{"newspaper_name": "The daily union.", "edition": "01", "page": "p3", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 2240, "word_count": 401, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9854000210762024], "ccnet_perplexity": [803.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
THE CASE OF TIRRELL The trial for murder in
Boston closed on Saturday about noon, after able
arguments by Mr.. Choate, in defence of the prison.
er, and Mr.. Parker for the Commonw wealth Mr..
Choate, in his defence, maintained that there was
nothing in the evidence to show that the death of
Mrs. Bickford was not brought about by her own
act but that, considering her of life and other
circumstances, such a supposltion was more than
probable; that there was not particle Of evidence
Inconsistent with beefthat third party had done
the deed; and that if it done by Trrell, it must
have been done when in one of his somnambulic
states. He urged upon the jury the necessity Of
great caution in case admitting Of so much
doubt.


Mr.. Parker, for the government, objected to the
novel ground of defence which had been set up by
the prisoners counsel He considered it as an at
tempt to establish precedent in the criminal law of
this Commonwealth, which dangerous to socie-
ty and to individuals. He warned the jury to be
guided only by sense of their solemn duty, and the
obligation Of their oath, and not by their sympathy
for the prisoner or his friends That they stood be-
tween the living and the dead and that the claims of
justice must and ought, for the safety of society, TO
be satisfied. The propositions, which he supported
by analysis of the evidence, were-that homicide
committed by human hands; that it was not su-
icde; that it was not committed by usual and
slant resident of the house where the act was done;
that it was done by the prisoner; that the act was
unjusti6abe; that it feonious death, and that
II was murder.


At the opening of the court on Saturday morning,
Judge Dewey commenced his charge to the jury 1t
occupied upwards of two hours. The jury retired
at quarter before eeven-and at one o'clock they
returned with verdict Of not gully. The ground
Of their verdict is understood to be want Of proof
and not somnambulism. The prisoner was dis
charged from this Indictment but ordered to be
remanded upon the charge of arson, which rests
upon the same evidence.


The excitement was intense in and about the
courthouse, the crowd raising immense shout as
he was carried off.


JNsp York Evening Post Of March 30.