The Old Pike Part 41

Quere.--Can bail be given on any other species of property than real estate?

Quere.--Are not these persons indemnified? If so, how? Would it be policy to recognize them as witnesses on the part of the United States?

Quere.--The order is that two sureties in $25,000 each should be furnished--will any other members be taken?

_The United States vs. John F. Braddee._

In the Circuit and District Courts of the United States, for the Western District of Pennsylvania, charged with the larceny of the U. S. mail or mails and stealing therefrom. Hugh Graham, Benjamin Brownfield, Isaac Hague, Henry Smith, Robert Laughlin, Emanuel Brown, Daniel Diamond, Thomas Moxley, Michael Franks, Abraham White, Jacob Humbert, Peter Humbert, Andrew McClelland, Lewis Williams, James McLean, David Chipps, James Dougla.s.s, John Hague, Abraham Brown, Daniel Franks, John McClelland and William Hague acknowledge themselves to be held and firmly bound unto the United States in the sum of sixty thousand dollars each, lawful money of the United States, to be levied of your goods and chattels, lauds and tenements, upon condition that the said John F.

Braddee be and appear at a session of the Circuit Court of the United States to be held at the city of Pittsburg the third Monday in May next, to answer the said charges, and such other matters as shall then and there be preferred against him, and that he shall not depart the court without leave. Taken and acknowledged. _Coram_.

T. IRWIN, _District Judge._ January 28, 1841.

THE INDICTMENT.

In the Circuit Court of the United States of America, holden in and for the Western District of Pennsylvania, at May sessions, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty-one. Western District of Pennsylvania, to-wit:

The grand inquest of the United States of America, inquiring for the Western District of Pennsylvania, upon their oaths and affirmations respectively do present and say: That John F. Braddee, late of said Western District of Pennsylvania, a pract.i.tioner of medicine, did on the twenty-fifth day of January, in the year eighteen hundred and forty, at Uniontown, in the said Western District of Pennsylvania, procure, advise and a.s.sist Peter Mills Strayer to steal, take and carry away the mail of the United States of America, then in progress of transmission from the postoffice in Was.h.i.+ngton City, in the District of Columbia, to the postoffice at Wheeling, in the Western District of Virginia, contrary to the form of the act of Congress of the United States, in such case made and provided, and against the peace, government and dignity of the United States.

C. DARRAGH, _U. S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania_.

True bill--JAMES RIDDLE, Foreman.

May 24th, 1841.--The Grand Jury came into court and presented a bill of indictment against Wm. Purnell for stealing a letter from the mail and other offenses. Same day John F. Braddee by his bail, Hugh Graham, is surrendered into Court and Hugh Graham discharged from his recognizance.

Same day, on the motion of Mr. Austin, and affidavit of John M. Austin, filed, habeas corpus ad satisfaciendum, issued to the jailor and Sheriff of Fayette county for the body of William Collins. United States vs.

John F. Braddee, No. 3 of May Term, 1841. Stealing from the United States mails. And now, to-wit: May 25th, 1841, a jury being called came, to-wit: George Fortune, William Plummer, Samuel Cooper, William Raymond, Edward A. Reynolds, Arnold Eichbaum, James Stewart, John Clemens, Joseph Alexander, Thomas F. Mitch.e.l.l, Thomas S. Cunningham and Samuel A.

Roberts, twelve good and lawful men, duly sworn, summoned and balloted for, and sworn and affirmed, do say on their oaths and affirmations that the defendant is guilty on the first, second and fourth counts in the indictment, and not guilty on the third count. Verdict given on the 4th day of June, 1841. The jury was polled at the instance of defendant's counsel.

EXCEPTIONS.

The Court referred to the trial of Robinson, which had taken place at the present term, and in which some of the jurors now empanneled had rendered a verdict of guilty. It was not pretended that this trial had the remotest connection with the mail robbery at Uniontown, or that the case of Robinson involved any principle of evidence, or consideration as to the credibility of witnesses, a.n.a.logous to the case under consideration; yet the Court asked the jury to reflect how it would look, out of doors, after the conviction of a poor friendless boy like Robinson, to acquit such a prisoner as was then on trial; that it might countenance the reproach which had been cast upon the law of permitting big fish to escape while little ones were caught, and that the Court would be deeply mortified at such an appearance. These remarks, which could afford no possible grounds for salutary reflection, were calculated to make the jury forget their oaths; to lead them away from a conscientious and fearless examination of the testimony to calculations upon the probable opinions of others, founded not upon oath or upon a full hearing of the testimony. This, too, in a case where it had been made to appear that the most infamous attempts were resorted to for the purpose of inflaming the public mind by falsehoods through the press. The jury to reflect that if they took a course unpopular at the moment, the whole odium must rest upon them, and that their characters, motives and conduct would be placed in striking contrast with the more popular tone of the Court.

2. That the Court whilst forbearing altogether to notice, or noticing very slightly, the considerations which took all weight from the testimony of Corman and Strayer (witnesses for the prosecution), told the jury it would be a farce to pay any attention to the testimony of Collins and Owens, witnesses for the accused, although the latter stood infinitely fairer before the jury, and had no such powerful inducements as Corman and Strayer to give false testimony.

3. The offense, if any, established against the prisoner, was that of taking the mail with the consent of the person having charge thereof.

Yet the Court declined to give the prisoner the benefit of this discrimination.

4. The charge of the Court that the testimony of Turk, as to the non-arrival of the mail at New York, derived from the register, was sufficient, without the production of the register or any copy thereof, or extract therefrom.

United States _vs._ Braddee. Reasons in arrest of judgment.

1. The indictment did not pursue the language of the Act of Congress, but mingles together words which in the act are intended to describe different offences. The accused is consequently not apprised of the clause under which he is indicted, and the especial character of the offence which he must prepare himself to meet. These crimes being statutory, must turn altogether on the language of the Act of Congress.

Suppose the same count had charged the accused with robbing, stealing and taking?

The indictment does not allege that the mail stolen or taken contained any valuable thing.

Overruled.

THE SENTENCE.

United States vs. John F. Braddee. May sessions, 1841. Sentence on the first count of the indictment: That you, John F. Braddee, be imprisoned in the Western Penitentiary of Pennsylvania, at hard labor, for and during the term of ten years, and in all respects be subject to the same discipline and treatment as convicts sentenced by the Courts of the State; and that you pay the costs of this prosecution, and stand committed until this sentence be complied with. And while so confined therein you shall be exclusively under the constraint of the officers having charge of said Penitentiary.

DOCKET ENTRIES.

May 27th, 1841.--Test. for United States: J. H. Phillips, J. H. Dicus, Henry H. Beeson, Frederick Byrer, John Keffer, Samuel McLean, Peter Mills Strayer, Amos Jolliff, Samuel Costello, William Wagner. May 28th--Test. for Defendant: John Warner, Thomas Moxley, Adam George, John Hendricks, Uriah Hoke, Aaron Wyatt, James McLean, James Smith, Jacob F.

Brant, Robert Carr, Thomas Rowland, Abraham White, Isaac Hague, Jacob Eckel, Decatur Wolfe. May 29th--Test. for Defendant: John Haney, William Collins, Francis Wilkinson, Jesse King, H. Mitch.e.l.l, David Chipps, Wm.

D. Swearingen, Henry Hally, Margaret Collins, William Purnell, John Imbre, John Campbell, John M. Crane, Alfred Core, Seth Holl, John Woodward, Henry Smith, Matthias C. Baker, James Marinder, Madison Mooney, James Owens. May 31st--Test. for Defendant: Jesse Jones, Wm.

Hall, T. Shaw, William Ebert, Gideon John, Alexander I. Fowler, John F.

Sangston, Benjamin Brownfield. June 1st--Test. for United States: Brown Snyder, George Meason, Robert L. Barry, John Keffer, Alfred McClelland, Ellis Baily, Isaac Nixon, William Nixon, Samuel Nixon, Geo. Rider, J. T.

Williams, Jas. McGayen, Wm. Redd.i.c.k.

June 1. Court took a recess for half an hour. Mr. Black (Col. S. W.), on behalf of the United States, addressed the Court and jury. Mr. William Austin, for defence, addressed the Court and jury. Mr. Darragh, district attorney, addressed the Court and jury. June 2. Mr. Darragh continued and concluded his address. Mr. McCandless, for defense, addressed the Court and jury; Court took a recess for half an hour. Mr. McCandless continued and concluded his address. Mr. Biddle, for the defense, commenced his address to the Court and jury. June 8. Mr. Biddle continued and concluded his address. Mr. Loomis, on behalf of the United States, commenced his address to the Court and jury. The jury, having been charged by Judge Baldwin, retired. Same day rendered a verdict as before mentioned. Mr. McCandless moved the Court in arrest of judgment and for a new trial.

June 5. Affidavits as to the owners.h.i.+p of a portion of the money in the hands of Messrs. Darragh and Kennedy filed. Mr. Finley for Edward H.

Brags, moves to take the money out of Court found in the mail stolen, and identified by the affidavits filed. Same gentleman makes the same motion for John J. Young. Both motions referred by the Court to Messrs.

Darragh and Kennedy as auditors. Amos Jolliff discharged from his recognizance to attend as a witness. The following report was made to the Court by Messrs. Darragh and Kennedy viz: Pittsburg, June 5, 1841.

The undersigned beg leave to report that they have paid out on affidavits to individuals claiming, or their order, the following sums from the money recovered on the premises of John F. Braddee: E. H.

Pandell, $250; Timothy Goodman, $1,060; Silas D. Force, $100; James Sproul, $690; H. S. Abbott, $647.10; Sibbett & Jones, $1,127; Haney St.

John, $1,455; B. S. Williams, $30; G. G. Moore, $170; A. H. Bangs, $934.90; John S. Young, $190; Chas. S. Bradford, $300; in all $7,154.60.

Whole amount recovered, $10,398.60, leaving $3,244 undistributed.

Report of auditors confirmed, and claimants who have been paid are directed to give receipts, and the balance unclaimed be deposited in the Bank of Pittsburg to abide the further order of the Court.

United States vs. William Purnell. Wm. Freeman, James McCune, O. T.

Moore, H. H. Turk, A. McClelland and William Crawford each bound in a recognizance of $500 to appear at the next term of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania, on the 3d Monday of November next, to testify in the above case. J. M. Austin moves the Court to direct the Marshal to pay the witnesses subp[oe]naed on the part of the defendant in the case of the United States _vs._ John F. Braddee. Court refused, and ordered that the expenses of compulsory process be paid to the officers by the United States.

United States _vs._ William Purnell. Defendant tent in $4,000 on condition that he be and appear at the next term of the Circuit Court of the United States, to be held in the city of Pittsburg, on the first Monday of November, next. James L. Bugh, Benjamin Watson and John Hendricks each tent in $1,000 on condition that defendant be and appear as aforesaid.

June 7. The Court overruled the motion for a new trial in the case of the United States _vs_. Braddee, and also a motion by John M. Austin, esq., to postpone sentence, and the Court sentenced the defendant as before mentioned.

November 16, 1841. The United States vs. Margaret Collins. Stealing from the United States mails. Witnesses sworn before the grand jury: E. S.

Harris, Johnze Dicus, A. McClelland, D. H. Phillips, William Ebert, John P. Sturgis, Henry H. Beeson, Abraham Alexander and Dr. Howard Kennedy.

Same _vs._ Same. Charged with receiving a $500 Treasury note, stolen from the mail, knowing the same to have been stolen.

November 17. Recognizance of William Purnell and his sureties called and forfeited, and the witnesses in this case discharged from their recognizances. The grand jury came into Court and presented true bills of indictment against Margaret Collins.

November 22. Defendant pleads not guilty. Tried and jury could not agree, and were discharged. Margaret Collins was Braddee's mother-in-law. Purnell and Corman were pardoned by the President before trial.