{"newspaper_name": "The New York herald.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 2311, "word_count": 421, "ccnet_language_score": [0.98089998960495], "ccnet_perplexity": [1777.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Crlme, than fen
years, and might be for life whereas could not be
sustained the charge against his client would be merely
resistance to the Sheriff for which the penalty might
as little a. two years The statute defined the nature of
propsry such would constitute robbery and those pa
pers being only Of value in relation to these lands they
clearly were not OF such kind Mr. Jordan then quoted
wherein was shown that II was not an ndctable Of


fence to puroin things only valuable In their relation to
others put Of no worth in themselves, such bonds
nstes deeds OF estates to settle boundaries Of
manors &C.: also from 9th johnson page 1854 case in
which manwas suodfor stealing of
the value Soo prisoner scknowl.dged he took away
prsme Court decided was not petty larceny nor any
other offence Of which the criminal sessions had cogn
value. II bond Be mot Of value anv man Of common
sense would say that distress warrant was not By
the British construction Of the common law taking
would be found recaptulated In the act OF
lsa7, as found in appendix to Chtty sec g. The
struction Of our statnte found in ID revised atutes
page 664 sec b5, was that the feouiosy taking man
personal property against his will or putting him ia fear
Of injury to his person. should be adudssd guilty Of rob-
sssy rsiscnsi i defined e bs chses
berry to take what not personal property and only Of


relative value Not word said Of distress warrants
be and If these were the law although Dr. b.
frightened the Sheriff till his knees trenbled like Bal
shazzars he could not be convicted He did not blame


ing told by the District Attorney whose zeal to discharge
his duty unbounded and marvellous that II was reb
berry to shten his cousin, the Sheriff. and that any law
was good enough for Big Thunder but they the jury)
there TO try Dr. b and look into the law which
perhaps the District Attorney did not That body
did resist the Sheriff was not denied but that robbery
committed was unquestionable, and having thus i'm.
ported to them correct view Of the case he would next
proceed to lay the evidence before them.


Mr.. JoRDAN after calling Colonel Roet and reading
Boushton deny his having taken the papers from the
sheriff asked Col. Root did he reoolect Il Col Root
was still unable as on the previous day to rsoollsst the