I answered that I had Dever previously been offerod anything in thai way. mr. OUIHTU un uoni >u uw I-oreuro de Angrlis ?worn ?I know nil four ofphe accused; the flnt time I met Hunt was In Belmont's office, pre tone to hie arrest, a lady was with him, whom I havo atnoe learned was Kolici*; I first saw I-outa Ore lot at tho second ward station house with Eugene, they wore arrested an* In custody of the captain. Q. Did you see a portfolio in the station boose* A. I did see one there, I think I saw these ouupoos (oihiblt 411 be fore, the hrst time In Helmoct'a offloc, on the day that I carried the portfolio from the stauon house to Belmont's office; I think the secotd day after the arrest of the two Grelets, Parot and Mad. Dubid, there eoupene were In the portfolio, and 1 think In the envelope (exhibit K8); there were from flfty to Ofty-flre coupons I remember ooonung them, and It strikes mo there were fifty four; It was some Ume In September 1 first saw Parot In Belmont's effit o; 1 assisted In havtuf these parties arrested, and David I arrested; I have received money myself for my services, and have raid to others, I paid Kll Do Voo $400; Oaptalu l/?onard $100, B<dj k. liver $100; I received money at tlires dliferent times?first $100, next $1,000. next $600; I pal-I money for expenses out of this?travelling expenses?end I returned $300 of the sum, and was told to keep $100 for myself; I weil to Boston, then to Philadelphia, then is South Orange, New Jersey, next to Cincinnati, several times np on Kaat Klvsr, near Hart Dial d, at Hunt's Pant. A' Juurned to loth last, at ll)i o'clock. AHOl'MKNTfl OF C0CNSIL. Mr. Fpellthorao summed up oo the part of David, and made an argument generally on the French law as appli cable to the case, citing a great number of aulhorlUai k show what constituted la France tho crimes of forgory burglary and robbery. Mr. Townshcnd followed on tho part of Urolot and Parol, making a full and clear able argument on tho law and facts of the eaM. ^ ^ ^^ ^ U KMOraer 11IIOU IIHIUWWI iw Uia umivu .u ment, arguing that this one came under the terms of lh? citradiuon treaty, liuwmucb u the term vA yu?rit> crime comprehended all manner of tbefh. Mr. Gaibraltli replied on behalf of the accused. He ?al bo had looked over the prucaoling* with conaiderabU care, more for the purpose of endear orlng to abridge hb argument than from any Idea that any materia point bad been otmited by thoao who bad pro ceded blm oo the aide of the prisoner*. Ho do a< rtbed the case aa one between tbe two government of France and America, tbe partiea In Uitereat and moat in Umately connected wltli It being the Northern Kallwaj Company of i France and the prtaouera, Car ponder, (J relet rarot and Patdd. The romiwny oommcuced operation eome time before 1M3 by laaulng aharee II wax manage<l bj a company of directors. or, as thoy were celled, aliulnla tratori, In whose emt>io> ment were Robert. Uarpentlor Orelet, and, for a ibort Ume, Kngene tlrellot. IncUlen tally connected with the oaae were l*arot and Itarld, am another person named (inert n Robert mas in 1M3 caah ler, Carpentier eub caehier, and ((relet had charge of i department. Things went on in this way, under th< same management, Ull 1*M. Home time tn this perim the safe, or mrmairt In which tbe shares wore deineitml wax repaired, the top having become unfaxtoneby its own weight, or br the aafe being moved and two Iron click* or bam la were put on It t< secure It, and which encored It rrer after In May. 1SMI, Mr. Robert died. Before hi* death Onerti bad retired from the employment of the company; Oar fBHentkr waa appointed caahicr, and Ore let aub cashier In y continued no bU August, ltM, when thane parlia raroe to the United state i under amumed nanrna Up to tha time no natrtcion wna ever entertained of them, am nothing wrong bad been discovered, either in the t liarao ter or behavior of the accused. There wore 110 snare minting?no caah mil ring. The accused having come t the I nltod States, were erreeled tn New York, end lodge In FJdrtdge street tell, to anawer e civil eult commeooe, against lliem by the railroad company. From the dale e their erreet Ull Hh February. 1W, no criminal oompltlu wee made against (hem. He wished the Oommlealoenre |<ar Ucularly tn note Ihle fart, inaemoch a* It bad an Importer bearing on the coaitrnctioo to be given to the |>reteaded ron feaelon made tn Tlaeander and others, In prison?such ono feeel >n, Mr. (Jalbrailta roniende.l having reference morel; to the civil cult, and not at ell to any criminal charge there being no each criminal charge actually pending. Mr Mnetholon, the French ComuI, had oo rumen oed crlmlni proceeding* againet the par tree on February I, 1W1 alleging that the crime with which they were charger] wa embraced under the term mt qwtkfii crime, need In th additional eoction to the Extradition Treaty, and that ooc aequently they thonld be enrreodered to the French an thoritiee. Covineel examined and skilfully analysed th worde of the treaty. The additional section was la thee words ? The erlme of mbbary-dettnleg the same to be the WeiWi and forcible taking from the person of another of goods c tenner to any value, by rlolenee or putting him tat rear; an the crime of burglary, defining the same to be breaking an entering by night talo a mansion bouse of another, wbhlnieti to commit felony. These, continued counsel, were two Crimea on which h opposed there would be no dispute In this ease. The <lta pole, If any, would artee on the next clause, whlolt In hi opinion applied exclusively to the French side of the treaty He had read the English version of the two ortdim r.. which accused parties wars to be surrendered. Ho wool now read the oorrespondln| crimes tn the French oo<V> under the words eel tjttali fr crime. After having slate the crimes of robbery and burglary, the treaty one Unties? And the corresponding ertaMS tool tided Udcr IM f rtBQ JUT H IN words ret fusMs crista MUC HBLLU), WEPyBSDA ' B ?mM mm Ihni i ho MbmiI tor tho twa govern ) menta labored aider a ateappreheoataa m MM oaean < tag of U>? treaty. Be weald give kh opinion aa to I meaning, and be bad no doubt that the Ueramla loner i wvoid deem bbi oenetroctloa the oerreet one. BwooMbe ? observed ibtt the words "eorreepondiog erime*" are J used. lb what were these crimes to correspond? la > geometry, which Is an eiaet sc ence, It used to be proved that two figures corresponded?that Is, were equal?wbea J their tines and anglns were exactly the as me This ww 1 an illustration of what was meant In the treaty by the t words "corresponding crimes." Hie crimes In the French | law for which criminals were to be surrenderod were to- > correspend exactly with the crimes of burglary and robr > Deiy in me inxuriu law. iney ?rt iu ?*> grimier nor less. And when It wan proved that he offence charged against these accused corresponded to (he c- Ime of burglary or robbery In American law be would bo witling to hare Ihem ssrreudered, but not till then. He wouid lock now at the French side or tho treaty fio tuyl got a correct traimlaUcn of H, from which tho Commissioner would Fee that the French translation of tho American Bide of tho treaty corresponded exactly with the dn {tuition which he bad given It. Ilo assumed thin to bo a truth ihut the French Legislature knew belter than the pro-ocutlon hero the exact meaning to bo given to the wordB txl quahjn crime. The French translatioa of the section of the treaty wue Tie crime of robbery, consisting ef the forcible and erimlnal taking away from the person of another money or etfrwta of any value by die aid of violence or InUinWaitoa, and the crime of burglary consisting ef the act of latroduclng one'nelf in the nfgbt by breaking lino ar lealhlng die dwell ing of ami'ber with a criminal 1>, tenuou, and Ihe o rreapond lng crimes provided for ami punished by the French law, under the qualification of robberies committed wuh violence er menace, and robberies committed in an Inhabited bouse wi'b cur urna slices of night. Tbe French coditlers, or legislators, (llr. G&Ibralth oon tinued,) bad given the precise ineaturg to the treaty which he (Mr (J.) insisted was tho true one. And tho fact of the counsel of the prosecution urging the contrary, wan tantamount to an argument that the French legislators did not understand their own taujtiage or their own laws He did not advance this proposition for the purpose of allowing one or two criminals to escape. If he thought his construction of the treaty a fulso one, he would not urge it; but he felt that no other construction wouid or ceukl he acted on by thle government or by the ICommisjloner now represents g tbe government. Otherwise therf would be one construction of the treaty on one side and a diffe-ent construction af It on the other side; and aa to the course to be adopted in such a state of things, he weuld refer to the case of the United States against l'errheuian, repolred in 7 Peters'Reporti, page bS? rare wInch arose ou the comiruciion u> oe gi viit to the treaty made with 3j still, where the Judge eays:? If the English and Spanish part* (of the treaty) can. without violence, be made to agree, that construction watch establishes thla conformity ought to prevail. lie acked tliat tho same rule would be followed Id this cane, if there wart any discrepancy between the English 1 and French versions ol' lite treaty; hut he Ituld there was no Hurb discrepancy. Tho French had Interpreted the word>|t<o( quulifit crime as crimoa corrospondlug to burglary and robbery In the United S.ttec. That was what be claimed to be the meaning; and in corroboration of that, 1 he gave, not merely his own, but the translation of a I perfon thoroughly acqu tinted with tho Froucb lang'inge. I Thcro wan no term In the French otde equivalent to tho < English terms ef burglary and robbery. Tno French oodo | did nd deOne crimes; it merely classified them by the i punhbmeiiL Therefore, burgUry at d robbery w<re i translated by the phrase " the e-irrMqiondiog crimes < known to the French Uw by the name of oaf, with the qualifi ation of crime." Ttiere was, taoreforo, no ditn i culty to making both versions of the treaty consistent with i each other: they were both uniform But oven if they i were not, tno catic of 7 retire, wbicb bo bad citod, showed i that where there is a diversity tbo treaty must bo so con- i ( trued as to make both sidos nmte. Tuts, he oontended, was consistent witli reason, otherwiso what would tho i consequences be? A treaty w as simply a contract between cations?a mere bargain, an every day b isinoes occurrence, and it required a unity of opinion and an identity of meaniug between both sides, other w iso it was no contra* or bargain at all. If, tborofore, the prosecution oontendod that there was a difference of meaning between tbo two sides of the treaty, and that that diversity could not bo reoon ciled, as be asked it to bo. then there was no troaty at all In foroe. It bocamo void, and the prisoners must go free There was a good deal of controversy bero as to tho ex; act crime with which tbeso parties were charged. He contended that the prosecution was bound to make their charge definite, and referred to tbo case of tho King i against Home Tooke, whore tho Julge says that the charge must ha so definite and certain as to enable the I prisoner to know with what he is charged, and to lot tho Court know what it is to jusm upou. lie oould not soe that in this case there was any definite charge made; but he anUcijiated that the counsel for the praseomlxn would en- , ' deavor to corn-true the phrase vJ qualify crime as having some indefinite, vague meaning, so si* to make it take , in every crime ana all crimes, and no arimo at all, just as they felt disposed. If the charge was burglary, or tr It , was lobbory, or If it was forgery, ho (Mr. U.) j was prepared to meet it, but ho could not b? - ri-"1*' to meet ev?vy vague -w?uwy, luueanitc charge, on watch > no or the uoiumissionor could not place any meaning, i This difficulty might probably have arisen from the hasty manner ui which tho preliminary proceedings hod been i got up In Krauco. On rcfereuco 10 SiuiforS'a "Kuropoan Criminal GkIos,'' (the legal part of which ho understood wu superintended by a very eminent lawyer, an oxGovernor of oue of the States,) he found the order of preliminary eriuiinal proceedings In Franco. Misdoiacan jra 1 were pr or ecu ted there by frncurevrt Generous and /Vneurturt Ae la HrpuUxcue. These magislraion prosecute t raiht r than direct, focb doiurt nent or ammdivemenl lias a Jvge U'lrubiiclion, or examining magistrate. : A Jug* A inrtructvm Is assisted In his functions by I the J'luoureur At la HepaUujue, as be can undoriake no act of instruction or prosecution without having oommunJI oated the same to that fhiiCtionary. After taking tho I preliminary examination be sends all the papers In the caso to the J'rucureur de la HepuUit/ue, who makes the necessary motion In cases of s fiai/runt Adit, or where the criminal is taken in the act. The J'rocureur de la RepuMiqtie J r <i* i Jnjtructvm can act alone. The Juged'Initruc.itm is obliged, i at least once a week, to make a report to the Ckamhre As , IXmtrU of tho cases which bavo oome before him after the , papers relative thereto have beco communiaato.i to tho ( I'rocvrevr Ae la Keimlliatie for his conclusion. This Chat* tire Ae Contnl decides Low far the facts, which from the subject of the preliminary examination, are proved or arc probable, and whether they constitute a crime, a misdemeanor or a oontrmvenhoa lie oon ended lliat these requisite preliminary forms wero not complied with In this case, and that, therefore, the iwooerdings were void for , error, lie referred to the fhstrucuoos given in this oaso to show bow nocusrary this compliance with forms was j doomed to "specify carefully tho crtmo or misdotneanor of which they arr accused." ( Mr. Morrough raised a question in referenoo to the , French word renderod into "misdemeanor." , Mr. Gaibraith was surprised that Mr. Morrough would , repudiate bis own translatioa. Tin so uistriicuons sliuwed , that tlio Juje A Imtrurtum was In doubt as to what was . tho crlrno, wbeUiur It wm a crime or a miadmnMnor. u 11 , whatever the crime wm ho ooutcndod Uiat under the | Fiench crde the L'luxinbrt dt Omtrtl wm bound to pMi upon It before three prisoners oould be extradiUvl. The > principal pert uf tbla cms had lurmd upon to uie sharm of Huron ltolhschild, which wore alledgi (1 to be iniaelng from I one of the aafea, and the great controversy wm whether these aharea had been abstracted or pilfered, or whether i It wm a mere breach of contldeDce on the part of those I who hail charge of them. It appeared very doubtful to him (Mr. ti.) whether thrae aharea were ever In the safe at any time after 1842 He had examined ail the evtdeLou and could not find anything to satisfy hia mlud that (hey had been In the sale. 1 The Commissioner?I nnderatand your position, then, to be U>at there la no poaibve evidence in the oaso to show , that tbaae aharea were deposited In the anwarr Mr Galbradh?Yen, I cannot find any evtdeuoe that Uiey were there. It la true that one of tho administrator*, in a Tagne way, when be ta aweartng all round?almost in the I tame way that Tehran her aworo to the oompiainl In Una caee?It la true, I aay, that this administrator, the Marpila Iwllon, a deeonr of Uie Legion of lloaor, makes some statement about It; but my mind la not aatlallod that th?M " aharea were ever in the safe at all, or, If they were, tbey were never in II after 1S62. Couneel commented upon the ! loose general way of drawtng Inferences from uncos netted facta that wm to be remarked In Una case. 1 It wm charged In the warrant of arreat that the art was 5 done In the nighttime. How wm that sought to be proved! ! One proof wm, that (Juerin. the night watchman, bad been purchased by 1,000 aharea, and Mother, that there were ao many persons passing Into and out of the office in the da) time, teat it wm imponaible for It to be dune at 1 any other Urn* llian night. 8o, In the same wm eoughl to have the inference drawn that the robbery was I ' effected by false keys, from the fact that a number of oiJ krre?none of Uiem fitting the safe?were found in Ure4 Irt'a desk, Counsel allowed the absurdity of aucb deduo- 1 i ' Urns. He ahouhl have auppvawl, too, that in reference to " the qnesUon whether these shares liad ever been in the ? aafe, that the teettmooy of Rothschild himself, would have I < . been the only com|<eteut evidence oo that point, unless I I 1 somebody tiad seen him deposit them. Rothschild > ( wm In Carta at the lime when Mr. 'nwandier , ' wm sent to the United Htales, and there was, : therefore, no reason why bis depoaltiooa were not i 1 taken. The first hypothesis of the prusecnuoo had | I been that the bordereou (exhibit M,) wm tint of the ' 80,000 sharer of Rothschild on doprwit In 1882. This ' lnr>Urm* had on 30,000 shares, and these ware all shares 9 of5'e. These same >0.000 shares, eice|4lng such as had been stolen, bad remained on deposit unbl uow. To that 1 effect wm Uie evidence of Onepfert, and the orrtlflcato of the directors; and It showed bow careful directors ought lobe In certifying anything. Then It wm proved that ' Rothsrlild bad no bordereau for these shares. Mr. Galbrailh?Ym; and consequently that the Hrrt de past' should bo blank In all the aharoa oorrnapoodinf tothoe " Ibarra Thnt KoUtachild bad, in (hct, boon (sill Iit don U . on hka OO.OoO atiarea alnco 1862. *u ihown by ibo bo?k*. . Thon II wan shown ibal a number of aharea meutimod In . thia berdsrroN, (exhibit 68.) b ibo number of 6,300, bad boon depoaitcd bjr Parut and other*. In the bank of Franor, an<l Ibal many of the aharea In the Urn do paw which thould bo blank, were fllled. Thla fad boln? trna, the coneoquooco la?and li waa ao Instated upon by the priwecuUoti?that the aharoa drpoaltcd In the Bank of France, tilled In the Urro da paw, and wbiob ou^bt b> have T boon blank, abowod the (tnten ibaroa The liereji da pane are tilled In from the boHaraou But it la aaid thorn waa \ nobordered* for Rotharhild frt m 1162 totliia Umo. and lliat be reeelTod the amount of all hl? coupons Then those ' blank apacea, taking Kothacbild'a bordereau and oom|>ariii|t It with them, showed that a number were ttllod in. The consequence waa, and It waa Undated upon by lire pro" aecution at the time that tbeae showed the atolen abarna, and accordingly In ine auiomont of the Bank of Franco, . all the aharoa deposited by Parol and other*, whtoh Oorrmponded with theae and exhibit AS, were marked in the margin ariKntherhlld'a aharea. Then, of cnuraa, the * Inference which (loepfert waa oommlaaloond to draw waa r "... n 'W. .ki.r n? ?,,i he would demonatral" H by the book*. that the sharea which Part* ud other*, it by hi* I net met lone, deposited with the Bank of fr?oo?, were the stolen harsa. Well, I look differently at Uie e fhria tnynrlf. The hypothesis ih eridentlr false, beI. cause not reconcilable with ?1 the f?> t*. Ho (Mr Owl * breltb) had demonstrated bow one thin* could be onrrea . ponding with another, geometrically, and ho defied any r person to refute that detnonatratioa. Rut they had now g cone to the refutation, by the prosecution Iteelf, of , (toepfert ? deatoneuauon. At Rothechlld had on deposit only j shares of (Wee, " he oould only be robbed of *hnr*e of dree." Oounael thought that that was a pretty Mund oon elusion. But among thMhars* deposited with the Hank of

k ffranee by Parot and other*, and marked In the margin m hetonfini toitottMUuid,were lUehnrea ?('wee, Wiuutj Y, MAY 20, 1867.?TOIPI a bleb wuM MteT eoime bekmg to RoOvtehlkl'" tonicrceu. yt wane. Ihti epeet all Woapftn* iiMatotlw. ?*rt lb la alaoreMMr ttoeofert mode aa exptoneiiou la lha (fleet that the share* of "fives" had been eicoanged koto ibareeof "onee." He saw thai bte demoxwtraUou wa' irokrn d( wn, or would be by the craM-exami nation, and te made a virtue of MomeUy, and showed that his 0.1th, md his demonstration, and the oerttdoate ot the direuUM> veie equally useless and equally fitl<e. It was Immaterial or the prevent purpose whether those tharna were ei 'banned by Rouitchild or U relet. There bad been a jprnd leal 1 f controversy between Mr. Tlllou and Mr towns lend a* to showing that U re let could uot have done it, but hat Rotheebtld oiurt have Hold Jioin himself, met to Mr (ialbralth'e) mind It wae clearly proved thu Grelet iould uot b. ve had anything to do with the excluuiring if tbcae "flves" into "onee" If they were oliauged at all. rhla rtet of rois.lng share* (eihibtlW)cootalnol, be-ides u? jtntellac'a shore*, only ~2b choree oorr?H|KMidlug with thune leporilt-d few 1'arot and (fee othurx In the bank It oui aiut'd no shares corresponding '1th the coupons found, as ill. gt d, on Parol. It contained, id any vlow of (loepfort's tab un til or explanation, no more than lift shares which mrrw ponded with shoes In exhibit 68?Itothscbll I'a bares Aud It led to uiuny other discrepancies. But iu act it upset the whole case, because It showed no ootiuooion w lib Parol It showed that only 2ft mU-ing Mharos ive? passed through bis hands at all. Two of these wore raced to other pirtieg, and If iho books could ha . e boon lad, the others might also hive breu traced. But, as lUggisUtd by Mr TowDBhrnd, it was only surpridng that 1 man v ho did the colossal busmen? in shares which this nan 1'oro. did, had not many more of thuso shares. But, t legcd ll,i' prosecution, llie accused rearing iriui mo snares J hriliM liild would be cxamim* gathered them all upand sold Uicm, in list W9, for llie ]>ur|HM? or replu'tug ibom. rbal hj i?)incni? watt not consistent with he facia. IT ixhibil 68 wu? Rothschild's shares tlii'D all the shares ia J ai exhibit collected by others wore stoleo shares. Now iut of these 11,300 shares, Uinterna* were ouly presented or 1,046. The Commit*loner?Your argument Is that only 1,046 wero protested V Mr. Oulbrailb?Yes; we can only judge from statement* sollected from the books siuce this new b>poOiosW wua darted. These shares, It uiay be presume.!, wore sold I'hey were in oilier hands, and tlio presumption Is thov Had hern sold ami parted with, dome were iu the hum Is jf Rothschild himself It had be< n said thai Unve shares a ere all collected up like a pack or cards the moment the Rothschilds were c >mlng to examine; that tony swept the board and dealt tbcm again; but be (Mr. G ) would suow hat some of hem were in Rothschild's own hands, and bow then could they collect tbeui from him 1 tlr. UaltiraiOi lenhd that Grulet had ever made any oonf.vsion will' h jnght to be relied upon In this case, and argued that jven if lie had It ceuld not lncal|?tto I'arot, and alio argued .hat ihe confession of carpontier could not he taken as of try < fleet ugainst Grelet, l'arot or David. Mr. McKeou will sum up to morrow on tbe part or Ute L*lilted .--tatci government. Wlut tbe Railroad Company Inland to do. [From tbe Loudon Herald, May 6. | A meeting of tho shareholders of the Northern Kail way of Franc e took place on Thursdayr, in l'arle, presided over by liaron James Rothschild. Tho report says:?"It so Happened that the greatest portion of thee loss caused icy the Itliti'iutmy "J the Uuu clerk* in Seytemlxar Uut/eU on securities belonging to tho Iiouho of ViM. do Kotiiscblnl. That Urui had determined to support the lues o these securill?? itself. The loss was not loss than 6,1)71 shares aud 270 beuids, or tlvo sixths of the whole securities missing. As to the small portion of Uie loss falling on tho shareihold ins, the hoard recommended to distribute the loss over a certain number of years, so as to render it less onerous; to thai end, the board would propose to set aside 100,000 francs for the next year, as a s|ietiiil reserve to meet the case. Tho board adopted the proposition. The Rothschild* and Speculator* DifendctI? A Krriirh Idea of National Morality, [Translated frotn tlio Courrier des Flats Urns, May 19, for UM Nkw YOKK Him V.I Tho citradition trial going on for three moDlhs, before Commissioner la Its, is at last coming to an end, in two or three day s the arguraeut will be entirely closed. At tho approach or that im|sirtanl moment the Nkw You* Ha KAin comes again to the aid uf tho prisoners, in an article too curious to ho left unnoticed [Here Is luserted a <|uotatiou of part of our article on tli* degree of criminality to be attached to the prisoners.} The theory of the Ukkano Is quite piquant with inioh novelty. That "certain degree of guilt" w Inch goes ro far as to violate a trust and uot farther, Is as rctliied as possible, and a Jesuit of oldru vlines would have with |o?>. reason envied the duiingiti of llie oracle of Kulton ft. eel. 3ut t ie ingenious argument uf our contemporary does not cud in so good a manner. Until now a man wno na<i committed a murucr u> coo Deal a theft was generally looked u|on as a murderer. But tins was aa incredible aberration of justice. U Is nothing more thaa the fact of a cautious man, who "takes measures to lndo a tlrst fault," Jit i? a real indignity lo pi t tend to see a di-"">-i criuio In the few stabs which l. uu<given. (hie thing aelotnshes us, tlial la, that the Hkrxid does not require the indictment of 11. Rothschild on guilty of having olbwcd hie shares to be atolou, and done not en gag i) Grclet and Pari A to commence a suit for damages against the Northern Railway Company, which has boon the cause of their being led astray. Seriously, hoaever, such an article deservea the stigma of public opinion. It is a disgrace, not only to the journal which publishes it?if we admit that it is yet possible to dirgraco Ihe Hkiuio?but even to the country of which that journal is considered abroad aa the m<?t reliable organ. In France or in England tho newspaper shich should dare to develope such theories would be Instantly under lbs ban. It is painful to think that In the United Rtatoe those occentricitieii are an clement of pecuniary success, and that moral fooling has been so much .wnakcued tliai It isnnot perceive any longer, under the wrapper of a piquant parados, the poison slow I jr altered into the very heart of the nation. TIm Destitution In Micltlcnn. [From the Dotroit Trlbuno, May 16.J A call eigne 1 by lorae of our most prominent el tisane ipi>cars in this eyei lug's Tribune, for a mneuog to coo uder the best mtwns of aflurdlng relief to the famishing ethers in the Northern juulImm. Our former statement* of the destitution and suit mug in that region have been most painfully confirmed. We shall not speak In the Ian gusgo of h>perbole when we ktsh' that a number of families In Gratiot and adjoining counties are iierisbing for want of even the meanest food. Thu statement is made on the authority of the providing elder of the Methodist church of that section In a letter to the Rev Mr. Miloo. of Lansing, who related the fact?In a public meeting bold in uim i'uuci vu iuc uikui wiuru ????*. vuf|?wi www Kith a mother's dovotodnosa had given to her two UUJe children all the food the could procure, diod a few days ilnce In Gratiot county of alwoiuto starvation, and her children, when found, wero too weak to be revived, and iharcd the mother's fate, other ciuxena have painfully ttruggled into Clinb>n county on fbot, begging for food. Sonio of litem ha<t lived Tor a number of daya on loeks ilone, and liie atench of their botlloa wax almost lusufforalile. Tho whole country in the new oountlee la atrlppod of rood, and even thoxo lu beat circumstances can pro ure nothing to oat but MM pumpkins and molasses, while tho povrer claasoe, wharo actual want has not overtaken litem, eke out a miaerable (ubmstence on roole, loekf and boiled oaU. Those xtatomoiiU, to uj who have enough to eat and drink, and oomrort all around ue, aeern Incredible but It |wlna ua to aay that their truth la beyond doubL The cattle, until the re cent coming of the put-ire, have dropped on day by day. The people of iheac dlxtreeaed dlatrtela have not mads known their auffertng; for beeido a natural reluctance, ihey have looked forward to the spring to aflord them relief; but aa yet we have no spring, They havo now urived at a coodluoo where their fkmixbing cnea far help moat be re*ponded to. Wo feel oonSdent that otir citizens will respond liberally. When the iaielllgenc i of Ibc dofrUtutloa reached Irau-ing, a public meeting was nailed at once. Our worthy Governor praaldod. The ilnry or angering was told by Ho v. Mr. Mabnn, who spoke both from reliable Information be bad received and from ictoal observation in the southern part of Gratiot county Those present subscribed promptly WT, and resolved farther to |>urchaae fifty barrli of flour for tho relief of Ihc sufferers The subscription was placed In the ham's of Walter Chester, h of this city, for disburtal, and he ban already purcl.iiHed and sent forward supplies of beans, meal, sc. This pun haen the ft-troit and Milwaukle Ihulroad has transported free of charge to St. Johns, where a committee from Unrot have agreed to be with trams, and convey the aupphee into tho distroased districts, and distribute them. American Bundsy School t'nlon. The Thirty third Anniversary of this important institution was held In Philadelphia on the evening of the lJth Inst, Ambrose White, Ksi , In the chair. Karneat and appro priate addrowxe* ware delivered by the Rev. Dr. Brantl ?y, Rev. Mr. Jenkins, Rev. Mr Breed, and Abraham Martin. K*1 , to which the large and intelligent audlenoe listened with marked attention. The opening and concluding religious exercises were conducted by the Rev. Dr. Work, and the RL Re* ihah>>|> K*.-t')urn The aba tract or the nnnal rejmrt ?m reed b* tbe Re* R R Weutbrook, Heo. of Mlealooa, (Votn which the fot.owlng fWcl* are gathered ? The receipt* in the mlaalonary de|*rtniont have Imuto, In donation*, $71,082 87. In legacliw, $11,?U87, an I a balance on band from leat year, beiug aoectally designated by the donor*, $70? 4$, making lb" total rtaourooa af lb? dfjarttooDt for the year, $84,6w7^7. Thl* inm baa boon faithfully epiiropnaled In accordance with Uia wkahoa of the dooora. A largo corpa of mlaalona rice haro boon arnt forth into twenty all dilTerent Htauw and Torrltortaa, who ha*e e*Ul>!ixbed more than 1,800 new icboi.ln, gathered Into them about 80,000 chile run, and aecured for the lotlrictiou of ihow th.dren over 13,000 teacher*, eupplylng poor and n- < Jy ar.hoola and children with book* and o her Sunday arhool requisite* In addition to planting tl.eec new aehuo!* Iliey barer Idled, aupplted with book*, and other*!** aulei <1 neurir 3,000 Holiday acboola, containing mot? than lw.faX) children, making a total of Sunday Khoax* organiavd and aided of nearly 1,000. If we takn Into our eetlxae the r"*ult of the laet alt yeara, we Ond that tbo ecco-ty i-?* organned In that time, through the direct labor* of tie mle?i"nariea, more than 12,0?X> new Huneay rcb<v>l*. ntoUwitig about 78,000 teacher* ami nearly 800,000 children. The miaa.i nary labor* o< the society are entirely dtallnct from the poMtahlog department. Indeed, the latter la quite anbordloate to the lurmcr Aa a mtceionary Inal tu Uoo, the *oct*ty baa two chief objecla I To open new Sunday acboola In neighborhood* and aeUlement* where they woald not otherwlee be eatabll*bed, *t-oung and retiring old Sunday achoola; and 2 To *opplr them with book* for carrying oa the acboola aueoeaafhlly, when thug begun. All dnnatloaa made to tbe eoclety are wrupokwly ap plied to the object* designated by tbe donera. In no ?a*e are tbe* applied to carry oa the publication (tepar.mont of tbe *oclely'e operation* It abonld be remember*! In thia connection that It la the ?-n -- ---? ?h* i?f h utlra ma I/* puuo/ low i? \y so y? irrmn" nereir M^lain, an<l eoUrje m occasion mmy r*qutr*, thin branch nf it* operation*, an I n<4 with a rUf of woahug a rer^uc for the missionary department. The soetety now pcblisb a complete library for Sunday scbnota, containing Ml rolumee, and four leloctioue from the general library of 100 rnlumea each, for ?10; alao two "Fire I ".liar Jureatlo libraries" of 7? roluraee each. Child * Home library, M> rolumc*. M 50, three Village and Family Iibrarle*, i4 volumea. Wench, and the Child' Cabinet library, of 50 rolumea, 13 60, The .bundoy S/mmal anl 1-tgA'i r aw* ftotrtU are published a* formerly, and in order to increase the usefulness of the latter, and to bring It within the reach of all, the prion of (Ascription ha* been reduott* to ton oanta par annua whara m ooptot art then j maw. The Na4?rttr Slav* Mm. p bvthimi oopmr or oaio. X Dob. 1. W. Barley,Chief Jtaitice: Hon J. R. Swan, Rat. o J. Brlnkerbel, Ben. 0 Bow on and Hon. J. HcoU, Jim" ea P Kumar, May 8, UV. John Anderron th. flcnry Potndeeter and others. Error 0 la the fHarriet Oourt of Clermont county. Bowen, J , delivered the opinion of the Oourt, holding: o I 'fliHt neither Ohio nor Ksntucky can an ah d roiialiou of the eonetituUon and municipal lawn of the h oilier as a mailer of uumity; and If a pcroon claimed an a * Klave In Kentucky, comw Into Old ? by the direction or r eons, ill of bin own*r, even for a tcmiwirary boitii mi |n.r o jx te, the constitution and lawn of Ohio operate ou the con a lition of Huch pert on, and elVoct hie immediate emauoipatW'll I ?* IU U a |m rxou ueiu id biayoft nj uif uiunicipti aw of the Slate ui which he Uvea udm be tome* free by virtue of the lawn of eiiOlhcr country or Slate, Into which hex1*** bv the mml of hi* WMr. it at not in tie power of 1)10 latter ever to reduce bun again to his former condition of servitude, under any law which thin court can rocugulae ob valid. 3. lly lawn of Kentucky, person who ta held and triatcd a* a Mate has uo catau Ity to make any oonlraol whatever, and promissory notoa given u> hie ma-dor by himself and tui etie* for him, In the purchase of hit fi'tevonm, arc illegal and void, a* to both priaclpiU and l u relies. hartley, Ch. J ; dissenting from eomo oftho view* eipi creed in the opiuiou of tho majority of the court a* to one ot tho groiinim of the dock-inn, boned Ms ixmclu-ious in the care upon the following point* t*t lhai althoi gh tho remova1 ot a negro slave from Kentucky into tihio, for the purinise of residence or ohangn of domlcll, hae the elfeet to emancipate the save, yet by the comity of nations and the suit Higher obligation* resting on the people or the xuverul SUUm of the Amervan I niou, in the free commercial and rocial Intercourse with each other, authorized by tho constitution of the United State*, a negro held as a slave In Kentucky dues uot bo oome free by elmplv inuring through Ohio on a journey , with, or by permission of, hi* master, or, its in Uil* cuse, by Velng sent on an errand Into Ohio and returning imraa diaioly Into Kentucky; and thi* comity between rftutei and nation* cannot bo construed to infringe tho fundamet lal aud local law of domlcll of cither .Statu. 'id That the contract In thi* case being, h to every other MBkMt, governed by tile Ir4 M, and havlBg be.ui mule in Kuitucky, where, by the local law a* expounded by the courts < f tbut State, a slave doe* not become tree by a hiiniilii utiiniirn iwj i/iWrp in u froo KIaIA rmild not hitvo bwu w.thout rorxiih-a ton, on the ('round tiuU Pelndexlor *?! free at the titne he (Kin the nolo. On the otht r poibtF, lo * it:? lrt. That Poindexter, under the lawn of Kentucky, be- { tr>K flave, had no legsl cawuity to make a contract with Mi Master; and lid, that the i.mere executory promise of Andei>ou to set Poindeiter free at a future |icri?d, being wholly void liy the lawn of Kentucky, was not a legal and j Ttlnath coUM.lcralion for the uoies, the (Tiiel Justice con- ( rurted with the majority of the Court ui the judgment for the i tfrndantv. JUDfll RllINKIRIIOFK'ft OPINION. Rrii kerbefl J.?For the reason that thu principles In | vol red in this cane are of great moment, and are now re | HlM with (euerul and peculiar Interest^ I will de|?rt , from the ordinary urn go of the court brleily to slate separately the grounds on which I place my coucurrenoo | In the joiignieiit we are about to enter. The can- made in the pleading and proof is thin : , lh nry l'i indcxtrr, held a* a slave in Kentucky, excout- , fd, together with nix co defendant* an sureties, to tho plaintiIf, Anderson, who da ined a legal rigid to hold blm, | the protuk-uory note aued on in the Common Pleas of Clermont county, In this Rate; in consideration of which i role, and otherr, Uie plaiutill' agreed to. and did rule tee l'oindcxter from the slavery In which he was held, and promisiug to give htm bin "free pa|iera" or dned | of eiiiani Ipalion, ro aoon aa this note, and other note* given at the name time Rnd for tho same oonsideraiion, should be lolly |stld. Reforo the giving of thorn notes, Poindexter, with the know ledge and consent, and tone times by the direction of Aiiriotsnti. had, In several Instances, rome into the State ol Ohio, and alter romaluing a short tnue in doing errands on which he was sent, had voluntarily, but probably in ignorance of his rigliu, returned lu'o Kentucky and resumed but residence with An derscn. After the giving of the notes, Poiudeitor labored a while for Anderson for wages, and then took up bts n Mum inOhio. The ease in tho Common Pleas was snbmttted to the court for tiiaJ, and a judgment was rendered lor Uio do Icluaillo me piuiuuu uiru HJ Uin innuii.i Court, irblcb alro gave judgment for tbo defendant*. Aud to reverse that judgment tiitH jielitiou in error b jtrosocuted. Two questions properly arise In this case:? 1. It is contended for tbo plaintiff that the case, by the comity of nations and States, Is to be determined by tho Ux iti amtraiius, an 1 that l>y the laws of Koutucky, wboro the note rued on was etoculod, it wras a ruli! note Now, granting, for the rake of argument, wind I do not admit, but wb*t. on tbo contrary, I deny, that the iab u> ? In lo decide tbo validity ul tho use, bow then stands tho caret Under tbo laws of Kentucky,* slave Is Incapable of contracting. He can hold uo property. He can acquire no rights His natural domestic relations ov ?n aro ignored. He bus not a right to the child be has begotten to nurture it, nor to the wife ho lias (boned and cbcrtohcd, to protect her. According to tho theory of those laws, the slavo belongs to the ma-iter as pro. perty, and descends to bis heirs un real estate. No contract can Increase the UablllUes of the one, or the power of Uio other. A contract of emanci|iatlon itnimrtn to the slavo no legal right,and imposes upon the mauler no 'nral obli gallon It is snnoly nugatory and void. Tlie promise of the s avo to pay money in oomtideraiiun of sucb a cou tract, Is nail, Being null when mode, no subsequent act of emancipation on ibe part of the master can impart to It any now force. It thus results logically, from the theory of the slave code of Kentucky, that the note which too plaintiff now seeks to enfbroo here was invalid ihorc. And moreover, by chapter 1*3, article P, of tho Itevisud Htalutes of that Mule, and which seems to he Kill! In force, emancipation, except by deed or lad will and test iinent, executed in conformity lo IU provisions, is prohlbi.ed. Ho that under tho legislation ef Kentucky, f'oicJextcr has never yet been legally emancipated,and thereby rendered competent to oojtract. 2. Hut were it otherwise, ooold this note be enforood by Judicial procedure in Ohio? By the laws of nature, all persons are free. No human being Is bora, or can be born a slave. The laws, by a stretch of courtesy, so called, of )articular countries or Hiatee, may subject certain per sona to be bold and troaU-d aa the mere transferable In- i rtrumeuU of otUor |#rsons, an l this subjection, which constitute* slavery, originating In farce and 'raud, and upheld by local laws which adopt and sanction the original wrong, may attach immediate y after birth,as the effict of pmitive law In derogation of natural right. But stlil it re mama true liial Uie absolute and equal freedom of all per sons at birth Is a fundamental principle of American institutions, pi oclaimcd with Indejieudunce, and inca|iablo of abrogation. This principle was. bv the or<linance of 1787, Impressed oo the ?<>ll or Ohio Wore there was an organised community within her limits; It is fundamental in hsr organisation?always embodied in her constitution?and her laws, her |sillcy, and the on vie. lions, the morals, and lbs religion (1 btr people, are Instinct with its spirit. The moment any jsirson runes within the territorial limits of (Jhlo, bis personal rights are ascertained and determined by the constitution and laws of Ohio. There is no oxceptlon to this rule, ssve In the case of a porwio, who, being held to service In another Hiate, nscapea into this. In such s ease, the (" institution of tho Unitod Mtal'W declares that the fugitive "shall be delivered upon claim of the party to wbora such snrvice or labor may bo due." There is nothing In this article of compact which giver * sy Sancto n to that slarery, the easential elements of which la amertrd property it man?oothlag loconrtatoil with the purpoerfif the framera of tliat rvsistltulion, dearly mani catad la tbetr debates as reported by Mr. Madison. to avoid all recognition of " the idea that there may be property in man."?Jd Madison Capers, 180. It eidabllsbaa no rule which does not apply equally to all " persona held lo service." It takes up and deals with the broad and general relation of master and serrant, but lias nothing w Later or to do with the relation of owuor and property. i When, therefore, a perron held as a dare in another Stab escapee into Una Stale he ceases to be, In any pro|ier sense of the word, a slave. Ami the courts of Ohio, I ap prihtnd, would decline to reongmze or eiforce any oontract of purchaae or sale, wherever made, of which he might be the subject while thus Within our llmile. The refitfos of Nttyncttna ea property, created by the local law of the Htate he baa left, nannet follow bun beyond the limits of ibe sovereignty which eetablli bed It. In Ohio be Is a man, liable, It may be, to be delivered up ou due claim and proof, but yet a man, " a person hel l lo service," and, in every other respect than this, a free man. When ou"e so delivered up, and taken back to the State from which be esca|>ed, Uio relation of a slave may re attaoh under the local law. Until then, subject only to tbts liability, he remain* free. In the case now before this court there was no evape from Kentucky into Ohio. Poindexter A'no into Ohio on several occasions with the consent or by the order of the plaintiff. Ho coming, be became entitled lo the full bontlt of ths express prohibition of slavery by our State constitution. To all intents .and purposes wbaleo soever he was free; bis condition and status were that of a freeman; bts master, by oonsentiug to his coming, must be held to liave consented to bis freedom, which, whether be emmsntcd or not, was estab liahcd by law And being thus free, wherever he might go or be taken he could not ega.n be enslaved by any law w htrb thl* court ran reengnlie as valid. And this doctrine has been frequently held, even In Stales where euforced property in men, with all ita repulsive foaturea an I odious attributes, ts sanctioned and upheld by the local law. Marie Louise v. Marat, L R- 478, Smith v. Hanh, 13 L. R. 444 If a person held as a slsvn ran bo brought or sent Into Ohio for one hour, and still retain his Malta as a -dave, then the same tiling can he (lone for a day, a week, a month, a I year, a lifetime; and thus this Institution, the sbarae of our country, and the opprobrium of Ufcriatcndom, be virtually established on a soil so oftan and solemnly devoted to absolute freedom. Krom the Heclaratlon of Independence until very recent ly, it wse never questioned that, in the United Hiatus, a person onoe legally free la always free. Tbo doctrine haa been regarded as apart of American common law. Courts hare differed as to ftiie which constitute a Ulle to freedom but have. ft I mo* t ?llit one ft. to. I concurred la U* doctrlM that do man onoe frcy, can bo aaaln kimu-a , crime. Id my j idgment?and such i understand to b? th? of four of the live winlrtX iu *, asjr-Js' a gSw3^ay TCT Sjjjj'jjjjjl'j **lld. Not do, lit* promt** wan made by I indexter While under dorr** t,i I wrongful duress, In consideration of release ft cm that usurped dominion, ami tnerefurn Imposes no valid obligation either la moral* or 1 0 & R'aflS* ?* 0uiar*CJ''-al1'' "v " Uooiuo*I, Wa ara awara that In Kentucky It turn boon decided that person bald aa a slave lu that state who may have been taken for a temporary purpose into a free Utah*, and brought, or coming hack again, ? not thereby enfranchised but la remanded to the condition In whlcb ha wae before held; aad It la urged that the principle of international and interstate eomity requires is to recognise aad eufore this rule. The clear and sufficient answer to this claim Is. that romttv la not a matter to be demanded as a right, else it would cease to ha comity like courtesy among individuals how far the principle of Htata comity shall be onrrted 1 iMjtm or sums of NHS, ? at thg dJacrttioa gf Uta tote eeJled <* fler Mi wrelw. Am* no MM* or tfi* ?M. MMt worM baa aw fob MmV bouad lo o*rrj u? iludift f ooinitj to Um txteal of aubraritnf Mi mlMU obey. Ik.I II la mU It to M nart A# Iht IMHiIT ofOhlA It Ak ourage emancipation la Kentucky. Tbk to true ; k to ko true that It to no part of the policy of Ohio ta *aourage emancipation In Kentucky. Ohio baa Mtlihg to o with the e object of emancipation tn Kentucky. Ail una an romt-Uiing ito do with the tonka of pareona coming rllhln her own Jurledlctloti ; and K to properly part of her obey to nee to It. that a violation of the right* growing >ut of that stutm euall not, In her oourto, be reoogniaad aa valid foordailnn of a legal obligation. The i or lavement, by local autliorlty, of a man ooae Nad| iret-pnie the monetroelty of a legalized wrong ; K to Unity Intensified and hardened Into law ; and when th? ubjid ta legitimately liefore ns, It to doe lo that prlnet^n >f righteousness which la the aoul ef all law worthy nff he lume ami It becomes us, uA the administrators of aueh :iw,to protest against, condemn, and a* far aa may ha, lousi.tently with ixioaUlutiotial obligation, to nullify It, be:auxe it In wrong, rather than to lend It an Indirect iianrtl? hrough a morbid exuggei aUou of the spirit of oourteny. 41 Tlio policy of Kontu ky ta to uphold the claim* of manera. H?r court*, upholding tin* policy, rufuso to reeogil/.o any obligation of comity or otlic-wlae to enforce the ihio rule of froodom?OoIIim t. America, 9, A tocaroe, >73. The fundamental, organic and unremitted policy of tJbld a to mainlalu the rtgbt* of men, and bur tribunal*, giving net effect to thl* policy, must not permli themselves to bto nored by the pl?a at comity to turn aside from the plana lath It prixcribos to the aupport of tun Kentucky rule of lavery. Thi* (>olioy of Ohio I* her r by virtue of her own overelf n choice. file will, I trust, never permit It to bn auea ID ({UeBUUIl. II inn uuw mm win 1I.WWIPWI lultable organs for the utterance of tier altered will, but ad in humble member of this court I can neror CJdeent to jiWiuo the meillum of its surrender. rtae Hanging of Tl?ree tf?-groe* In UmliTlllf l?y a Mob. [From Uio Louisville Journal, MaJ IS.] T eater day afternoon tbo arguments of counsel werd concluded la the cane of Jin throe negroes charged with the murder of the Joyce family. In this county, several months ago. Judge Hullock then charged the Jury, who retired, and in a short limn returned with a verdiol of "Not guilty." It would have been impossible, we are told by lawyers, to render a different verdict, considering the nature of tbo testimony introduced by the prosecution, which consisted mainly of the statements ef one nf Ibe negroes Implicated In the crime. Resides, Judge ItuN lock, iu his charge, declared this cvidinco to bo entitled to but Itttlo If any crodit. Immediately itrter Uie rendition or uia verdict, mn prr< utcr portion of tbo person* in the court room left and proceeded toward the jail where the accused were eontlned. Tim crowd woe somewhat excited, and manifested t desire to satisfy themselves with executing summary vengeance ti|?n tho negroes, who they oonoeived wera improperly acquitted. Arriving in front of the jail, they were met at the gate by the Cliluf of tho I'ollce and body of hie men, who resisted their attempt to enter. Foiled In Ibeir elforts, the oxclted srowd retired, ind, until night, were gathered In the vicinity, but made no further demonstrations. In the mean Urn# the police force was strengthened, and arrangements made for the defence of the Jail In view of a contemplated ittack. Ry nightfall the multitude had greatly sweled III Dumbers, and the excitement wax manifestly Increasing. The majority of the perrons present, however, appeared lo he m 'rely spectators, taking no |?rt In tho dlsturbanoe. Appeals wore made of a highly inflammatory nature, and Iho Indignation of the people was niturally helgUteted. Finally a desperate onslaught was made, tho prison fema was broken, and the large crowd rushed to the doer. Peroral thots wero fired, and Ihe rorce within returned by the .discharge of blank cartridges This firm reaixtanos further maddened the already infuriated mob. A party af men and boys forced an entrance Into tbo building wharei the artillery is kept, and, procur ng a canon, heavily loaded It with every (ieacrtption of deadly missiles Yill a as planted within a few foot of the prison door, wbtoti vii already battered down, sod tho windows broken iu. Threats were made lo discharge tho cannon Into the inal ante chamber where Mr. Thorns.-*, the jailor, and his depulies. Mayor I'iicber, and about twenty policemen, wer? Stalk oed. Further resistance would tiavc been utterly futile, and at the imminent ]* ril of the life of every one of (he gentlemen who were attempting to defend the prison. II would also have resulted in demolishing the prison da'onmu '?n?l tufocruan\u on.! fr.^,1 mnra than flftv nrwotltii*. t'ndsr these circumstance* the officials In cbnrge found themselves forced to the painful measure of delivering og the negroes. Tin wo officers hie I during the evening conducted themselves wltlt much manliness, and for twe bourn bofore dark hod successfully kept at bay the attacking mob. Had the crowd boen dispersed when H first awi milled and enfagist in disorderly proceedings, the terrible tragedy Dial ensued could have bi-en arrested. Hirer of the prisoner* being delivered up, a raaor wad given to the faurth tn the jail (Jack, the property of Mr. Hamuels.of Hullitt onunty), and he cut his throat, severing the jugular vein aad windpipe, and producing Indent death. The wound was of thu too it horrible cbaraotar. and a more ghastly spectacle was scarcely ever witnoaeen than the deait bisly when it wan tirought to the yard and exposed to tho view of the crowd. Knpee were obtained and the other negroce marched off to tlw Court Hound sipiare. At the weet end, (ieorge, the slave ef Mir. Samuel*, was hung upon a tree, amid the hoettagd and execratioiui of tlio multitude. The other twe werw then marched through the iquare, and near Fifth street were likewise executed. On of them, the slave of Mr. Drown, protested his Innocence, and pleaded plteoualy la be released. His agony of mind and sutterings were very intense. Mr. Pendleton's Bill, the one who wae the (talc's evidence In the case, eras lh? last oue exeooted. We understand that he and one of the others confessed their gu'lt Fires were kindled under the suspended bodies; but they were not consumed, large narrbers of persoos lingered about the scene of this awful tragedy until a late boor, and II was the unirersal lojito of convertallon. Die excitement In some degree suwldod, and tbe turbulence gave eray to a feeling of silent horror at the lorrlble see nan that were wltmased. Tbe rioters themeelvee, having wreaked Uirlr vengeance upon the victims, appeared to bg more awe stricken than exultant. Mr. Kirkpetrlck, Chief of the Police, took aharge ef thg bodies. Mayor llleher attempted to calm the mob, and was outrageously assaulted, receiving a severe wound In the fhee. lifflcor J A. Weal her ford bad one of his fingers shut ott We haul of no other persona being Injured, though iber* were rumors to that effect TTie Morality of Cincinnati. KLOriMKNT or A CITT FATHER WITH HI3 WlFW'f 31RTXR-IK-LAW. [Worn the CtnctnnaitjCommerckal, May 11.) As much of lite world as ts comprised within the purtloud of the Queen Uty of the West, was startled from Its staid sense of propriety on Halurday, by tho announcement thai a well known ctlixen, ami a member of the Uminctl fur thg Thirteenth Ward, had been playing the Don Juan, and departed from the city In company with a lovely and dashing widow, mother of four children, while, be the gty I/ithario, had also left behind him a young wife and tsr* n teresung pledgee of her n, with a speedy pruepesfi of another budding blossom to their union. The name o( tho orrlrg Cttv Kather Is Jos. Harr. Jr., one of the Uveltesfi members of that uniform chamber of dullness, whereta our municipal laws are enalad, while the inamorata l* a relict of tho late Mr Joseph Armstrong, and ibe daughter of CapL Summons, an old ami respected e ill sen, ami Hog many years ooonected with the mall jacket line betwsea this city and I/iutavtlle. The parlies are nearly connected, the srlfb of Parr being the sister or the late Mr. Armstrong, consequently sister M law to the woman who bai stolen away her husband. We hare beard It wblspered that die course of marital felicity was somewhat ruffled a few months since bet wee* our modern Joseph and his spo-me, In consequence of soma letters having fallen Into the handa of the later, writtea M her husband by the naughty widow, breathing of lorn nai devotion, and hinting at Favors secret soft and preelons, which had passed bet ecu them, and such an tbe nnoieal Joseph, of I'oliphar notoriety, would have down from wtUx horror. Be lhi< as It may, it was discovered, on Baton law morning, that tbe I noon* tan t Benedict bad appropriated ad the ready cash he could command, aad in company wtlln the widow, who It is mid. had la her possession a large sans of money?reports vary from $10,000 to $90,000?wan "*M to HaJtlmoro" as it la surmised ca routs ?o Europe. Prorioua lo leaving, ho eaecu led o deed, btqtmMH onmo pecuniary intereata, ?? well M o liquor buatnaae to which bo wm enraged, to hlo deeerted wife, who, bowover. u kmxi a* It bvcamo certain tbol the elopement heM artuilly taken place, ?ent deapatrhea lo the anthotlttoo eg the Kaetcrn cltiee, with accurate description of their perkxw. and order* for bla arreat. Whethor thla will h? effected or not remain* to bo eeeo; but tho affair baa canned a vivid ee*ation In thn ettjr. aa wall aa In Mowi?*t, where the widow Molded, and whore aba baa left her four falherleaa and now neither lean children. Her rat born, for ?he ban had fire, woo the child poteoned H the J a me* Hummooa affair, and for which bo, her brother, to condemned to pnaa tho remainder of bla Ulb In tho Mg prl*oo Dorr woo a ataunrh democrat, aa mtoht bo Inferred fwma bla being a mamber of the "bloody Thirteenth." and Mi little peccadillo will bo **dly felt by "dlmtoraar' In Council, for the partieo wore an nicety balanced thai they Mat but one majority, oo that Dorr, although bto virtu* we* oal ao nicely balanced aa It might bare been, never the Uw* man be aald to hare eloptd with the balance of power wlwoh bad Inclined to the party, who, a lac* bo baa out loow, wp Had themaelTM toduoad to a tie. AM ntyoitTCTiin wrr* A real eetate agent lo tho neighborhood of Mxth atreog market, ha? been receiving at hi* offloe tho vMta nf thi wife of a city official?an appointoe of OmidcII. The oh)ect "f her v tail* wm dtocovered by the femalea nftb# V_ .. w k-n ii.. The hii>band M . mmming >min in uir wn? v ^ -?7? much oliler Uian hla wife, who ia a pr?"*7 J"' f?<*?y?C women, and preferred belts nod *? forbidden pieces lo remain"* le home <"<** meile wi"Ached by ibe curoiw eo<l abuse of a drunken man. Rbe ba< ?wo yonna children He determined lo send bar boo* to ber frieeila m Kentucky tJfllAPrr NAURU#* On Saturday aftermwo a youn* married women attempted to drown herself in the cenel. betweea Rn? end Pinna atreeta but reacued by the cenelipoBce. Aha wn# UUco to Iba Ninth street station bouee. Though hot twenty three year* old, ?be had been merrtad Hi yaura. b?* tier huabend?abo in ion* e bookkeeper la a nflh nAreet M?re ilore?bed tekea to drink end the company of Infhrnooa women. and broken bearte 1, hla poor wlfb ami Id not supportWe loafer. Hie wee, however, taken hoaM by e brother, who la able and wiiiin* to provide Ikr bar. A FtMAI I DOR JtAR. One day laat waek e steamboat captala, reatdtn* in Nevrport, arrived home from e trip to kern that hla wife had during hla abeenoa, deemed hla home A letaar aad two da?uerrer4ypaa of the frail one were left for him. In ItM letter she bade him e kind fkreweU, end raguaatail him M fira one of the dacuerrecAypee to hia brother end tha other lo his oouAln, both of whom she loved bettor lima him. but aha had gone ewer with another whom aba taresl bant of tha three. She bed choeeo a i ertnar, and reennv mended him to I ml'ate her example, end wlabed htm bam plneaa with the woman of hla ctaotoe. No oina ban beaai obtained of her wbereabouta, nor ta It known who la the paramour with whom aha haa to myatarioMty lad. Connecticut FnrtMCW. TV report of Mm HteM comptroller of Ooonecticnlany* the State a In debt $k:,AOT. The eipeneaaof the current year ere sail meted at tAW.jgO M taawM o( twa p? 09M tt ^ 4