Articles from the New York Daily Herald covering the first trial of McGuire, Allen, Hudson, McGloin and Grady in Danbury. These are hand-transcribed, and I tried to keep the original spelling and punctation wherever possible. Please let me know if you notice any errors.
The Adams Express Robbery.
Our Danbury Correspondence.
Trial of the Perpetrators at Danbury, Conn. – An Unexpected Witness – Interesting Details of the Robbery, &c.
Danbury, August 29, 1866.
At nine o’clock this morning the Court House was even more densely crowded than yesterday. The first two witnesses called were Superintendent Spooner and Mr. Washington Webb. The latter is the agent at New Haven of the Adams Express Company. Their evidence was short and referred for the most part to the identification of certain articles and persons. Just as Mr. Webb sat down the
Unwished and Unexpected Arrival
of a witness for the plaintiffs produced a marked sensation in the court room, filled the breasts of the defending counsel with disappointment and vexation, and sent despair and consternation to the hearts of the unhappy prisoners. This was none other than Thomas Kenyon, better known in this case under the alias of Thomas Clark. This person, it will be recollected, was arrested shortly after the robbery, tried several months ago at Bridgeport, convicted and sentenced to the State Prison for five years; but owing to a writ of error filed by his counsel the carrying out of the sentence was delayed until the proper court should decide as to the merits of the writ. Clark, however, became tired of prison life and prison fare, and determined to turn State’s evidence against his pals.
His testimony was rendered in a confident, straight-forward manner, and he did not appear in the least disconcerted by the rigid and close cross-examination to which he was subjected. I might here say that the counsel for the prisoners were completely thunderstruck and thrown off their guard, as the unexpected arrival of Clark as a witness will alter all their matured lines of defence. However, they very soon recovered their equanimity, and all day have been using their legal skill to invalidate the evidence of Clark.
The Details of the Robbery
Clark said: – My connection with this robbery commenced on or about the 20th day of December last; I met Martin Allen at the corner of Prince and Mercer streets; he told me that his brother-in-law, James Welles, had an acquaintance by the name of Gilly McGloin, and that Gilly had a brother-in-law by the name of Grady, a brakeman on the express train of the New York and New Haven Railroad which left New York at eight o’clock P.M.; and that Grady wanted him (McGloin) to get somebody to help throw the safes out of that train; it was for this purpose that McGloin went to Welles; Welles told Allen and Allen told me; the next day Allen, Welles, McGloin and Grady met me at Lafayette Hall, a drinking and billiard saloon on Broadway; this was, as far as I can judge, on or about the 21st day of December; at that interview Grady produced a piece of soap, on which was the impression of a keyhole, which he said was that of the keyhole in the lock of the Adams Express car; Grady said in the course of the conference that there were two messengers who looked after the car alternately; one, named Moore, was the most careless; his (Moore’s) evenings were Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, and Grady, therefore, thought these would be the best days to commit the robbery.
After some evidence as to the prefatory arrangements the witness continued: – The next night that Moore had charge of the express car I got on the train at Forty-second street and went into the smoking car; there was a man there making a fire; in a few moments Grady came in and slapped this man on the back, saying at the same time, “Billy Moore, you don’t know how to make a fire;” thus it was I knew the messenger; the place I selected to throw off the safes was between Coscob bridge and Stamford; I hit upon this spot for an obvious reason – viz: because it was only a short distance there between stoppages; it is about three miles from Coscob bridge to Stamford; at Bridgeport I got off the train; stopped at the Atlantic Hotel that night, and went back to New York by the ten o’clock train in the morning.
A New Plan
I think it was on the same day that the parties I mentioned before had a second interview at Lafayette Hall; at this conference we arranged a plan to get the safes out at Forty-second street; the next day Allen, Grady and I met at Forty-second street, where we got the size of the lock on the Adams Express car.
They Buy Hardware.
The next day Allen and I visited nearly every hardware store in New York, for the purpose of purchasing a lock similar to that on the car; the nearest to it in appearance was found in a store on Howard street, between Crosby and Broadway; we wanted this lock to put on the door of the car after breaking the other one off; the same day Allen and Welles went to the same store and bought a sledge hammer; on the evening of the same day Allen went to Crowe’s livery stable, and hired a horse and a heavy express wagon; I forgot to mention that some time before this Allen and I went to a blacksmith shop at the corner of Hudson and Canal streets and had a piece of steel made into shape for the purpose of prying off the lock of the car.
They Hit on a New Plan.
I think it was the next day after this last attempt that Allen, Welles, McGloin, Grady and myself had an interview at Lafayette Hall, when we arranged to abandon the plan of taking off the safes at Forty-second street; I wish to state here that Tristram, Hudson and McGuire were never present during our conferences at Lafayette Hall; I used to meet McGuire and tell him what transpired, and he used to convey the intelligence to Tristram and Hudson; the new plan was, that three of us were to secrete ourselves in the express car during its brief stay at Forty-second street, and the other five to go in the passenger cars; the three were to throw off the safes after the train got over Harlem bridge; the five were to get off at the bridge; after the three had thrown off the safes, they were to ring the bell, stop the train, get off and walk back till they met the others; they were then to take the safes to some convenient place, break them open and pack the money and valuables in two valises, which they had with them, and leave the safes there; on the night of the 6th of January we, that is the eight of us mentioned before, met by previous agreement about seven o’clock in th evening, near the depot at Forty-second street; McGuire fetched with him two carpet bags, a marling spike and a common mortising chisel; the others of us had a pieceof steel, a lock, a sledge hammer and dark lantern.
In the Car at Last.
Hudson, Grady, McGuire and myself got in between the express car and freight train and managed to break the lock with the marling spike; we then drew back the door and three of us got in; these were Grady, McGuire and myself; Hudson then drew the door to and placed the lock in the staple but not in the hasp; this was to save appearances; we sat quietly until the train got in the tunnel between New York and Harlem; we found three safes in the car; we got one of them over and tried to break in its bottom with a sledge hammer, but this we found would not work; we then took the marling spike, drove it into the door of the safe and thus pried it open; McGuire held the spike, I and Grady knocked it in; having packed the contents of this in a carpet bag, we broke open another safe, the contents of which we also packed away; the reason we did not get out after passing Harlem bridge was because we discovered after getting into the car that the rope was in an iron tube, and the prevented our stopping the car; at Coscob station we got out and hid one of our bags in a pile of lumber; we then walked up the track about a mile toward Stamford where we his in a stone wall the large carpet bag; the three of us then, unencumbered, walked to Stamford; here Grady lived; he wished us to go to a barn, and said he would bring us something to eat; but McGuire and I thought it best to go back to New York as soon as possible, so we got aboard a freight train, from there; going to New York we sat in different parts of the car and did not speak; the train stopped for some reason or other at 120th street, and here McGuire and I got out; we then made the best of our way to Tristram’s house, in Horatio street; here we met Allen, Hudson and Tristram; they told us that they had got o the car, as agreed, and got off at Harlem bridge, and had walked up the track about six miles, but failing to fall in with us had become disgusted and returned home; that evening Tristram, McGuire and I started for Norwalk in the five o’clock train; we all got off at Stamford, and I went to Mr. Brown, who keeps a livery stable, for the purpose of hiring a horse and wagon so that we might remove the stolen property; I told Mr. Brown I was going to Norwalk, but it was so cold he would not hire his horses; we could not get a horse at Stamford, so we arranged to take the next train for Norwalk; we reached Norwalk the next day and stopped at the house of old Josiah Tristram till Tuesday evening.
The Arrest.
On Monday evening we were joined by Hudson; he came to the house with Tristram in a rockaway carriage; we then went to Cosob bridge, got the hidden bags and returned to Tristram’s house; we here unpacked and then repacked the bags, tying a couple of skate straps about them to as to be handy for Josiah Tristram to carry them to New York the next day, January 9; we remained here till Tuesday evening, when we were arrested. Clark was here subjected to a severe cross examination by Judge Stuart, who succeeded in eliciting from the witness many facts as to his previous history.
The Adams Express Robbery.
Our Danbury Correspondence.
Third Day’s Proceedings – Testimony Corroborative of Clark’s Evidence – Scenes in Court, &c.
Danbury, August 30, 1866
Sketch of Clark’s Life
As intimated in my letter of yesterday Judge Stuart in his cross examination succeeded in drawing fro the robber Penyon or Clark a brief sketch of his antecedents. He is now twenty-five years of age and was born in the town of Oswego, State of New York. He staid in his native town until he was nineteen years of age, at which period, in the year 1861, and about the breaking out of the war, he entered the army. He enlisted in the Twenty-fourth New York infantry, went to Elmira, thence to Washington. He served for two years, and participated in some of the severe battles of the early period of the war. Clark asserts, most positively, that he was honorably discharged, and that although for the remaining two years of the war he was engaged in the bounty brokerage business, having his headquarters at Elmira, he was never arrested for bounty jumping. During these two years that he was in business, he says that he may have enlisted twenty-five, fifty, or perhaps a hundred men. Since the peace he has not done anything for two years, living during the greater part of that time in New York city. The witness objected very much to tell with whom he boarded during that time, as the people were very respectable and his connection with them might bring them into disrepute. The name he bore while in New York was Thomas Clark. He denied having anything to do with the Adams Express robbery five years ago, and steadfastly disclaimed all participation in many crimes and misdemeanors in which he was tried to be implicated. He denied to Judge Stuart most emphatically that he had ever been convicted of a felony in any part of Pennsylvania, but afterwards admitted to Recorder Smith that he was, during the war, arrested, being found in the company of a man who shot a deserter; that he was confined in the jail at Tunkhannock, Pa., and escaped therefrom before being brought to trial. While in Pennsylvania he went under the name of Thomas Smith.
How He Escaped
He found in one of the cells of his prison an old auger, with which he bored through the boards in the floor of one corner of his cell. Through an opening thus effected he jumped down under the prison wall, and after a good deal of hard work and perseverance he managed to dig himself out. This was the only time, according to his own statement, that he was arrested in his life, until the perpetration of this robbery.
Scenes in Court
The progress of the trial was rather slow to-day, owing to several interruptions. The laws of this State require that in all cases of crime, when the punishment is death or imprisonment for life, a grand jury shall pass upon the case and find an indictment or refuse to find one as the facts may require. In all other cases of crime the offender is prosecuted on the information or complaint of the State Attorney. Several prisoners now confined in the jail here charged with offenses which are punishable by imprisonment for life. A grand jury were called in this morning, and a charge delivered to them by Judge Pardee.
This is also motion day, and all the lawyers in the county are in attendance. This is also seized as an occasion for disposing of divorce cases when there is no appearance for the respondent. Several of them have been heard to-day. Widows and widowers are made with remarkable celerity. The grim messenger seldom performs his office in a briefer space of time. Some of the poor women who desired to have the tie of Hymen cut had melancholy tales of cruelty and ill-usage suffered from the hands of their lords. The husband of one was a drunkard and beat her. Another had a “man” who would not support her. A third was unfaithful to his marriage bed. One tall young farmer called upon to testify as to the habits of the intemperate one averred that “he see him drunk, but didn’t think he ever see him dead drunk.”
The Court House is, this afternoon, more thronged with both sexes, particularly the ladies, than at any other time. Every inch of space is occupied. Many a fair damsel who is so unfortunate as to arrive late is compelled to stand on the back seats in order to obtain a view of the criminals and lawyers. The old lady who brings her knitting, and the young one with her crochet, have had to desist from their occupations for want of elbow room, and the young ladies have very few facilities for a vigorous use of the fan, which, from the extreme warmth and closeness of the room, is in constant requisition.
Witness Examined
There were goodly number of witnesses for the prosecution examined to-day. The examination of each took up but a very short time. Their evidence throws but little new light upon the transaction, being merely corroborative of the testimony of Clark.
The Adams Express Robbery.
Our Danbury (Conn.) Correspondence.
Third Day’s Proceedings – ?? of a Detective’s Life, Moral and Immoral – Indignation of a Sweet-heart – Prospect of Fun Next Week
Danbury, August 31, 1866
The court to-day succeeded in disposing of the witnesses for the State. There were some fifteen who gave testimony, which was merely corroborative of the evidence of Clark. Two of the detectives, who had been engaged in ferreting out the matter, were placed on the stand. What they had to say was of a highly interesting character. Detective Hale’s testimony embodied a sketch of how thieves live and what opinions they hold on a variety of subjects. For instance, it is quite common to hear a question of honor discussed among the fraternity, and the wives and paramours of the light-fingered gentry insist upon calling the party of their choice “a perfect gentleman.” The manager in which this officer obtained his information exhibits a good deal of professional skill and hardihood, but some minds may question the morality of the plan adopted. He succeeded in obtaining board in the family of the prisoner, Welles. Here he lived for several months; became the bosom friend of the young robber; and was treated with much consideration and kindness by the prisoner’s mother and other members of the household.
In order to arrive at the information of which he as in quest, it became necessary for him to assume the character and bearing of one, who, though not actually steeped in crime, was rather a proficeat in some branches. To gain the confidence of young Welles we frequently find him boasting of the robberies he had been concerned in, how skillfully he had executed this “little arrangements,” and how successful he was in that. He had to say that he was engaged in some business, and thought proper to tell his dupes that he was clerk in the cashier’s office of the Erie Railroad Company. Welles hinted to him that his position might give him an opportunity of doing a good thing for them both and observed that he would be very happy to receive anything that his nice young friend might steal. The nice “young friend” got out of this rather practical test of his appropriating powers by declaring that he was working up quietly “just about one of the sweetest little things in the world; and for him (Welles) to keep dark; he would soon see the upshot of his deep designs.” In this way he worked himself into the confidence of the young robber, and after a time succeeded in worming from him the secret of his guilt. In company with Welles he visited a number of the low dens in New York and Brooklyn where thieves and prostitutes “most do congregate.” In these vile resorts he had many noted characters pointed out to him; men who are expert as pickpockets, knucks, lifters, sneak thieves, riggers, &c; but more particularly was he called upon to take note of the personnel of the other parties, who, he was told, were engaged in the Adams Express robbery. Welles said the other prisoners were taken all aback when they discovered that their quondam friend and, as they thought, to a certain extent partner in guilt, took the stand to testify against them. One of the young lady witnesses for the defence, and a particular friend of the Welles family, could hardly control her indignation while the bland detective unfolded his story. After the adjournment of the court her temper got the better of her discretion; and meeting the young officer in front of Barnum’s Hotel she “opened out” on him in fine style, giving him several broadsides with woman’s favorite weapon. What she told him to repeat here “might not solace ears polite.”
Shortly after two o’clock, all the witnesses for the State having been examined, the court adjourned until nine o’clock on Tuesday morning. At the trial next week it is supposed that there will be lively times. There are an extraordinary number of witnesses for the defence; and it said that some new parties will appear in favor of the prisoners hitherto unthought of.
This week Danbury has been crowded with the aristocratic portion of the New York pilfering fraternity, who take a deep interest in the disposal of this case. Nearly every one of the prisoners has a wife, a sweetheart or a mother present; and at the close of each day’s proceedings the unhappy ladies crowd around the “box” sympathizing and mixing tears with their unfortunate relatives.
The Adams Express Robbery.
Our Danbury Correspondence.
Fifth Day’s Proceedings – Witnesses for the Defence – They Try to Prove an Alibi
Danbury, Conn. Sept. 4, 1866
The trial of the Adams Express robbers was resumed this morning at nine o’clock.
Owing to a rainstorm during the forenoon there were, in comparison with the attendance last week, but very few spectators present. Nevertheless the young lady with her fancy work, and the old lady with her knitting, were found in their places, as they have been since the opening of the case. As remarked in my letter of Friday last, the examination of the witnesses for the defence was taken up the first thing this morning.
Grady’s father was the first called to the stand. He was interrogated by Judge Smith [defense counsel], and afterwards closely cross-examined by Senator Ferry.
He gave his evidence in a straightforward manner, swearing positively that his son, John G. Grady, came to his house at Stamford, on Saturday, the 6th of January, the night of the robbery, between the hours of eight and nine o’clock P.M., that he went to bed at ten; got up in the morning early, took his breakfast about half-past seven, and was at home all the following day. The robbery, it will be recollected, occurred on the train on which Grady acted as brakeman. His father stated that John did not come on his own train on the evening in question, but reached Stamford on a train that arrived there about eight o’clock. The witness admitted that he told Mr. Hoyt, the Superintendent of the New York and New Haven Road, a different story that he now told the Court, but asserted that he was compelled to tell this lie by Mr. Hoyt’s putting insulting questions to him, and making disparaging remarks regarding his child. He told Mr. Hoyt that John was not home in the evening, but that he was home in the morning. Mr. Grady is an Irishman, considerably advanced in years, and while giving his evidence appeared to be considerably moved.
The next witness called was Thomas Grady, the brother of the prisoner. This witness was a bright youth of thirteen. He said that on the day of the robbery he was sent to New York by his father to buy some groceries, and that he should return to Stamford in the evening by the express train, on which his brother was brakeman; he reached New York and followed out his instructions to the letter; at the depot in New York or on the train he saw nothing of his brother, but when he reached home in the evening, which was some time before ten o’clock, he found his brother John with the other members of the family at home; he first heard of the robbery on the Sunday following while at church with his father.
The next witness called was Mr. Robert Wilson, a shoemaker at Stamford. He stated that on Saturday evening the 6th of January, he met the prisoner Grady in front of the Union House somewhere between eight and nine o’clock; that after some preliminary conversation the prisoner told him he wanted a pair of boots amended; that they went to the shop; he examined the boots and the prisoner left them with him, after this they had a drink and he left the prisoner in front of the saloon, he (witness) going home.
The next witness was George Anderson, a painter, doing business at Stamford. He testified that he saw Grady in the drinking saloon at Stamford on the evening of the 6th of January. The above were all witnesses called especially to testify with regard to Grady. The witnesses for Allen and Welles were next ordered to take the stand. The first of these was Mrs. Wells, mother of the prisoner of that name, and mother-in-law to Martin Allen. She is a tall, fine looking woman. She was dressed in deep mourning, and appeared to be much troubled. She averred most solemnly that on the night of the robbery, and all the subsequent day and evening, her son Wells and her son-in-law Allen, were in her house. She recollects their being home particularly, from the circumstance that on that evening her daughter, Mrs. Maffatt, who resided with her, was taken seriously ill; her son James sat up all night in readiness to go for the doctor at any moment; he daughter continued ill until the 16th of January, at which time she was delivered of a child. Many particulars with regard to other members of Mrs. Welles’ household were elicited by the counsel for the State. An effort was made to throw discredit on the characters of Mrs. Smith and a Miss Master, but so far as the testimony of Mrs. Welles is concerned it proved abortive. The next witness was Eliza Smith. It appears that she is the wife of a New York policeman and lived in Brooklyn with her sister, Mrs. Welles. Her testimony went to corroborate all that the last witness had said with regard to the whereabouts of Welles and Allen, during the 6th of January and the Sunday following.
Mrs. Martin Allen was next called to testify regarding her mother, Mrs. Welles, but the Court ruled that her testimony – she being the wife of one of the parties implicated in the robbery – was inadmissible.
Mr. and Mrs. Maffatt were next called. Their testimony was entirely corroborative of that of Mrs. Welles.
[Immediately following, a letter to the editor dated September 1]
The man Clark, who is State’s evidence in the Adams Express robbery trial now taking place at Danbury, Conn., escaped from jail at Tunkhannock, Wyoming county [Pennsylvania], in the fall of 1864, by tunnelling, something after the manner of a ground hog. He and three others were substitute brokers, had a number of negroes with them, and one of the negroes attempting to escape was shot by them and had his brains beaten out with a stone, the three taking an active part. They were arrested and one of them was brought to trial and sentenced to a term at the Eastern Penitentiary at Philadelphia, where is not doing the State some service. He escaped at Philadelphia from the Sheriff, as they were leaving the cars for the prison; was subsequently arrested at Washington, D. C., and safely lodged in prison. During the absence of the Sheriff with this prisoner, Clark and his partner escaped, as stated, and his whereabouts had been a mystery until the present development. The people of Wyoming county are anxious to furnish him with a residence for a time, and it is to be hoped that they will be expeditious in their charity. The murder was most brutal, and the gallows has been cheated of its rights. It is a sad commentary that such villains as he should be permitted to go free on the score of testifying against others.
I have no other than a public interest in this matter and hope, with all law abiding people, that justice will not be tardily meted to him.
J.L.O.
Adams Express Robbery.
Our Danbury Correspondence.
Sixth Day’s Proceedings – Evidence for the Defence Concluded, &c.
Danbury, Sept. 5, 1866
Last evening, after the mailing of my letter, Mr. Hoyt, Superintendent of the New York and New Haven Railroad, was called by the State, to rebut the testimony of the old man Grady, regarding certain conversations which he (Grady) alleged took place between him and Mr. Hoyt. Mr. Hoyt stated that a short time after the robbery he met Grady, who said to him, “What is this that has happened John?” The witness told him that he was afraid he had not brought him up properly. Grady said “Yes I did, sir; I learned him to pray.” He also told witness that he had not seen his son on the night of the robbery, although he found him in the house the next morning at breakfast time. The witness acknowledged that he was a stockholder in the Adams Express Company, but would not tell to what amount. The Court ruled that he had a right to keep this information to himself.
Mrs. Catharine Miller, a sister of the prisoner McGuire, testified that her father was a desk maker, and worked with a man in Liberty street, New York.
This morning the examination of the witnesses for the alibi in the case of McGuire was continued. There were a number of these men and women. Mrs. Dibbles, Miss Gale, Miss Slanin and Mr. Barnett, all swore positively to being in the company of McGuire at the Winter Garden Theatre on the evening of the sixth of January last, which it will be recollected, was the evening of the robbery.
Thomas Nelligan was the last witness called. He keeps a liquor store on the corner of Houston and Varick streets. He stated that McGuire was in the habit of coming frequently into his shop, and that on the Sunday morning succeeding the robbery he came to his house and stayed until two o’clock that day.
The first part of this afternoon’s session was taken up by wrangling among the lawyers, as to whether the case should be proceeded with or the court adjourned until one or two witnesses, whose testimony was deemed important, should arrive. It was at last agreed that the testimony should be taken at another time during the trial. Senator Ferry then proceeded to sum up on behalf of the State. He went over the whole story of the robbery, as detailed by Clark and already laid in full before the readers of the Herald.
The court house this afternoon is crowded. The ladies are so numerous that their many fans, in constant motion, keep up a refreshing current of air through the close rooms.
The Adams Express Robbery.
Our Danbury Correspondence.
The Last Day of the Trial – Arguments of Counsel on Both Sides – The Jury Disagree – Closing Scenes, &c, &c.
Danbury, Sept. 8, 1866
This afternoon the trial of the Adams Express robbers was brought to a close.
The day has been particularly fine, and as usual the court room was crowded with the ladies of the town, and the female relatives of the prisoners. THe former came incited by curiosity to see the gaily dressed young culprits in the dock, who have been objects of especial interest and sympathy to the young of the weaker sex ever since the commencement of the session, but the latter were present from far different and weightier motives. Mrs. Welles and the other members of her interesting family appeared excited and troubled, as they watched earnestly the countenance of the Judge, and listened breathlessly to the impassioned pleadings of the counsel. Each of the prisoners had either wife or sweetheart in the court, and the glances of alternate hope and fear which were exchanged between them and the occupants of the dock, bespoke a world of affection and tender solicitude.
Arguments for the Defence
Yesterday Judge Stuart concluded an elaborate argument for the defence. He went through all the evidence which had been given on both sides, commenting thereon at length, and showing the bearing of the law upon each important point. Ex-Recorder Smith followed Judge Stuart, making the same points, and many others touching the case of “Neddy McGuire,” for whom he is more particularly counsel. Two of the most important points presented by Judge Stuart were: – First, that the act of January 3, 1866, chapter seventy-three, of the laws of Connecticut, repeals the statute in existence at the time this offence was committed, and against which it is alleged the prisoners offended, and that they must, therefore, be discharged. Secondly – That Allen, Welles and McGlain were, as proven by the prosecution, in the city of New York at the time Clark and others robbed the express car in Connecticut, and that, therefore, although they might be accessories before the fact in the State of New York, yet they could not be tried as principals in the positive larceny that was perpetrated in the State of Connecticut. It was also attempted to be shown by the counsel for the defence that no reliance should be placed in the testimony of Clark, whose evidence forms the backbone of the entire prosecution; that he was an admitted felon, a man of bad character generally, and one who had an object – his liberty – in securing the conviction of the prisoners, and, therefore, he was not entitled to credence. Mr. Smith was followed, on behalf of the State, by Mr. S. B. Brindsley, of Bridgeport.
His speech was argumentative, pointed and well delivered. He maintained that Clark’s statement was entitled to credit, every material point of it having been corroborated by other witnesses of undoubted standing and integrity, and who could not possibly have any object in colluding with a felon to procure the conviction of five young men against whom they had no malice. He also dwelt upon the amount of faith that should be placed in the testimony of the detective, Hale, warmly approving the conduct of that young man, and eulogizing the National Police Agency, terming it the best institution of the kind in the country.
Mr. Brindsley met the law points raised by Judge Stuart. He held the opinion that the act of January 3, 1866 did not repeat the entire act under which the prisoners were being tried, but that it only repealed “Acts and parts of acts in?? therewith,” and therefore that the argument of Judge Stuart, in reference to the section of the general statute unrepealed, by the act of the 3d of January, had no weight whatever.
(It will be recollected, as mentioned in my first letter, in the indictment, prepared by the prosecution in this case, the amount stolen was put under the sum of $2,000, so as to bring the offence within the pale of the unrepealed section of the old statute referred to by Mr. Brindsley.
Mr. Chapman closed the case for the defence in a speech which, for sarcasm, well directed argument and wit, surpassed all that preceded it. The Adams Express Company and Pinkerton’s National Police Agency were held up to ridicule and scorn; the former was characterized as arbitrary, malignant and tyrannical in the prosecution of this case, while the latter were proclaimed to be a self-constituted band of spies and informers.
Judge Pardee delivered an exhaustive charge to the jury. He weighed nicely and pointed out the degrees of faith that should be placed in the witnesses of each side, telling the jury that with regard to Clark, he was not entitled to credit, save where his testimony had been amply verified by other witnesses of unexceptionable character. With regard to the witnesses for the defence, he considered that the jurors themselves would be the best judges as to what they said being true or false.
After the charge the jury retired for deliberation, and returned in about two hours with the tiding that they could not agree. The Judge sent them back for further consideration, but they returned again in a short time, not having arrived at any more definite result. The court was then adjourned until Monday morning, at nine o’clock, the jury taking the interim for reflection and consultation. If at that time they still remain of the same opinion, a new trial will be ordered to take place, probably at Bridgeport in October next.
The prisoners and their friends appeared to be much gratified with the disagreement.
The Adams Express Robbery.
The Jury Are Finally Dismissed Without Bringing in a Verdict -- Joy of the Prisoners, &c, &c.
Danbury, Conn., Sept 11, 1866
At the meeting of the Court this morning, the jury sitting ont he case of the Adams Express robbers were again brought in by order of Judge Pardee. They once more stated that they had arrived at no unanimity of opinion, and thought there was little probability of such a result, the views of the differing members being widely divergent in the matter. Eight stood for the conviction of the prisoners, four for an unqualified acquittal.
The jury were then discharged. The prisoners and their counsel are very well satisfied with the result, being fully of the opinion that at the next trial in October their acquittal is certain.
Judge Stuart filed a motion to reduce the bail of the prisoners.