The New York Herald Newspaper, April 17, 1859, Page 1

WHOLE NO. 8260. THE WASHINGTON TRAGEDY. Prial of Daniel E, Sickles for the Kill- ing of Philip Barton Key. The Question of the Admission of Evi- dence of Adultery. Spirited Arguments of Counsel on the Subject, Rey dee Bey SPECIAL REPORT TO THE HERALD. ‘Wasumoron, April 16, 1859. ‘Tho whole day has been consumed in a spirited disous- sien on tho admission of evidence, The prosecution have Deen out-generalled, as the defence have managed to get in evidence which has carried Mr. Key and Mrs, Sickles ‘up to the door of the assignation house. Startled at this the prosecution jumped up yesterday and objectod, The defence now turn upon them with the question why they allowed them to go this length and then stop themon the Shreshold of guilt? ‘Tho Court has got into a false position. If it rule out farther testimony the jury will suspect its impartiality, ‘and the effect ont of doors will be unfavorable, If the ‘Court let in the evidence, the crime of adultery will be proved. What if it be proved, exclaim the prosecution, that docs not justify the homicide! Why, then, ask the defence, do you object to our evidence? Ou Monday the Court will give its decision on this grave point, and there is much anxiety here to know what that decieion will be. If it is adverse to the defence, it ia not improbable they will rest their case aud leave the prigoner im the bands of the jury. The prosecution may call some rebutting testimony, when the summing up on both sides ‘will follow. The case will close, then, towards the ond of next week. [PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT. Wasaunctox, April 16~11 a. M. ‘We are requested, on the part of Mr. Sickles, to state ‘that be deeply regrets, for many reasons, but particular- ly for the sake of his child, who must one day read the reoord of her mother’s abame, that the confession of Mrs. Bickles was published. The publication was contrary to his wishes, and if it bad been within hig power he would appressed it. ‘The Court opened at the usual hour, and with the usual crowd in attendance. ‘The argument on the question of the admissibility of evidence of adultery was pretermitted for the present, in order to allow Peter Cagger, of Albany, to be examined, he being desirous to return home this afternoon. EVIDENCE OF PETER CAGGER. Peter Cagger examined by Mr. Brady—Iam a member of the bar, residing in the city of Albany; have known Mr, Siekles for twelve years and upwards; saw Mr. Key ‘Dut onee, in June, 1868; I was introduced to him by letter frem Mr. Sickles, and evgaged him in a case a3 counsel, To the Court—I retained Mr. Key’s services on tho ground of that lettor of introduction. Not cross examined ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL, Mr. Ould would like to refer the counsel for the defence to one or two additional authorities: third volume Jones’ ‘Law Reports, the State against Reuben Samuel; the State vs. John P. Creighton, Iredell, page 164; the State va John G. Ferguson, Hill’s South Carolina Reports, pago 619. Mr. Phillips resumed his argument. Ho bad discussed yesterday the following propositions :—1. That if the eyi- dence offered is admissible for any purpose ft must be received. 2. That the issue presented by the indict- ment is not whether there has been a killing, but whether there has been a murder. 3. That, to @onstitute murder, there must be established a killing with @oliberate intent or malice prepense. 4. That the malice of the Jaw implied a wicked, depraved, and malig- nent spirit, @ heart regardiess of social duty, and fatally bent on mischief. That even in cases Of exprese malice, arising out of a past grudge, if there bas intervened & new provocation, it was Bot tobe presumed the killiog was on the ot grudge. 6. That in cases where the law presumes malico from the act of killing, this presumption may be rovut- ‘ted by expressions of good will and acts of kindness on the purt of the prisoner towards the deceased, always con- sidered important evidence, as showing what was his eperal disposition towards the deceased, from which tho fury ‘may be led to conclude that his’ intention could not bave been what the charge imputes. (Quoting 2d Ruveell, page 698.) That this presumption may als) be rebutted by ebowing that the killing was in passion, for jons arising from suflicient provocation i# evidence of the absence of malice. (Quoting from the Common- ‘wealth against Bell, psge 162.) 7. Toat as the law declares wiultery to be tne greatest of all provocations, there could be no such legal absardity as permitting evi depce of the lesser provocation, and excluding evidence of the greater. 8. This brought me to the consideration of the udmission of the prosecution that if the accused had geen with his own eyes the very act of adultery, then the Provocation given could be given in evidence, but not Otherwise. This { demonstrate to be wholly unreasonable ‘and fallacious, by showing that the eye, the ear and the touch were but media through which facts were trans mitted to the brain, and thut these governed the will and decided theaction. 1 was \ilustrating the position tha’ the knowledge of the adultery, at the time of its commisson, could be as definitely conveyed to the mind by the ear or the touch as by the eye, and cited examples to this end, ‘when the adjournment of the court took place. He had yeeterday presented a case in illustration of the faleity and abeurdity of the doctrine that a man most see the act of adultery to entitle him to set it op im justification, Ho (ht also illuatrate the same idea by the case of the blind He bad seen a picture of Hogarth’s, representing a fcene at an English bustings where aa old man, with the snows of many winters on ois bead and without his right arm, which be bad lost in the service of his country, @ame up to vote. The «ld man was challenged, and the Judge declared tbat, inasmuch as the form of the ath required the perton taking it to place his right hand the book, and bad ot band, he ‘That doctrine was about as the husband must find the aduiterer in the very act. Sup- pose a husband found the adulterer ia his wife’s bed, in a state of quiescence, or found him disrobing or clothing ‘himeelf in the bedroom of his wife, would it be held that Sat feck woull Gok be & legal Jamtication? ‘The District we ere was any well defined ine tu thie matter. ‘Mr. Phillips replied that there was no reason for this rule, as in the nature of things it would be impossible to Be eee te et hee the law does not apply the law itself is atan end. Did not the adulterer fuvariably endeavor to shield himself from detection? Besides, if the husband did find the parties in the how was it to be proved? tongue of the adulterer is , the of the wife is silenced by the law, and the oo er cannot give evidence in his own therefore the mere witnessing of the fact, but the knowledge of it, however derived, which stirs the human ‘and Insbes them into fury; and if the adalterer killed in the transport of passion thus aroused, the Jaw, which is a rule for the gree: of man, has re- ‘4 for the fraiities which hang around the human +. The most liberal interpretation mot require ‘that the killing should bo with the act of adultery. Counsel referred to Russell, pages 4 to 10, to show that though the killing ‘Bay be subsequent, yet it will not be murder if not done deliberately and upon revenge ; counse! also discussed ‘the caso of Manning, on whicn ho said this prosecution entirely rested, aud even there the Judges unanimously declared “that the killing was bot manglaughter, and the prisoner having clorgy at the bar, the sentence was that he be burned in the band, and the Court directed the executioner to burn the hand very slightly, aa adultery ‘wes the greatest provocation that a man could Teeelve, and was too much for him to bear.” ‘With a view of testing this matter still fur. ther, suppoee they were to convert this judicial Fetolution of the Jadges in Manoing’s caso into a statute against adultery, that any pereon found tn the act should gaffer such and such punishment, and if a person wero in- @icted under that statute what amount of evidence, ho ‘would ask, would be sufficient to coavince the jury that the offence bad been committed? Would it befor a mo- Ment contended that the witnesses must testify to Rosing the oT hot Mootle, Tho statute of Masrachagetia decia: that any party who bad been guilty of the crime of adultery should euffer so aad #0, and there what evidence was necessary to convict a man under jt, He would read some of the decisions there, Covneel referred to the case of the Commonwealth va. ‘Morrin, Ist vol. Cushing, p. 394, and also to vot, 14 Pick- ering, Bertie the case of the Commonwealth vs. Mor- . rule was the same in other States and in the Nish courts. He referred to the. case of the State va, , N. H. Reports, and toa caso in Alabama. Ho also referred to the opinion of Lord Stowell, yol. 2 Grean- Weafs Evidence, where it is declared that it is not necesary to prove the fact of adultery, ‘bet to incta a8 led to the inevi- table inference that the offence had com- mitted. The circumstances must be sach as to lead the rded opinion of a discreet man to such a conclusion, | would ask whether the knowledge on the part of the husband of the aduitory is required to be greater and more complete, in order to justify the provocation, than ‘would be required by a jury of twelve deliberate and im. ee men to convinoe them if they wore trying the very of adultery, To nek that would bo te reverse ail our notions in me to the In tho cane of Jobn, slave, and thore being no marital rights recognized tween slaves, there could be no adultery. Bat the coun. nel on the other side had said there was no distinction in Jaw between slaves and freemen. Mr. Carlisie—On, no, I did not say that. There are lo- cal laws, of course, affecting slaves. ‘Mr. Phillips supposed that the gentleman bad reference ‘then to moral principles. He would take that to be the case, and he would ask, would there be no dist'nction or difference of feeling between the case of a white man, whose marital righte are recognized by law and by socie- $7.06 these of 8 Hack: man; whe bag ‘no marital ree @ very statement of the proposition was enough vo its fallacy. The counsel would ask, what would ‘be the condition of the defence if, after excluding the evidence of the provocation, the District Attorney would call apes the 'y to declare that the passion of the yi had een proved, was fictitious and feigi not real. Mr. Carlisle thought be had noticed the polat by sing that the passion was immaterial unless produced by pro- vocation, and that a previous adultery was Ro legal pro- v 2 Mr. Phillips held that if had aright to ‘show the passion, they had a right to the provocation for that 20 us to excl the of argument that jon was fictitious, not real. referred to {llips on Evidence, p. 172, and vol. 1, Greenteaf, , nection 102, What did they offer to prove in this syatematiaed adultery, carried on im che absence of the accused, in his house, and in the bouse of the de- ceased; that these facts wore made known to the pri- d that a few moments before the homicide the had laid down the LE pens that when the kvowledge of the lessnees of his wife cauee for his passion. Mr. Carlisie only made that point in answer to the plea of the homicide having been committed on the part of the prisoner to prevent the ortme of adultery. Mr. ipe—The argument was, that because the wife had been !oatbaome to the prisoner, the signal of the ceased formed noground tor passion which would lead to Justification. Mr. Carlisle disclaimed any such idea, and hoped the Court did not so understand him. ‘The Judge said be had understood it as Mr. Carlisle did. Mr. Pbij)ips—His Honor occupied a position in this case which seldom falls to the lot of any Judge. He was not called npon to ea law ‘ig cage, Dut to apply the jokers of the law to the new facts presented in this ex- trac! case. This sometimes occurred in criminal cages, and it signally occurred in the present; for the point now discussed was, as far as he A never discussed or adjudicated by avy tribunal in this country or in England. Here they offered to prove the truth. What were the rules of evidence made for but the elucidation of the truth? And should these rales be converted into an instrument for the suppression of the troth? Before such a principle was established it would ‘be necessary, in the words of Curran, ‘That languago fhould dic away in the hearts of the people, and that hu- mapity should have no ear,and liberty no tongue.” That is the period and degradation when alone such a doctrine can be succesefully maintained in a court of justice, If ‘on this point there should be any doubt in the mind of your Honor to whether the testimony should be admitted or not, that doubt ought to be resolved in favor of the application in this case. The oldest trial on record ing apy anal to this was that of Orestes, for slaying the lulterer of his mother, which was tried before the Court of the Areopagites. ‘The Goddees of Wisdom is represented as having ded there, and having cast her controlling ballot io ear of the accused; and from that day we have had the beautiful type thus derived wherever civilization has spread, that justice tempered with mercy constitutes the rule which determines the action of the courts of justice. With theee remarks he submitted the case, Counsel for Mr. Sickles eaid the presentation of the case is thus:—The counsel for the defence ask that certain evi- dence be received; the counsel of the prosecution ask that it be excluded, because, if received, the Court is bound, as a matter of law, to decide that it goes for notning; the question for the Court is virtually this—whether the testi- mony shall be first received and the effect judged of after- wards, He then stated the propositions which wero offered yesterday by the defence. Wo, he offer these five propositions on four grounds First, as making out a justification in the act of Mr. Sickles; Becond, as establishing the provocation which led to thé perPetration of the act; third, as illuminating the state of . Sickles’ mind with regard to insanity, or a mind of unsoundness at the time of the commission of the act; fourth, as proving the truth of Mr. Sickles’ declaration at the time of the affray, that the cause which induced him to the commission of the act was the sonse of the adulterous intercouree between Mr. Key and Mrs. Sickles. In other words, the facts show that he was the instrument in the hands of bis Maker to carry out the judgment against adultery, which is denounced by the Court of Heaven. It ‘was necessary for him to repeat this, as the senior counsel for the prosecution (Carlisle) had claimed he had migun- derstood him. The counsel bad entirely misconceived the scope and effect of his address, Mr. Carlis'e—Quite unintentionally. Counsel for Wr. Sicktes—In order to sustain the prose- cution, the evidence, it is claimed, must establish four facts:—Firet, that the defendant was moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil to perpetrate the crime; second, that he killed the deceased feloniously, malicious. ly and of his malice aforethought; third, that the act was againet the peace and government of the United States; fourth, that at the time of the commission of the act the deceased was in the peace of God and the United States— ani we distinctly and confidently say the deosasad was neither in the peace of God nor in that of the United States. We propose to show that we are not invading a pew domain of proof. We are not ee facts or evi- dence which have not already been q by testimony. Weare nt to extend the line of ‘proot already commenced, and it stops here we leayé no doubt, morally or legally, in the mind of any man,’ of the existence of this very adultery which wo seek to establish by more positive proof. Tho prosecution thought we would have nally to prove this, and that they might get the benellt of supposed failure; in other Words, the prosecution experimented ‘with vs apd allowed us to go to w certain stage, and when they find us able to extend the proof they ask the Court to stay ovr progress. The question ts whether the Court can exclude the evidence we seek to adduce. Wo have offered proof as to the friendly relations which existed between the defendant and deceased, and that Mr. Key availed himself of the friendly acts of the defendant. Wo have shown, in the second place, that immediately before, and up to the time of the commission of this alleged id, criminal act, the defendant was in a state of frenzy or mental unsoundness which for- bids the idea of killing with rational mind. In the third place we have shown that at tho very timo of the act Mr, Sickles declared what was the maddening cause of his conduct. Fourth, that the deceased cou- stautly mace the defendant's house the place of adul- terous assignation upto the time of his death. Firth, ‘that Mr. Key and Mrs, Sickles not only went in the direc tion of the house where it is charged they committed adultery, but that before the death of Mr. Key they wero located outside the house, in the very act of entering the doors. The siniple question is, whether our proof shall take them beyond that door, and whether we shall be per- mitted to thow the jury the guilty correspondence be. tween them, 80 as to loave no doubt on the point that the deceased and Mrs. 8. were pursuing a confirmed and habitual adulterous intercourse. In other words, this ‘was not an attempt to invade a new territory of proof, but to exhaust all their proof in regard to a matter in which they fairly exhausted their proof. It wasa rule of law that where objection is to be made to a line of proof, that objec- ion must be made in line, and once the threshhold is pass- ed it cannot be required of the to retrace his steps. He asked the Court whether Jaw countenanced such ‘an experiment as that evidently made by the prosecution in this cage? In the caso of a witness who answers question which he might not have answered, he is mt al lowed to object to answering further questions on the same point. The prosecution had permit the defence to show certain facts which did not cssentiate the main fact; and straining the preat onthe pout ot edultory?”-Aftr Bevig straining the on the point altery’ allowed the defence te po. Me ee poietic urge the doctrine that, uniess the husband detect his wile in the very ac: of shame he has no rights against irty who has deflowered her body, and canaot set the up the adultery as a justification his act. In order to reduce the grade of offence, it is urged that the husband must gee the act of shame with his own eyes; otherwise, he must stud before the Court and the world as one of the highest criminals known to the law. So long as passion was carried on sect and - destinely, so long would the husband, to this doctrine, be deprived of all right as ‘against his wife's adulterer, His Honor knew that in oases of divorce, a chain of evidence which led the mind to the feresistibie conclusion of adultery was all that is ever required. Counsel referred to 2 Greenleaf, sections 41 and 43.) roximated facts, leading on to the demonstration or ¢s- tablishment of guilt, are all that the law requires in cases of divorce. Asultery. is @ continuous fact, and, where once shown to exiat, it is presumed to overshadow all sub- sequent ngeociations of the parties. A great effort was made here to excite prejudice agavnat the groand taken by the defence. Now, it was hardly necessary for him to ap- peal to this Court to Hay, that he had not laid down tho doctrine that any man Has a right to slay an adulterer in cold blood, and aga resu‘t of calm deliberation. What- ever, said he, my views are on that Bubject, T have distinctly restrained their expression in this cago, because, at every stage of the case, I hayo in- sisted that there is not a single feature ‘commupicating premeditation to the act which places tho defendant at the bar of this Court. What [ bavesaid, and what I say now, and what I am prepared to say, is this: that when's hus’ band catches an adulterer of his wife, eithor In theact of coition, or 20 near to that act as to leave no doubt of his guilt, that the frenzy which rcizes on the husband is the mode which the, Almighty has adopted of turniog that husband into his instrument for ha 6 dow J out the judg. ment which He has denounced against the adalteror; and if the Bible proves anything, I challenge any man who even professes a nominal belief in coe I say imighty hes made us with sach instincts that there are certain provocations 80 operating on us a8 that when they do work on us we are thrown on these ta- ts, and that our acts become but the execution of the of Heaven. Now I will suppose a case, We have all had? mother#, and can enter into tho feelings which en- circle # relation of that kind. Could it be expected that a son shoald stand in the presence of his mother and see an am a he rose a the midst of Slew the party who outraged whore womb he came, where is the jury that would con- viet him of crime in so doing? Now, what is it that justi- flee, what that necessitates, a slaying under such ciroum- stances? It is the irresistible influcnce of that love which the great Creator has implanted even in the breaat of a brute towards the parent brute that produced it, Is not that Precisely the affection that Kentides iteelf with the reia- he tbus becomes an ix' ‘a judgment for which, int-pded by nature upon and accomp! husband slays under the influence Speticnes to the will of nature. ities Beeese is BFEsess ‘term is per ‘with eome fapati ing politics} endi : case of individuals, go in the dividuals they are required to the law into their own hands, eQPee, ‘4 their individual natures, and resol instrument of Deity for the purpose of accomplishing aud carrying out ends? Counsel again quoted from the Sermon on the Mount—St. Matthew, obapter, 28th veree—for the purpose of showing that the body of the wife is to all intents and purposes defiled by the lustful eyes of the man who lusts for her:— But I say unto that whosoever looketh on ® woman to Just afler her bald commited adultery with ‘er already in his So that, eaid he, so far a8 the adultery of deceased could be perietet it was in the course of being made perfect at the very time he was met by the defendant on tbe occa- tion leading to the affray. As to the benignity of the law in allowing the defence of adultery to reduce the grade of the offence to manslaughter, counsel asked, is the law benign’ Is that the mercy which the jury are in the habit of ask- ivg when they :ay the Lord’s Prayer? Is the law benign, ie ite benignity to be found in reducing the act of the hua band from murder to manslaughter when he finds his wife actually engaged in her act of shame? I3 that be- niguity?—is it mercy?—is it lenity? And yet the counsel for the prosecution say that when the bur band eatches the wife in her shame the law is bevignant—then aod only then. This doctrine of the prosecution was mainly based on the case of John, cited in 8th Iredell. Ali the remarks made th the Oou't were obiter, for in that caso—a slave cag e rights of the husband did notexist. The obiter dicta of Judges had been the occasion of wore coniu sion in the law than uroge from any other or ail other causes, Bis Honor would find that that case in 8th Iredell repu- diates the doctrine of moral insanity—a doctrine recog: nized by his Honor and all the great jurists of the country. Why, then, should it be relied on in regard to other pointe? What was the origin of the rule which says, that ‘where a man catches his wife in her shame, and siays the adulterer, bis offence is reduced to manslaughter? In the case in which that rule was declared, there was a special verdict made in reference to « particular state of facts; and was it to bind all other cases? The rule in the case of Maddy is reported in Hale’s Pleas of the Crown, which ‘were written in 1700. That rule was copied by Hawkins, which was written in'1724. It was again copied by Fos ter, and again by East. Did these writers sanction the rule? No; all they did was to rofer to it, without giving tt the weight of their names at all; therefore it was a mere historical fact, not endorsed by aby of these authorities, that in the reign of Charles Il. such a rule was declared by the Court of Queen’s Bench on @ particular state of facts, Was that rule to govern this case’ Juries were at that time mere instruments in the hands of tue Court; Jury trials were then a mockery. Is this grewt institution, ‘which like a mighty tree strikes its roote deep in the goil of the constitution, to be restrained and restricted in its growth for the purpoee of encircling ita trunk and branch. 8 With an arbitrary rule made under a despotic govern- ment and in a corrupt age? The jury system is now deve Joped and is perfect, and it was idle to try to bg aed it the rule of two centuries since. Then the jury no rigbt to pass upon the motive or intention of the accused; that was kept jor the decision of the Judge; bat here the jury wasas absolute as the Autocrat of all the Russias; bis jonor could not restrain them; nothing his Honor could say should beve more weight upon them, in reference at least to the facts, than what fell trom the Jips of the coun sel. Another considers we the rule in Maddy’s case was that the Jt eT anxious to aggran- dize and enrich the coffers of the king, and while there the deoner was absolved from all corporal punishment, fis estates passed into the king’s treasury. To ebow that counsel was ot reviling the old Jaw, he referred to Foster on that re sy 264. There was much progress made in the law since time. To illustrate that be referred to the difference between now and then, in regard to the plea of insanity. Accord ing to Lord Hale, nothing but a perfect extinguishment of the candle of the md would satisfy the behests of the Jaw in regard to irrea; If the Jaw of sanity had changed go, a0 had aud as well might Hale be cited now to sh jonor was not right in bie ruling im cases of i ity, as be cited to show that it was necessary for a husband to catch his wife in the act of coition to reduce the grade of homicide to mao- siavghter sides, it wag suggested to him by his col- league (Mr. Brady) ‘that Lord Hale presided in cases of proecution for witchcraft; therefore, he said that, non obstante Lord Haile, this question was to-day a new one. Counsel referred 0 the statute of James [. in regard to homicide, in reference to which statute it was heid that the case of an adulterer stabbed by the husband was not within the statute, and if the husband was indicted, uoder that statute the jury were directed to acquit; and so the indictment in such cases was made under the common law ; Shylock-like, they secured their pound of fieah by {ndicting the husband under the common lew, #0 as to get his estates for the crown. Was not this hypccrisy? Was it not such protection as the wolf gives to the lamb, covering and devouring it? It would be | for bis Honor to say whether this rule was to be the rule of morality and goclety in these days. Counsel referred | to Pearson's care, in Lewis’ Crown Cases, 216, where tho | Judges followed with the most implicit blindness every- | thing that emanated fromsuch ® Moloch as Lord Haie | For the purpose of enforcing the right of defence to this | testimony he submitted: first, the Constitution of the | United States, as baving broken down the old system of | special verdicts, arguing if the Court can dispense with a | Jury it cam abrogate that provision of the constitution which provides that the trial of all crimes, except in cases Of impeachment, shall be by jury. It is for the jury themselves, on the facts themselves, to form judgments with all the surrounding circumstances. North or South Carolina might make what laws they please for the trial of State offences, but they could not come into the federal courts and strike down the constitution of the land. Tne | learned counsel (Mr. Carlisle) said he loved North Caroli- na law because of its mustiness of one bundred and sixty or one hundred and eighty years,and the inference was that he would rather have lived at that time; but for himself (the counsel for the defence) he would prefer to live when he now did. (Laughter.) He would show that we are not to knecl to old idols and run after strange gods; the gods wa are to wor- ship are our household gods; we are not to run after those of other countries. The second point is this:—In the pre- sent cage the intention is synonymous with the state of mind, and the causes which produced the state of the mind are admissible for Purpose of illustrating the de- Sop In Day's case Lm Court received the whole narrative; you permitted the prisoner his wife bad a child threo or four months after marriage; you permitted hira to establiah all the facts in evidence; ‘and at the close of the case the effoct of these facts was Judged of. In Jarboe’s case the same thing was aliowed; the deceased seduced the prisoner’s sister, under promise of marriage. Now, the door through which these facts entered in these cases is sought to be closed against us. In the case of Singleton Mercer all the fa:te wore narrated ; for the sister of Mercer was permitted to take the stand and trace out her acquaintance with Heberton, In the caxe of Smith, which will be found in Wharton on homi- cide, the facts were permitted to be elicited; Captain Carson had absconded from his and been gone two yeara without being beard from, and his wife married Smith. Carson turned up and claimed bis wife. A contention occurred, which resulted in the second husband killing the frst; all the facts were received in evidence, and the case adjudged in view of le mm the case of Hatfleld, showing that disease ‘was produced by # wound received in battle. In all these cases, the Court permitted the party to trace out the act to tho real canse—there was no limit of time. We say, im the vext place, the testimony offered establishes the truth of the deciaration at the time of the occurrence; that it dieproves the idea of mere pretence; it to stow Key had drawn off Mr. Stokiea’ wife from ber true and lawful allegiance, and that Mr. Sickles did not jmngine or feign what he uttered, but uttered tho real fact; that the fact existed precisely as he declared it, and bo declared it because he was informed of it in such a way as to leave no doubt of ite existence. On what principle, then, was the defence not enti fled to it? If the defence wag that Mr. Sickles slew Mr. Key under a delusion, we would prove that he imagined the fact, and Mong Abana trace out the origin of ‘the delusion. Now, as the law permite it to be shown that ‘© man can become insane from real as ‘well as imaginary 18, What diflesence ia there in the application of the role? ‘In the time of Lord Erskine it was only delusion; ‘now it is admitted man can become insane from Hvenes of the be consech af Bara the conduct of his w: to avail himself of such conduct to’ shield himsolf from con’ when the coun wet Ae al Oe, be committed? know! Mra. Sickles was the ir. ‘H * re rious authorities to show ‘wea i time ag to the rule of justification. All the of the case must be conskiered, No matter what the i 8 Fy i Hy t i quoted to suow where a prisoner was permitted to prove ‘that his ‘participation in a criminal act was voluutary. We ask, continued the counsel, to be permitted to show the slaying of Mr. Key was just as invoiuntary as thougo he was hurried on by the violence of a mob; but instead of being an instrument of the mob, he was an instrament im the hands of bis instinct, and went forward in the commitsion of the act. The counsel quoted a case where tbe defence was permitted bE: 8 by showing the de- claration of an alleged thief at the time of his depositing the goods en the premises of a neighbor, and after further quoting from vrecedents, added—It seems the learned counsel for the prosecution was unfortunate in distin- uisbing the present case from that of Jarboe; ut if the report of the cass, as contained in this” pamphlet, is correct, it’ is perfectly ovi- dent that Jorboe acted on the oer that he was temporarily insane at the time of the act of slaying the seducer of his sister. This court, in ita instructions to the jury, meant the case should turn on tae satus of the ae soner’s mind at the moment the killing occurred. It bas been asked on the other side, what interest had Mr. Sickles in, his wife at the time he met Mr. Key, for she then had forfeited her marriage vow? I sak, was not his grief atthe pitch of despair? Mr. Sickles knew his wife had been gulty of ‘conduct which forfeited her hold on him; be raw the man who cut off the attachment to him; and henceforth what must have been the feelings of the man who was deprived of the richest pearl in the casket in which he had placed his jewels? Mr. Carlisle—I bave already distinctly disclaimed having entertained any such idea or used any such argument. One of the grounos upon which the proof was offered was that the deceased wasat the tims of his death actually proceeding to commit the crime ot adultery with the prisoner's wife, and that the prisoner slew bim in defence of his wite’s honor, and to prevest that crime. Ia this connection I referred to the fact that, according to the theory of the defence, be bad the day’ beforo fully ascertained that #n adulterous intercourse for nearly a year had been car- ried cn between those persons. ‘Couneel for defence replied—If the doctrine of the prose- cution is a correctoue, then wo ought to stop with the Coro- ner’s jury who found who killed Mr. Key; and according to the prosecution, this is the only fact before the jury. A strenuous efiort bas been made to show the state of the pritoner’s mind at the time of the killing of Mr. Key. If ihe intention is Important, and tho evidence bearing on it is proper, then it seems to me the defence is entitied to such evidence. If we are here merely to discover what the coroner’s jury found as to the killing of Mr. Key, aad if this Cou se is conclusive evidence of matice, and is ad- mitsible, then the preferment of the accusation by the grand jury, and trial by petty jury, are unneceseary in jaw. But T'eay that every fact, whether it bears remotely or nearly to the case, is proper to be shown, to enapie the jury to understand the condition of the prigoner’s miod ‘at the time of the killing, We ask you to extend the tine of inquir; If there is objection, it should have been previously urged. It was not now for the prosecution, after experimenting with us, aod finding we have evidence of the adultery beyond peradventure, to de prive us, by means of toubnicalities, of this benefit, Task the Court to review. ‘The Datrict Attornay raplied—The greunde on which application was made were frat, that the facts recited amount to justification; second, that they amount to legai Provocation ; third, that they are competent evideuce in coppection with the qnestion of insanity, and lastly, that they are competent evidence for the purpose of explaining the statement of the prisoner at the time of the homicide, aud explaimg the motives and feelings by which he wa? actuated, The first two grounds could be treated of at one and the same time. The questions of justification and provocation are legal questions presented to his Hooor in conpection with the ofler of testimony. It had been said that the Evglieb rulings could not apply here, because no euch Btate Of facts existed. He contended thut the ques- tious were the fame mw substance, The proposition here implics the truth of facts offered in evidence. It was to be taken for granted by bis Honor that they wero true, The legal effect of those facts was to be necessarily determined by bis Honor, and in that respect the Judge was perform- ing the game functions «8 were imposed upon ish Judges in cascs of special verdicts. ‘The question bere was what was meant by tbe rule as laid down in the Englisn ‘books of authorities, in regard to the effect of adultery as justification. The prosecution here dia not contend for the doctrine that the husband must witness the infidelity of his wife. They relied on the wording of the English au: thorities, that if a party ‘‘be found in the act of adultery” the offence of siayipg the adulterer would be reduced to inaneiaughter, That uncoubiedly was the meaning of the rule; if found in the act, the Killing was manslaughter; ‘Dut if the husband afterwards slays the adulterer, the act ie murder, The old masters purposely use the word “fnd.”? He could imagine that if a man witness from a distance—say with a teiescope—his wife’s infidelity, and afterwards siay the adulterer, he would be excluded from the benefit of the rule. He bad been asked to define the Ime of thie rule. It was impossibie to do 80; he might with as great propriety ask the other side to define the Ime of what they call the busband’s marital rights. Tue law bad settled it by declaring that if there were time sufficient for the cooling of the passion, the act of killing ig murder. If the rule was to be extended, the length claimed by the other side, even to the case of Ordinary lust, he aeked what would be the state of society under such circumstances? Ifa man could take the life of one who bad lusted for bis wife, what would be the condition of society? It was not the part of the prosecution to stand up and desend aduitery; it & grievous crime, a great out- rege inflicted on the rig! the husband, The question is, how @ party who kills Avother under such provocation is to be treated in @ court of justice? It bad been here that, inasmuch as the Good Book had declared tbat the adulterer should sufler death, and inasmuch as tie civil law did not, the rights of the husband were remitied He did not subscribe to any such doc trine. He would also refer to the Good Book to show what bad been almost a judicial determination of this question, by the Founder of our holy religion:— Jesus ent sat On ees Olives. ‘ita ia ‘And ear morning be came again and al the people came unto him, and he eat down t seribes and Pharisees tht unte him © woman ai edatiry: and whea they tad sot ber ithe md They say th Master, womaa was taken in adulte- "Tow Moses in the law commanded us that such should be ees et Sates tetapting bien, thet they might have to accuse y Bald, 1 ‘and with his finger wrote on him. Bus ‘lows, “t hed saking Blan hs ied up himeel? and {a without sin'amoug you, let him frat ir own o9n- e4 a the eldest, even and the woman sand temple, and taught m ‘ben bad lifted uy wrcmen, bo said unto ber, Woman, where are those thine condemped Bhe said, Nomen, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee; go, and sin no more. ‘The whole case there recited was remarkable in its inci- depts; it was, as it were, a transfiguration of eee itee)'—a transfiguration as glorious as that which tool Jace about the same time in the presence of Moses and lies. For bimeeif, he would rather have been in the pil- Jory than in bed om of the last scribe or Pharisee in that prerence. whole case was an exomplificuzion of the meaning and spirit of Christianity. There was no hint there that the ee ee might take the Jaw into his own hands, and the voluntary or involuntary instrument of Divine vengeance. No; it was the genins and spirit of Christianity, stooping, as it were, from heaven, and kissing in peace the erring sister. He oid pot deny that when the party is canght in the act the law says that it is the greatest provocation a husband cap receive ; but the same law says that when time for cooling bas elapeed it is no tion atall. There was no pretence for any authority anywhere protendiag to al- Jogo that it was a justification. “Unquestionably it was a grievous Lagi od but tho solitary question to be de- PRICE TWO CENTS. SEe2 2 Ae “7 ba 8 4 2 oI Hf : g 7 aE the other admitted tacitly bot that it ought not to be law. lefence—I said that one part of it was obiter, that the partin regard to insanity conflicted with is _Hovor. Mr. Phillips—That would make the Judge the trier of the whole case. Counsel for defence—2h-woulh be the tanect a Bpedial vor. dict, The District Atworue: was a ter solely Yor tho decision of the Sudge. ‘He referred to Archibaid’s Criminal Practice (235) on the question of cooling’ time. It was material for his Hovor to inguire whether there was cooling time between that hour when his wife's infidelity was communicated to the prisoner and the time when he shot down Key; did it invovie euch a space of time as that his passion ought to have ceased? ‘That was the material inquiry—not whether the passion actually did cease. ‘The Jusge here intimated to the District Attorney that it was time to make the announcement now that had been agreed upon, referring to the announcement of the death of the late Chancellor Bibb, who died at George- town a day or two since. ‘The District Attorney assented, and suspended his argu- ment. Mr. Brady would ask the District Attorney to answer this question: it the Judge was to pass on the question of Provocation, of justification, and of cooling time, what Was the jury to pass upon? The Judge thought the answer to that question might be deferred for the present. Resolutions of respect to the memory of the late Chan cellor Bibb, offered by the District Attorney, were entered on the minutes. ‘The Judge pronounced a high eulogy on Chancellor Bibb, efore the adjournment the and the Court adjourned. District Attorney said that be understood some of the ju- rors desired the privilege of having some religious books to read to-morrow. The counsel for the defence had no objection to the ju- rors having any of books they wanted. The Judge—It is very easy to see that there might be other books foisted on the jury, and Iam anxious to guard against that. Mr. Selden—As Marebal, and as being somewhat respon- sibie for the character of the dosumenis and boots to go to the jury, I desire to have the particular description set- ted. The Jadge—Books treating of religious subjects may be given to ramet under the direction of the Marsbal. A Juror—I reapectfuliy ask the Court and counsel the privilege of sending to my room fog a copy of ‘John New- ton’s Sermons. ’’ ws Magruder, a juror, expressed a wish to have the le. ‘The Judge—I suppose’ nobody objects to that, Mr. Magruder—I suppose not. Religious Intelligence. CITY CRURORES. The Union Religious Services at Niblo’s Concert Room will be continued this evening. Rev. Frederick G. Clark, pastor of the West Twenty-third street Presbyterian church, will preach. Brother David Rogers will preach in the Universalist Mission chape), No. 59 West Forty-firat street, between Seventh and Eighth avenues, this afternoon. Rey. Dr. Macmenamy and the friends of the Bible wil, discuss the claims of the Apochrypha and Purgatory, and answer Romish objections, in Spring street Hall, No, 185 Spring atreet, this evening. ‘ ‘The Rev. George F. Noyes will deliver a discourse in Hlop> Onmpet this afternoon, wt belf pact three o'clock. Subject: “ Religion and Politics.’” Divine service will be held in the Third Unitarian church, northeast corner of Broadway and Thirty-second street, this morning, at hatf-past ten o'clock, and in the evening at half-past seven, under the direction of Rey. 0. B. Frotbingbam, who bas been regularly established as pas. tor thereof, Rev. J. Bedford, of Newtown, Connecticct, will preach this morning and evening in the John street First Metho. dist Episcopal church, the services commencing at the usual hour, Rey. Sidney A. Corey will preach in the Eighteenth street Baptist church, ono door west of Fifth avenue, this morning and evening. ‘The Third Unitarian church, northeast corner of Broad- way and Thirty-recond street (Rev. U. B. Frothingham), is now regularly established, and open, morning aud eyen- ing, on Sundays. In the Stanton atreet Presbyterian church, corner of Foreyth street, the pastor, Rev. J. Sanderson, will deliver thesermon in the morning and afternoon, and Rey. E. T. Higcox in the evening. Rev. Dr. Scudder will preach, this morniog, in Dr. Hut- ton’s church, Washington square, and at Dr. Sirong’s church, corner of Bleecker aud Amos streets, in the even- ing. Rev. George Potts, D. D., will preach at the Academy of Music this evening. ‘The usual divine service will be held in the Protestant Episcopal Mission church, Cilnton Hall, Astor place, in charge of the Rey. Robert G. Dickson, this moruing and evening. In the Orchard street Universalist church, near Broome street, Rev. Dr, Sawyer, pastor, will preach, this morning and evening. Subject, “ The Destruction of Jerusalem as Foretold in the Scripiures.’” Divine service will be held, as usual, this morning and afternoon, aud prayer meeting in the evening, in tho North Duteh chuich, corner of Fulton and William streets. Public worship will be held this morning in the New Jorusaiem church (Swedenborgian) at Lyriquo Hall, 765 Broadway. - Trof, G. Bush, of the New Jerusalem church, will ad- minister the sacrament of the Holy Supper this morning, in the Atheneum, Atlantic street, corner of Clinten street, Brooklyn, and deliver a parting address to histriends. The Rey. Samuel Beswick will preach in the morniag. Rey, Thomas Gallaudet, rector for St. Anue’s Church for Deaf Mutes, will preach this evening in the Memorial church, corner of Hammond street and Waverley place. Mrs. Cora L. V. Hatch will speak in the trance state at Musical Hall, Brooklyn, this afternoon. Dr. Atmitage, pastor of the Norfolk street Baptist church, will preach this afternoon at three o'clock, in ‘Trenor’s Academy, Thirty-fourth street, one door west of Broadway. In the Free Protestant Episcopal Church, at the largo chapel of the Rutgers Female Institute, 264 Madison street, three doors above Clinton street, the whole service of the church will be rendered chorally, this morning and even- ™ the Bicecker strect Universalist church, corner of Bleecker and Downing streets, Rev. E. W. Reynolds, of Jamestown, N. Y., will preach this morning and evening. A fareweil m’ssiopary meeting will be beld in the Pres. byterian church, Fifth avenue and Nineteenth stresty (Dr. Alexander’s,) th's eventog, in connection with tie departure of Dr. and Mrs. Hepburn, missionaries of the Presbyterian Board, for the purpose of establishing a mis- sion in Japan. ANNIVERSARTES, The Sabbath School of the Sixth avenue Reformed Dutch church will hold its anniversary this evening, ‘The second anniversary of tho Young Men’s Christian Union, af New ‘York, wiil be held on or about the 11th and Tah of May. termined Honor was whether it be a legal provoca- tion ; wi such ® provocation as will excase a man for the perpetration of a homicide. ft bad boon stated that thero was no instance of a conviction for murder, here or in England, in bry cago of a husband who had slain the adulterer. He wool there was, and for that pur- pose he referred to 8 Jones, N.C. te, 24. Counsel for defence—Thore the prisoner bad made pro- vious threats, The District At read a statement case, where the Judge ruled that had Prisoner caught the deceased ia tho act of adultery 1 jog would have been mansiaugh. ter, bat as the killing took place aftor time to coo! the act was murder, and the prisoner was convicted of murder. In that case exception was taken, aod the Court Poy mqhogt pe bv ruling of the Court below, and held that the facts of adultery did not amount to logal justifica- tion. In that cage there were peculiar featut roner “ound his wife in the com, res; the pri- ny of the deceased, going out for the purpose, as he believed, of adulterous inter. course; fifteen minutes after that the hosband, armed with a wooden mallet, went after his wite's paramour aod slew him; and notwithstanding that,the Cour; held that the F seated did not rmouns 6 ~ legal provocation. The anpiversary of the Union Theological Seminary, o this city, will be held in the Mercer street courch, on Monday evening, May 9, American Bible Society, on May 12, at the Academy of eBie. American Home Missionary Society, on May 11, at tho church of the Purkans, o K American Board of Forcign Missions, May 13, place not yot designated, American and Foreign Christian Union, May 10, at Dr. McClintock's chorcb, ov Fourth avenue. American Geaman’s Friend Society, May 9. ; ‘The American Missionary Association holde its anniver- ery ‘hie year, in Boston and tne Presbyterian (0. 3.) Board of Foreign Miesions at Indianapolis, during the sit- ting of the General Aseomoly. New York State Colonization Society, May 10, in the Reformed Church, Lafayette square, ORDINATIONS. Rev. J. I. T. Coolidge, formerly pastor of the Thirteenth ‘The Dated In this case ' Unitarian church, Boston, was Ordained as an Episcopal Sore oO Peas cburch, Thursiay morning, by Mr, James R. of Strykersville, county, New York, was ordained as ao fing i feed Eocleaiastical Cou ii coavened at that place, INVITATIONS. The members of the charca ano society of the Second eg gad ebureh, in Ciacinnatt, have voted to the i Soe < Sane city, a calito The Knox Presbyterian church orsuinges A at Freeman place chapel, and now at tne (Tremont Temple,) Bastin, have extended ® unanimous Gall to Rov. David Magli, Philadelphia, to become their f INVITATIONS ACCEPTED. <i Rev. Z, M. Humphrey, of Milwaukie, bas accepted s call trom the society of the Firs Presbyterian chureh in ago, Rev. Jorepb Wileon has accepted a call to the Presbyte- rian church of Pleasant Prairie and Loog Point, I. Rev. W. 8. spauiding bas secepted © unanimous PReayedh bet ae pe bonnes in Bristol, N. H., and enters upon his labors there immediately. INVITATIONS DECLINED. Rev. Dr. Moves 1). Hoge, of Richmond, Va., has decHned: Seal to the Fm Daten etormaa Charen fn New bs trong inducement to Mr. B., a salary of Fer annum was offered, with the { a eat of wh $2)000'a year and turnitiod the at ap expense of $16,000. Rev. T. DeWitt Talmage, of Belleville, N. J., has de- clibed the call extended to hima ‘by the Weforme’ Daten Church of Sixth avenue, in this Setasmuk 5 city, and niso the call from Rev. J. H. Suydam, pastor of the Dutch hesch, Fenn. who ‘received a call to take of preferring Meu ars es het ik located. . Rev. Dr. Magoon, of Albany, has declined a recent “call to San Francisco. Rov. B.C. Smith bas resigned bis pastoral charge, of fifteen years’ duration, in Prausburg, N. Y., on account of NEW CHURCHES. ‘The dedication of the new Bapust cbureh in Augusta, Ga., took place on the 10th inst. The sermon on the occa- $100 Was delivered by Rev. J. E. Ryerson, ‘The corner stone of » Methodist church was laid im Lynchburg, Va., on the 6th inst. MISCELLANEOUS. The Sixth Univereatiat society in New York, Rev. J."H. Shepard, pastor, hitherto worrhipping in a small hired church in Twenty-fourth street, have purchased the church: in Twentieth street, on the south side, a little east of Se- venth avenue. The ship Boston sailed from Boston on the 18th instant for Caicutta, baving on board the following miasionarics fent out by the Methodist Missionary Society :—Rev. ©, W. Judd and wife, Rev. E.W Parker and wife, Rev. J. R. Downey and wife, and Rev. J. M. Thoburn, ‘were beld on ebipboard previous to eailing. At the conference of the United Brethren of Christ, re- centy held in Robresville, Washington county, Md., seve- veral of the preachers appearod with beards of such Noachian dimensions ‘one of the brethren, an aged and venerable clorgyman, was induced to offer & resolu- tion to the effect that every preacher of the confereuce be Fequired to shave off his beard at least once a week, which, after a spirited and amusing discussion, was carried in the affirmative. The General Aegembly of the tech hay ig Church in the United States of America will meet in the Central Presbyterian church of Wilmington, Delaware, on Thars- day, the 19h of May. Upwards of sixty years ago Rev. Ebenezer Price, of Boscawen, N. H., was settied at Beifast, Me., and waa the first minister of that place, Not one member of the parish that called him is now living, but Mr. Price, at the ad- vanced age of eighty seven years, is still living, and now resides in Boston. Mrs. Harriot K. Hunt, of Boston, has taken to preach- ing, aod bas already officiated at Athol, Westminster, and Stoneham, Mass. Mrs. Jenkins, of New York, who has been relied upon Parker’ to preach in Music Hall, before Theodore e society, bas declined. Rev. R. M. Nott, of New York, will spend a few Sabbaths Preach at Ninth street Baptist im Cincinnati, and church. NEW YORK CHURCHES. The New York correspondent of the Boston Journal fur- ‘Dishes the following statements in a recent letter:—Rev, Dr. Morgan’s society is s00n to remove up town from the corner of Broadway and Houston street. His church, known ag St. Thomas’ church, bas for years been known as one of the lanamarks of New York. Grace cbarch, ‘Trinity, Trinity chapel, and the Church of the Ascension have eclipsed the giory of St. Thomas’; but in earlier times this was one of the Jeading churcbes of the Epis- copal faith. It was built in 1826, and the interior roof was medelled after Westmmsater Hal. But the de. mand of trade called for its removal. Tné land is very valuable; I am told that {, bas been sold for the full sum of $400,000. Tne church has secured sixteen lots on Forty-secon’ street and Fifth avenue, nine biocks only from Biehop Hughes’ great cathedral, aod the wealth of St, Tromas’ will enable the corporation to pat up one of the most elegant and spacious houses of it worship in thie city. The Fifth avenue and Murray Bill will be as celebrated soon for the location of the leading churches as it — is 7 eter -re . the most aristo- cratic of our people. Begws with Wasbing:on square and parsing up toward Murray Bil the visiter will) the Church ot the Ascension, Rev. Dr. Bedeli’a; the First teriap Church, Rev. Dr. Philips, one of the most elegant churches, and by far the most costly site in New York; Rev. Mr. Corey’e Baptist cnurch, just off Fifth ave- nue, on Eighteenth street; the commanding Presbyterian church, Rev. Dr. Alexander pastor, on Niseteenth street; the Reformed Dutch church, under'the care of Dr. MoUau: ly, on Twenty-first street, which is the original church that was once in Garden street, near where uow the Ex- itands; the pew marbie Duich church on Twenty- ope of the colieginte churches; Christ’s cb, Episcopal, near Thirty-fourth etreet; ‘Rev. Dr. Spring’s new bouse on Thirty-seventh street, and now Key. Dr. Morgan’s, on Forty-second atreat, not to men- tion other churches near Fifth avenue, but not on it—so ‘that this famed thoroughfare on the Sa>bath holds almost the whoie church-going population of fashion of this city. And it bas become the great promenade on the Lord’s Day. At noon it a densely crowded with the young, the gay, the elegant, the well dressed and the fashiouable, 4nd at the hour cf four or five ons pleasant afteracon of the Sabbath it is crowded with strollers, as Broadway is on a week day, And persons make it'® poiat to prome- pace bere op Supday aftervoon. And when the weather becomes more pleasant the fashionable part of New York wiil be found bere on Sabbath afternoon. Apprehended Revolt jtaten Island. RUMOKS OF AN ATTACK ON THE QUARANTINE BUILD- ISGS—MBBTING OF THE POLICE COMMISSIONRRS— PREPARATIONS TO REPEL THK INSURGENTS, BCC. The Commissioners of Police held a moeting yesterday afternoon. Tho epecial business before the Board was the Subject of another attack upon the Quarantine buildings, Private information baving been communicated to the Commissioners, that in case the bill now before the Legis- lature, in favor of the removal of the present Quarantine ‘was not passed on the adjournment of that body, the citi- zens of Staten Island would immediately proceed to de- atroy the buildings which have been erected daring the past winter. It was also understood that a large meeting ‘was to be held on the Island on Saturday evening, at Nau- tilus Hali, regarding the burning of the bulidiogs, and in all probabiitty the meeting would end in a unanimous feel- tog to immediately proceed and destroy the buildings. fe Aether oor thereupon adopted the followiog reso- lution :— Resolved, That the General Superintendent be directed bs Ih resdinvan Y2} eo, under Commando” 0 Waser: wend vergesnta Belton, Preston, Dison ceed to Quarantine for the ‘defence ‘of the alld. ings. Samuel Brevoort, the special aid to the General 8a; intendent, was detailed as commissary for the men, a) ‘The following communication, with the resolution, at once forwarded to Genera! Superintendent fallmadge :. via The tortion Soames cod Pe a Pg th ns 5 TR Gv. W. SMBASE, Chief Ulerk. Gen, Tal'madge accordingly communicated the above Teso.ution to Deputy Superintendent Carpenter, when the reqnired number of men were ordered to bold themselves: ip roadin« se at the First, Seoond and Third people of the inland. Te order w Jet the Commiesioners of Emigration know of the movements on the part of tne Police Commissioners, the following communication was sent to that body by the General Soperintend: nt:— COMMUNICATION OF THE GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT TO THR COM- MISSIONKKS OF EMIGRATION, Orrick OF GENERAL écrERINTENDENT OF PoLice, 413 BROOME STREET, CORNER OF BLM. New Your, april 16. 1860, To THR PRESIDENT OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF EMIGRATION :— From recent visit and observation st OF near Clecovered & disposition to recew the attack noon she buildings Et Qunrantine 10 case the bill for the'removal of Quaranting thonld fa5l in fle onsen. Jon received from Albany. we are apprehen- ette Sea it the il abot Tot pase tbe dlanifected ‘mer alsordiy make the aitacl ve with a resolution of the Cowmlertoners of Po- vet” Fim irceied tue hamdred aud tangy mee Be hand te reagueee 8 ees See ite proteciioa at short notte ‘You will please, therefore, give me the if sete TT Ne Gee ees fos ran 1 should fee! obliged by recetying any information, if you are pocteered of aby, im regard to lated move: rents of the inaurgedia. Beepecttuy Your obedient we General Buperintondant of Pol About 120 of the volcanic rifles were again heey | and placed in the bands of the police in case they be needed during the night. Boy Meira. —Augustus Doyo \welve years Of ego, left his father’s residence one wee! BA and hes not been beard of since. He wa: a quad boy, acd bis disappearance is a mystery. lls fre- Bides at 168 Bedtord strech Axon PirtianD Marctt.—It is stated io Detroit that a match between Phelan and Seerelter is shortly to De played in this city.