{"newspaper_name": "The New York herald.", "edition": "01", "page": "p3", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 1971, "word_count": 340, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9699000120162964], "ccnet_perplexity": [1356.699951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Before the Recorder and Aldermen Cozzeps and Gale


Fee. l7-T,ial Of Samuel adams Resumed Upon the
opening Of the Court the trial of this resumed
The question before the Court objection hav


ing the three drafts accompanying receipt offered in evil
dence the ground of between the instru-
men!s themselves and the averment in the Indictment


Mr. SrANssuRY said that after consultation of counsel
they had that the variance did apply TO the
third count Of the indictment alone but the variance
ran through the whole counts In arguing that
point the question of jurisdiction would also come up
and the intention of the defence argue that also
He held that the most fatal variance in the third
count, which recites that certain draft &c SC where.
as, fact. there three drafts The next question
that OF venue the Indictment setting forth that the
offence was committed by Samual Adams merchant of
the first ward othe city and county Of New York
as should have been set forth that Samuel Adams of
Chilicoihe Ohio, to wit of the frat ward Sc Mr. con.
tended that although the missr cling of word or
omission OF letter, when it does not affect the subsistence
that in the Of the word draft the omission of the
hnal gave 1t an entirely different meaning He cited
many authorities to support his position and conducted
the argument with graat cearness and ability


DIR. PATTERSON and Mr. WHITING replied to the defence
and maintained that the varances were not fatal and
that the question Of want of only applied to one
the counts IN the Indictment and that was not sound
objection. They also cited an abundance Of authorities
which they contendsd supported their side Of the ques


Mr. WooD closed the argument which occupied the AZ.
tenton OF the Court the entire day II purely tech.
nicai and very dry, Notwithstanding the great ability
with which was conducted The Court their
decision till tomorrow morning. David Graham, Esq
appeared also for the defence to-day Adjourned