Newspaper Page Text
I» y Joseph CTlisby.
m Receiver s Notice.
I** * ,, Hihhmnotyhttbowopen»«A.
#«* "£ J wKrr.- the Tax MoStasr will
f ^ " u f u* pajern on Monday.
s&ssSE^SS^ai
j^tts*H^rwOR
Tax Kccclver.
' , >. U IIITTLE,
tT0 I*NEY at LAW,
* *c■*-ys«
MACON, FRIDAY, 3 CTCLOCK, P. M., JUNE 8, 1860.
Volume XXX IT.—No. 35.
. Jr -»
tAusev at law ’
^ 5JA00N,
. „ MaooB Circuit, and in the
TfUl r r * r 5fv an"', I’otnara, Wilkinson end
I 1,1 * ■
.. , . Blofk.mxt toboMdman'e
;, i* n (act 85)
„ 4 *t hardeman,
r tijK N E V AT LAW,
G/.vr<LV. QEQRQ1A.
' .....ch»<Tiu)*i!«aos
q S. & C. ROBINSON,
P CtTHBERT, GEORGIA
.i *,r proirint attention to nil business en-
iS l * l “ f m. in Kamlolpli, (May, Early. Mil-
^Trtrell. Stewart and Quitman rountlea.
klUBKOtOU Ac BASS,
fORNEYS AT LAW.
, r4 H. K. 8. U*J9, .
1^, r-> , <1* Dawaon. Terrell eo.,Ga.
rrnst s. iiumrimiES
, AtV AT Law, J’aimv. <1*.—Will Practice in
< .n i ircoil and aiUululnu rountlea. Alao in
. r*- at Savannah and MartMia.
. an«l tin* « n»ft**n»t»n which an* with him.
* r*inoi any man. the Law la open and
iliuA: M **H msik
mi'i.KAi* out* auoliuT.—
lilHOJtltE W. NORMAN,
uorney eft JL*zx\aj,
llamhwn, AsMtU County- Ark.
MV.- r, m..vnU>> llatniuifj!. Ark., win rontlnne
il-r e U» la A.hl. yai..l ike adjolnta* aouu-
I 'JShMflMs i" * nv " ,lMr oomolf ia the
iin*»M"F«. ». A. *«*Mtv.
nlrrriwdM 1 .V AnolfV,
[tobxkys at law,
k. voxvuxe. gkorgia.
I ll, i.rarti*f in t’rawford and the adjoining
I‘ All busdnt!** promptly attended to.
CO. DUNCAN,
Iittobmev at l« w,
I'KIIHY, GA.
PA II TN-ER.fijiff'
iiili. a hiilx,
...#n t.ilatrtirui ul Stubbs ami Hill,
i-artirr in Macon »nd adjoining Circuit*,
i ;v Supreme and Federal Court*.
T'rV—lip 5<i Street. Maron, O*
it. mix
' _ J.B.H1LU
w,v nwaBULKs urua
atm*. utirLEii,
|l In II \ K Y S AT LAW.
Albany, Georgia.
• t 5 |!,. -Mj„ ri,.r < 0.1 rl« of the Soutb-Wisat-
Tcrr.il, JtaiMlulph and Karly Conn-
artuaUl.ro.il—in WorlUaa»l .Macon coon-
sla-* Hr. ult-lii the t'nitrd State* i Ircnlt
uouiuh—anil hv .jMH-lal contract, tnauyconn-
*atin*gt». * ,
Kiwi. )*n 17
Mew Law Firm.
rilEKKORD & HARRIS.
HACOS, GA. '
Lutni* U» in Uitib nud a.ljotninif counties
. railed Stale* Court at SavamuiU and
l. an; county of lh» Slate l.y special con-
in... — Ci.aitLCs J. Ilannia.
THE GEORGIA TELEGRAPH.
rUBUAHRD
EVERY FRIDAY, AT 3, P. M.
PRICE —Two Dollar, a year, alnays 1* Advance.
U. a CENSUS OF GEORGIA.
We arc indebted to T. H Ross. Esq.. Depaty
Marsl.nl for the followin'? list of Assistant Mar
shals appointed to take the census in the vari
ous counties this year. Their returns will be
due I -Till Aujjust next, and for their convenience
and information of Post masters, we publish be
low the provisions ofthe Census Law of I860,
which relates to the frankin'; of packages of
blanks anil letters connected with the Census:
■ 17. Ami I* it fnrihtr emu-t- K That
the marshals ami their assistants ato hereby
authori/.ed to transmit through the post office
any papers or documents relating to the census,
ii\ uriu,? thi-r.oii ••otli. ial buMiic». census."
anti subscribing the same with the addition to
his name of mnrshal or assistant, as the case
tnny be; but this privilege shall extend to noth
ing but documents and pajiers relating to the
Convention)” and (darkly and doubtfully as we
concede) gives in his adhesion to t' e party, with
the determination to “drive out the (non-inter
vention) rebels” from it at once. Cajsar and
Brutus! is this the man who, a mouth ago,
when he unfurled old -Sant Houston, said these
“our northern brethren” were false, corrupt,
loathsome, unworthy of decent burial? The
Opposition should let down their life-boats and
go to the rescue of this Boating leader. He i*
in a bad way, or rather in all sorts of ways, at
one and the same time. He is in deep water,
and ought to be helped before ho sinks. We
quote from this new Hedged leader, to show
how aulhoritat'velv lie speaks for “Me hretA-
MH," and what he is going to do with and for
the deraoerntieparty: -V - • •
“We have confidence to believe that the con
stitutional democracy will, at Baltimore, insist
upon a plain and distinct understanding of the
matters in dispute, and accept nothing less than
an equivocal declaration of the constitutional
rights, as Laid down in the Davis resolutions and
the majority platform. By that means the
South trill heroi,it united, which we nil project
to have so much at. heart, the ipiterahlejaetion
census, which shall pass free; and the sura ’of .
twelve thousand dollars is hereby appropriated m our nudat which clings to the fortunes of the
out of anv money in the treasury not otherwise “Little Giant" and ins.odious Squatter Sover-
appropriated,-for the purpose of covering the eignty, be buried beyond the hope of resuri*c
expense of transmitting the blanks and other
matter through the mail, to be paid to the Post
Offico Department"
“i\ Franking Pririlreje.—The attention of
postmasters should lie directed, to the provision
in the 17th section of the .law, which authori
ses you and your assistants to frank all packn-.
ges and letters relating to tin* census, and this
is rendered the more necessary from the fact
of reference thereto being omitted in the abstract
of the laws regulating the Post Office’ Depart
ment last published. . -
LIST
ManMtJbr taking the Cemiu u Georgia.
Al.lillua—Itleeer* Mobley. Jackson—William Bell.
Itrooki—Ja>. Kdmuud«ou.
Brook*—Ja.. Kdmuudaon. .tanper—W m. L Phillip#. s
Berrien—Jmiuc. tiriUlu. Sr. .h.ne*-W tliy K Pope.
IlnlltK-k -Janiee M. Rlevee. Jeffeixm—B . P. Johnson.
lUker—P. D. llammond. Lowndes—I. M. UeLvun. .
llaaki.—Janie* Crocker. Linrolu—R. 11. Fleming. .
Bibb—Thoma* L. Ko*r. IJperty—W ni. H. Bogg*.
Baldwin—Tomlinson Fort. Lro—William C. Gill.
Burke—Thomaa A. Ward. Lumpkin—Jar. J. Findlay.
Bryan—William liarn. Laurens—Jas. M. Smith.
Butts— Edwart Vanier. Momgomery—J. A. Morris.
calhonn—H. T. Robson.,
tliiicb—Jobu Williams.
Codec—Rowan PntJunl.
( ass—William Goldwirc.
Chattooga—B. Hawkins
Mai on—Allen H. tJreer.
Madison—Will. J. Piiuuan
Marlon—Lcwcllrn W. Walt.
Meriwether—A. B. Howard
Murray—
tioo, and our righteous demands be cheerfully
accorded by our brethren of the north, thus
strengthening the union of the’States. Wo
foel persuaded that nil the pure Constitutional
Democrats wito counsel a return to Baltimore,
do so at policy for the purpose of securing the
platform rejected at Charleston, and tltus retain
thepArty organization and tlrire out the rebel*,
and failing to secure that platform they will not
hesitato to act up. for themselves. The only
compromise the south offers the north Is the
majority )d,itfi>rm, nothing more, nothing less.
If it can be got at Baltimore, well.* and good; if
not, the Constitutional men wilMiave nerve
enough to put it forward at Itieliwpud, or. cite-,
ithere, and put the right kind of metr<tn it. The
regular-Georgia Convention, which meets at -publish the above proceedings.
i tv * sly.
M»UKK & IIBUTEB.
fTORNV.YS AT LAW,
WACO'S. (IV.MHGIA.
•r Hfork (,'omrr of Cherry Sirff4
, mmJ Colic* Art'Hkc.
C Live H«.v»t*i*ft*J at partners in fho practic.it
•l hw intlic couuiim of tht Maron und ad-
i i'ir<'uitan,l cUvwhprt in fiin State by «pe*
aUo sriii attend ilie Federal Court* at
|*Ji and IfnrirUft
ALKX. M.SVKKM.
SAMUEL HUNTER.
paving! Engraving!
S WAHir.l.-welrv. Ac. Ac., engraved ill
yi«ty of L» tt«*r, in H:»U*t«o*a B®Ilding.
HUl,.i\>f ('Hinpluli & Colfoa'a. by
J. E. WELLS. Jr.
DOWN’S HOTEL.
' ou III aaw It All. BOAD DiroT,
MACON, GA.
E K. BROWN, Propriator
"*’•«)"» Ui« Arrival of every Train
2AN1TE HALL "
fw* umn house,
a °on r G-eorgin.
•if - DENSE,
f n»Jd Iltinse.l
PROPRIETOR.
ItOKEItT V. IlAltUlE,
|u» kb prafcmiuiial service* to the elUaeua of
|wad rklailr. lie may be found at all hour*
i >,t John P. Harvey’s store, ou Clu-rry St.
fftilm w.|r
OR. It. 11. IMS1IET
Cent Street, over Maaard A Bugbard's
I Jtnir, Uoridrnce on the Hill in Boot of tb*
•V Kind. >»»
cks on New York
EUR SALK RT THE
SIFACTUKEKS’ISANK
uerieb A tirocertes.
»l U* old stand No. 140 Mulberry
, •'t*. *. u-ual a full asaortuiout of gooda iu
l*r<w-iuiiu; of Caudle* of hia owu mann-
J'tktritKh candle*. Ho i* Ike only one in
^«P*i* IlnmJf, Utoas, aud Hta* IljMgar
* tbarr. Ail kindauffitK Liquor* aud Wine*
and beat Tobucoo, Orauge*, Ap-
, J"„Eroil». Italetna, Ftga, I'rune*. Nut*, and
U.•» Mad*. Pickle*, dapre*. OUve*, «live
S' V*«rv*. Hotter, CheaM, Cracker*, Uaks*.
Pit- Hams, Potatoes,Union*. Cab-
other arUrle* ia Uatlln* tuo name rot
* mrtcfc 10 w-iy
W arehouse
EMISSION .MERCHANTS
MACON, GA.
ta & WOOLFOLK
,i.““ri*'ed together, and will otvonpy tba
IrooUVareliouae new being ereeled
rt"*- hardoinou A Spark a.
‘-itoetu uiadu ou Colton when aakui for.
Rope, Oroeelte*, *e., aball
r^kl attention.
[ P Prompt attention to btudneaa, to mer-
*-*rr of patronage.
JAS. II. WOOLFOLK.
N. COATES
.eman& Sparks
I ^aro Houso
emission merciiants,
’Httron, hid.,
JJr to give prompt attention at theil
r u**H* m >F WAKKilOUNK, on the cor
kJ'r.plar .treets.to
Clayton—Ja*. 11. Morrow. Mitchell- Jo*. J. Bradford.
Crawford—J. K. Torreitoe. Morgan—John C. Bee*.
Cotuinbl*—I.ueln* A. Lake. Mo*cogeo—Thoma* Cbaffln
Chatham—Out*. J. White. McIuto*li—E. M. Blunnt.
Chattaboochie—FSRackcr. Milton—
(V.mden-J. D. HoUendorf Miller—A. If. McLaw*.
Clark—Early M. chandler. Monroe—Carey A. King.
Coweta—B. F. Hammond, Nowton—Kpbraim Thoru.
Cobh-Wnitam H. Tucker. Oglethorpe—B. Crawley.
Campbell—W. M. Bartlett. PFcken*—William Tate.
CharUon—John AtnetL Plke-David (iibsou.
Cherokee—Warren M<S«. Putnam—P. If. Dawson.
Carroll—tieo. W. Awtrey. Pulaski—J. Oarotber*.
CUtooaa—N. L. Trammell. Polk—John OritHn.
ColquUt—Peter O. Wing. Paulding—Whitney Adair,
flay—Alex. S. Tcnneillc. Pisree—Matthew Sweat.
Dawson—Wm. J. Barrett. Wnltman—Wm. T. Daw.-on.
DcKalh—James S. Klliotl. Rabun—James Bleckley.
Dreatur-Johu Daffln. Richmond—I. Thompson.
Dade—J. O. Jackoway. Randolph—Jaa. L. Rossi
Dooly—Abram 11. l*iat\l. Scrireu—M. N. McCall, Sr.
Dougherty—T. P.IIampton. Spalding—J. H. Logan.
Early—Abram II. McLaw*. Schley—John Monk.
Kcbola— Isaac M.DeLyon. Stewart—Jamcs-A. Fort.
Elbert—William Toasley. Sumter—Benjamin Tharp.
Eauuael—N. M. Ilrin»on. Town*—John Bryson.
Effingham—It. Mi Reeve*.. Tronp-Danlel N. Sheet.
Fannin—T. K TnuuneU. TalnaR-J. P. U. sAea.
Fontylh—T. Strickland. Telfalr-Robt. T. Wilcox.
Franklin—Nelsou Osborne. Twlgg*—Lewi* Solomon.
Polunt-c. H. Chandler. Talbot—Simon T. Veil.'
Floyd—Wm. Johnson. Taykn^-S. II Dwlrft.
Fayette—Wniiam III***. Terrell-Beiijaroin F. Cock,
(libuer—Win: P..Milton. Thoma*—Wade F. Sanford.
<Alyun—Ch»*. C. L’.her. Talllarerro-
lionlon—F. J. Sullivan. Dpaon—Jame* Zorn.
t!la**oock—AhramHtassell. Union—John Belt.
Gwinnett—B. 8. Thoma*. WWta-W. T. Lewi*.
(*r«*t!ii—OavidiMjn, Jt. \\ a*blnfftott—1{o1»poik
Hall—Obld Thompson. Wilke*—Robert S. Smith.
Hart—John G. McCurry. Man)—Wm. H. Thoma*.
Heard—Jasper N. Pittman. Wayne—hnoeli D. Hendry.
Habersham—T. J. Hughe*. Walton—Allen IV. Brown.
!!irri7- llmdshaS’ WHkln*on r Wm. tr. BeMI.
Irwin—Jam** Ihmlk, Jr. Walker—VV m. 1). Lnmpkln,
Johiisou-Win. T. MeVay. Wehster-Ollver Taggart,
' Ward & co.,
^TVRERS 4> DEA L E KS,
Wiethe iToydHooO ..
(J U0RUIA
* ^Ick" of riiq pul.lil
lies, lirelta,
f thto nitmic «Wwnt« flu-
,.r'.omWw. North. . •* IA » *J
, !1 RA1 fLKUOUO' BL'GGIKScon.
RIRB COirXTV CAVALRY.
This time honoreil rorjis, .which we learn was
first organized in 1884, and re-organized May
1st, 1857, was out on Thursday last, in full r»|>
and feather, (having n most delightful day for a
a parade) for the purpose of target shooting and
sabre exercise, for three, prizi^, viz: a Silver
Pitcher, a Pocket Knife, and a Silver Plated
Cup, presented to the corps by private \V. J.
McElroy, a very generous gift from a very lib
eral member. Kach competitor had three trials
of Ids skill in cutting at the heads, thrusting at
the wing, and shooting nt the target The ex
ercises wok place at Camp Oglethorpe. The
first prize, the beautifully engraved Silver Pitch
er, was won by Cornet < River Porter, whose skill
in horsemanship, satire and pistol exercises
was unequalled. He made three ’ excellent
shots, and did not miss a single head or tlx:
ring in his three trials. His horse as it were,
seemed to slide upon a sea of glass, so gently
and swiftly did he glide the course.
The second prize, the Pocket Knife, was won
!>y Sergeant A. McOally, who made the-host
shot; only two inches from the bull’s eye. Ho
fell off in his count by missing the heads and
ring; ho rode at sucli n rapid gait that he could
not control his sabre in time for execution, nev
ertheless, his exercises with the ’ sabre wore-
fruitless.
The third prize, the Cup, was won.by Private
James M. Gates, from the Warrior District, who
seemed to be perfectly, at home in the saddle
and in the use of his’ pistol and sabre, and we
should suppose that his good luck would have
some influence npnn his neighbors to enroll
their names as members of this handsome Corps.
Licnt R. R. Bearden, Sergeant I^oonidasI
mar, and Privates Burgo, Dunlap, Giiiiert, Scott
and Wimberly, displayed exquisite skill in the
management and ruling their steeds, nnd de
serve great credit, Imt they moved so rapidly,
that they were aide to do but little execution.
Afte.-’tho exercises of the field, the company,
arid a few others were invited by the non-com
missioned officers, to partake of a collation upon
tiie grounds, prepared by that famous caterer,
('. If. Freeman, who never fails to have every
thing nice and good.
After dispensing as many good things aSeach
one seemed to desire. Lieut. John Jones, of the
Governor’s Horse Guards, in an appropriate
speech, presented the winners with their prizes,
which were received and handsomely acknowl
edged in brief, but pithy speeches by the win
ners. A few momenta were spent in social re
unions of sentiment and speech. The company
then returned to the city, went through quite a
a number of evolutions, the observed of all ob
servers, and were dismissed.
New Wiikat.—Wo are indebted to Mr. Na
than Weed for four heads of wbito wheat, raised
in Macon, from seed grown in Tuscany. There
are forty odd grains of the largest size to cacti
of these heads, and nothing is wanting to the
finest kind of grain business but plenty of them.
Also to (be Ratne gentleman torn stalk of rice
just received direct (him China. This also is,
of course, a fine specimen.
MAN OVERBOARD.
Lees than a month ago, the Augusti Chroni
cle A Sentinel announced to tlie woHd, in words
following, to wilt .
“We unfitrl the flag of tlie hero of Sail Jacin
to for the Presidency—tubjeet only to the hah
lot. 1 " •
The italiet were the Chronicle's, though lie
went into it in l>old Homan fashion. lie not
candidate, hut he mode a platform,
too" and on that day, wc thought the Chronicle
& Sentinel fairly fixed on his platform and his
candidate. The next morning we looked to see
the flag and it was not there. The Chronicle
A Sentinel had dnepp** It, and if lie lias ever
said a word about tbo heroofSan Jacinto since,
we have failed to notice it.
Two weeks after, he was ringing the
i Bell and Everett, with a rather
sort of clangor, hut still a rmgin
*k. j-anic 1'ir.inr-- uitermitti'iilly ever j
since. In his number of the tl*t nil., be ring
'll it ns a “very good ticket,” c “very sound
ticket.” and quote* the Ei q lire) to prove that
Bell has a private platform ol’his own, mot the ,
Chronicle J. Sentinel's platform) h lii.'li is sound
leading editorial ol tbesanie
'Milledgeyille next. Mpiulay, will require of its
delegates to hayc the platlorin or nothing, and
imiler no cireumstaaccs to .accept Douglas on
any pla tform, nor any mgn, eren though he be
a Georgian, oti the Douglas platform, or any
other two-sided structure. • There may lie nu-
ny who would,willingly ntmpminiae on the
Dred Scott decision unKtpltiined, or thu Tcn-
ncSsoe ultimatum, ’ unexplained, hut they "can
not sueveed. After all that has happened any
each eomjiromiOt.iruohl jnture defeat, ami if de
feat niiist come, wise men prefer defeat ou’prin-
ciple to defeat on double rout true! ion. Defeat
now oil principle. If that occur, tcHrimatre. tic-
tory htreutfter, and litis mean* more than any
mail can see into.”
viz: Dr. Cochran, Tho.s. Temples, B. O. Bow
man. E. Kemp, T. R. Conley, J. Hardy, S.
.Meredith and .la-per Jlnlloeh ; u lm retired and
soon alt ei made the following report:
1*4. llaolned. That in the opinion of this
meeting a dismemberment of the National
Democratic party, at this time would be fraught
with eminent peril and great danger to the
Union of the States, as there is no other party
in the government, in our judgment, that can
heat down the Black Republican party in the
approaching Presidential election.
-I. ],‘,-e.d('d. That we regard the great prill
ciples of Non-intervention, as established
185(1, and adopted by both the National Deni
ocratic and Whig parties in their Platforms of
1852, as rc-ttllirmcd in (be Kansas Nebraska
Bill in 1854, and fully set forth in the Cincin
nati Platform of 1850, and ratified by the elec
tion of Janies Buchanan to the Presidency,
amply sufficient,' if. faithfully carried out, to
! : : ■ . : !; la. :: .lit- "! the S'.Util in tin- Ter
.ritories. ' *-^MHfi
:W. Reunited, That in the opinion of this
primary Convention the State of Georgin
should’ l*o represented in the National. Dent' '
ocratic Convention, which meets in Baltimore
on the listli of June.
_ 4th. 1,‘enohed, That while we regret the con-:
tingencies that brought about the rupture
the Charleston Contention, we have an abid
ing confidence in the ability and patriotism of
the entire delegation from Georgia in said Con
vention. - "... ’■
There being'some objection to the above re
port, Dr.' Cochran made a speech of some
length in support .of the.’same, which resolu
tions were put by the Chair and. passed.
The Committee reported thc'followingnames
as delegates, to Milled Seville? J. R. Bragg,
Gen. I). X. Smith, C. O. Davis, N. W. Hugiies,
J, Pittnmri, J. Pierce, J. .Rivers and It.
Rozer.
On motion, it was resolved that the Macon
Telegraph and Federal Union lie requested
There being iio other business the meeting
then adjourned.
~ " . D. X. SMITH, Chairman.
H. A. Solomon, Secretary.
- Wh.kzs.—The Democrats^ of lhi< venenthle
old county,- held their meeting Tuesday fast.—•
The (csojutloiiK sustain the ’majority report at.
Charleston, and deelarc it. in strict "conformity
to the (k'cisioit oftlie Supreme Cpurt, wliieli ait
Democrats, north and south, had pledged them
selves to uphold Nothing is said of thc’soco-
dors, and* nothing oft the Rallimore Vs'. Rich
mond issue, the great desideratum being, in die
opinion oftlie meeting, the harmony ofthe.de-
mocratic party in order to beet tlie Rla’ek Ke-
publieans: .The action Of tlie meetirig is dis-.
t reset ugly non-eoiiiioilt.il. Wo had liiqiedfor
belter tilings from old Wilkes.
Me*srs.’RulK‘Vt Toombs, I. T. Irvin, B. W.
Dear.I. M. G. Robert, O. L. Rattle, W, l>. Walr
tou t S. Ratnett ami Jas. II. Willis. Were ap
pointed delegates to Mdledgeville..-lSaV. Rep..
“■liintreaeingly iimt-eommittal," 110 doubt.
ISore “Distressing" Non-Committalism.
~ Old Clark Cunhty last Saturday
Iletohed, That, as we believe the unity'ami
success of the Democratic party are essential to
the safety of the country and the continuance of
t’lO-. Union, we deprecate the threatened ifivi-
sjon in our ranks. But, while.we. are willing
to meet our brethren iu council in a spirit of
good feellug, wc arc unwilling to surrender Our
principles for the sake ofhannony.
Remitted, Tliat we are.um-oinpromisi.iigly op-
posed tothe doctrine that n Territorial Legisla
ture, undvany pretence, <ain exclude slavery
frohi a Territory or impair die rights of South
ern slaveholders.
Itemdeed, That wc Approve of tlip suggestion
of another effort to secure a sound platform of,
principles nnd a'sound man as Jlic party candi
date, at the approaching adjourned Convention
ip Baltimore. If there he a failure to effect’%»
reasonable an oiiject, wc oannot yield 011; honor
or our principles to any .supposed policy, hut
must unite With the sound Democracy in offer
ing other candidates to the people’. _ .
The following gentlemen were appoiutcil to
represent the Democracy of Clark in the Con
vention at Miliedgoville, on tlie 4th of .rune
next,'viz: lion. Howell Cobb. Hon. Jauics
Jackson, Azariah P, Cobb, Win. G. Deloney,
Janies A. Sledge, Gen. James D. FnersoTi, La
mar Cobb,,Benajah Slieats, nnd Henry Hull. Jr.
Here, it will lie seen is nothing about “Pro
tection”—-nothing about Richmond. The del
egation is “one oftlie strongest kind.”
Cass.—A meeting for National Democrats
was held in Cass, on the 28th, very luiiperousi
ly attended; which sent as delegates.lo Millcdge-
.ville, J..W- Harris, II. P. Farrow, J. O. Bran
son. E. M. Fields ti I*ev.v, E. M. Price, and J.
L. Rowland. ■*-'* • ?* *. "... - ;
Fi’lton.—A call for ri National Democratic
meeting, signed by numerous gentlemen, - ap
pears in the Atlanta Uonfeijeracy. It Waif ap
pointed for last night.
r THOMAS -COUNTY.
I Wc are- yuleb'ted to the Wire. Grass Reporter
for an Extra Containiiig the- proecedings of the
Democratic meeting in that county on the 8pth.
The following resolutions were passed iinaid-
ipously:
Remind, Tltat in the'opinion of this meeting
uo new issues should lie applied op a tesf of ft
delity to Democratic principles.
Renotred, That wc are opposed to precipita
ting the cotton States into a revolution for any
existing causes, lmt true to oqr Southern rights
trinctplcs-and to ouf love of equality in the
Jnion, whenever tlie Federal -Government; by
its aggronsive jiolicy or any overt act, should
peek to (i’egrade tile South, wo are ill favor of
resistance even to a disru]rtion ol every tie that
binds us 'to the Union.
Remind, That we are in favor of ending del
egates to tl»« Baltimore convention iifa spirit of
itarmony", uninstructerf, to puisne such a course;
as tnay, in their judgment, l«e*t subserve ouriu-
lerest.
Retoleed, Tlwt we will send delegates to tlie
Convention nt Milledgevilic on the 4th June.
Retoleed, That we have no. words of crimina
tion or re-crimination towards Southern men
engagrd in a common muse, lint are content to
submit our views as expressed in tlie preceding
preamble.
On motion of A. P. Wright, Esq., tlie following
named gentlemen were appointed delegates to
the Convention at Milledgeyille:
Wm. II. Reynolds. Esq., James McDonald
Wm. G- Ponder, James L Seward, Mm. C.
Mitchell, Robert S. fiutvb. Jnbn llurst, J. fl,
.indscy, 11. II. Tooke, J. H. M’halcy, nnd E L
Him s.
R I*, lltnes offeied the following resolution,
wbieh was adopte<l wilhontdebate:
Retofred, That wc <lo not endorse the doe-
trine of squatter sovereignly, ora squatter sov
ereignty platform.
Tiie "following resolution was then offered by
mes L. Seward, which was unanimously
to, to-wil:
Remit,,'. That we recommend Alexander II.
Stephens as a steteiaaaw worthy to fill the high
or President of the United States, ami rc-
1 him to the Baltimore C<
DEMOCRATIC MEETING.
, At a meeting of a portion of tlie Democrats
in Bibb county, assembled at Concert Hall,
12 o’clock, M., 011 Saturday, 2d June, 1860,
Thomas C. Nisnrr v ; Ijoj., was called to the
Chair, and Dr. G. U. Griffis, requested to act
as Secretary. .. . ’
On motion of Geri. J. M'. Armstrong, tlie
Chair appointed the; following gentlemen,
committee to report business, to-wit: CoL q
W. Armstrcug, Col. W. K. dcGraflenreid, H011,
CVR..Co!e, J. A. Nisfiet, Esq., Messrs. A. B.
Adams, H. C:! Oaffey, -T v Mulaney, J. A.' Ma
lone, B. G. JiOcke(k and Charles Be ruff
The Committee after Conference, returned
and reported the following Preambled and Res
olution, which on motion were adopted with
one dissenting vote:
IIhrreat, Judging from the indications-, of
the various county meetings called for the pur
pose oftappointing delegates (b the Convention
to meet at Miliedgoville on 4th mst, that there
is at least a possibility that a majority of said
Convention tnay Ins iu favor of ignoring the
Baltimore Convention and sending delegates to
the Richmond .Convention; and • ,
Whereat,. Such a movement would result in
tlie disorganization of tlie Natiqntil’ Democratic
party*-which it is pur desifo aiid object to pre
serve inviolate, so Tong as this can lie. done
compatible with the- honor 5ml integrity of all
parties concerned; and ...
IFAciw*. At a meeting of a portion of the
Democratic party of Bibb county, on 19th May,
resolutions were adopted improving of the seeCs-
iisoi* of ft i-irtiiwi nf lhu.Kuuth'*/n t)«C>Sfttiuu
from the Convention at’Clurleston and rccom-
tnchding the appoiiiinieilt of delegates from
the State of Georgia to the Convention Of the
SK-eilers to meet at Richmond on the Jltli
insL-; and ' 1
mmw, Suglt action slid not represent the
views,of the National Democrats otsaid coun
ty; therefore
IUfoJeed, This meeting of -National Demo
crats, believing and hoping that the dissensions
which prevailed at Charleston may lie amicably
adjusted hv wise ami prudential counsels at the
Baltimore' Convention, will appoint seventeen
delegates to attend the session or tlie Conven
lion at Miiledgeville, on the 4th just, not for
tlie pur)wise of taking seats in said Convention,
Imt in tlie event <Jf a failure bv said Conven
lion to appoint delegates to the Baltimore C01W
ventum; or in the event of the appointment of
delegates t«i the Richmond Convention with in
structions to go to Baltimore on certain condi
tions only, then the delegation from this conn-
ty he and” they are hereby instructed to act in
concert wi0i such portion of said. Milledgeyille
Convention, and'any others who may he/asso-
■J ciatcd with (hem as National Democrats, i n the
appointment' of a delegation to represent the
National Democrats of Georgia in tlie Baltimore
Convention, and tlwt said delegates have power
to appoint substituies in case they cannot at
tend. --
Tlie Chair then apimintcd tlie following gen
lleiuen in pursuance of the terms of tlie resolu.-.
tion: Lerov Napier, Cicero Tharpc, Redding
Minchew, Nathan Bass, IL C. Cafley, Janies U\
Armstrong; Henry J. Liunar, Sam’,1 B. ■ Hunter,
M T m. F- W'jlburn, Barnard Hill, Pulaski S.
Holt, Win. C. Wilson,JR. Einstein, Lewis S.
Avant,'A. B. Adams, George Mead. John Jaug
stetter.
The meeting was then ably addressed, on
call, by llon'R-A. Nisbct aiid Barney Hill, Esq.
Urgently enforcing the necessity of a represen
talion at Baltimore to consolidate the demo
cratic party on a satisfactory platform and can
delates. /•"
On motion, tlie proeeedinp were ordered to
he pilblhhcd,- and tlie meeting then adjourned.
- - >c C- uionir ei,
T; C.* N1SBET, Chairman.
G-. G. Griffin, Secretary.
Wilkinson Democratic Meeting.
According to previous notice, a meeting of
and he his tin- iinnoeraiie party of M’llkinsdu county met
at Invinton. to take into eonsiileRition the
li -1 policy to la- pursued in the pending Pres
idential e’lectioii and to apimint delegates to
liii- State Convi'iition in Milltdgevllle, on the
till of June.
Gen. D. X. s’l lit)) was niiaiumoiisly called
to tlie Chair, and II. Soloinon was request-
enougli; but ‘'himc-if to tli.- p'uUHc^'sa .si Vo art a- Se.-r tarv. Tlie Chair «n taking
all eninp'omisc short df hi - scat, in a few remarks, stated the ohject ol
. swindle declares that ",ntr the meeting, tin motion of Dr. < 1 *i: 1:111, tlie
Is will be' cheerfully accorded 1 Chair appointed the following names ;1 < a
by ov~ n-'t*"” of tho North (in the Baltimore I
numlier, he intr.
leiiiocrnt. tleiiot
‘•protection,” ns
righteous demands will be clteerlnll.
bv our brethren ofthe North (in the
NEW YORK AT.BALTIMORE
A story has been circulated that the Fernan
do .Wont! “Mozart Hall" Democrats were pret
jiating for a representation at Richmond.- How
much truth there is in.it may be seen in the
following from tlie New York Daily News, the,
especial organ of that party.*
Puosi'Fi-rtVE.—The prospects of a perfect
union oftlie Democratic party at BaltSbore are
brightening overy day. We-bear on all sides
the expressions, “We must unite.’’ “It is bur
duty to unite.” In our own city the little lo
cal tiickcrings and difficulties which hive here
tofore existed, ami which divided 11s on some
local questions are now yielding to (he general
desire for union and harmony. When demo
crats meet each other iu the streets, the first
question is, “Shall wc not unite at Baltiiiiorc ?”
This is as it should be. Wc are pleased that
the Convention adjourned rather than to pre
sent two candidates for tiie suffrages of tho
Democratic party. The great heart ofourpa'rty
North ami .South heats for Union, and the beat
ings of that heart during the interval between
the adjonmiucnt at Charleston and the nssem
Ming at Baltimore will lie seen and felt bv all.
No one can mistake the wishes of the masses
in regard to iiniotl, and no delegate will dare to
oppose any conciliatory measures necessary to
acounplixh this great result so ardently desired
hv every true Democrat in the countiy.
' With the almost certain union of our parly
at Baltimore, tlie prospect of our success next
I' ill w .i- in ' - r 11101 '■ li.ilb-i in?.
THE SAVANNAH EXPRESS
Says that our case stated is not 11 supposa
Me one, to-wit; Tliat tlie Richmond Conven
tion should proceed to nominate in advance of
(he Baltimore Convention, because “ when tl
seceding Convention adjourned at Charleston
in lid, it was e.\pre>*l\ Muted,
in the Resolution, (hat it was fur tlie jinrqio.se
of eoi ’idtati'io and action would follow, only
under certain circumMaiiocs—such as a refusal
on (be part of Baltimore, to present such a
platform as Rielnnond could accept”
Now, friend Kxjiress, Your memory h much
:u built here. The Resolution of adjournment
staled no such thing. It simply called a Con
vention of the Democratic jiartv, who are in fa
vor of the majority platform to meet at Rich
mond, aud said nothing about eon.. ulttittan or
itefioh in “ rrrt'iin circtn/iAfanrfxN It was a
naked <*all for a Convention—a nominating
men’ts in .Alabama and Mississippi all seam to
us to look to an independent nomination at
Richmond, and your own Savannah meeting
pronounced the invitation to meet the National
Democracy in Baltimore an intuit which Geor
gia could not too indignantly repel. Why
then do you say that an indejiedent pre-noini
nation in Richmond is not a sujiposable easel
We hojic it may not prove to be; but you
must find some better reason for holding it is
not
From the Central Georgian.
Decision of the Supreme Court.
Tiiomas Jones, )
r*. ■ Murder.
Tub State. )
Opinion by the Court:
Stephens, J., held 1. This was an indictment
for murder. The killing was admitted upon the
trial and tiie defense turned wholly upon tlie
grading of the homicide. Tiie Judge was asked
by the dvlense tn charge the Jury, "That the
existence of malice is not presumable in this
ruse, if mi any ratinnai theory eun*i.*U-nt with
all the evidence’ tho killing w.as cither justifia
bio or excusable, or an act of manslaughter.”-
Tho equivalent of this proposition in simpler
terms, is, that the jury should not grade the
killing as murder, if the evidence would justify
them ill grading it either as justifiable homicide
ora’s manslaughter. The charge thus' stated,
becomes a truism in criminal law, nnd wc think
was improperly refused. The Judge says that
the grade of justifiable homicide was not pre
sented as an issue by the argument.’ If this re
mark be an Intimation tiiat the issue was not
properly presented, it is sufficient to reply, that
it was as competent to present it by asking a
charge as by making a speech, nnd the very re
quest under consideratioxfdoes present tlie issue.
Tlie Judge refused to let that issue go tb tlie ju
ry because in his opinion there was no evidence
which could support it Ilis opinion that the
evidence could not support the supposition of
manslaughter, if lie had happened to have that
opinion, would have been equally potent to ex
clude that grade also from the consideration of
the jury. Ilis opinion, then, if such had been
his ojiinion, that there was no evidence which
could.possibly justify or mitigate the killing,
would, have been sufficient foundation for a
judgment of murder by the Court, without the
intervention or a jury. Tho homicide lieipg ad
mitted, there were but three possible conclusions
in the case, murder, manslaughter, or justifiable
homicide, and the exclusion of any two ofthe
three would necessarily have been an adop
tion of the third. The Judge held that his opin
ion was eomjietent to oxclude.one of the three
conclusions oflaw; if so, his opinion, if he had
tia|>jicncd to have that opinion, would have been
equally coiiipcteot to exclude (wo, and tho cx-
clusibn of two would have been the adoption
oftlie third, and o-scttleinent of the. whole busi
ness by himself. ■ •
He had no use for a jury on tlie issue of justi
fiable homicide, because in his opinion tlfcre
was mi. evidence which showed a justification,’
ail’d idle had hapjiened to bo-further of ojiinion
that there was no evidence which showed a
mitigation,-, he could not have had any use for a
jury on the issue of manslaitghtcr. The remain
ing conclusion of murder Would havejiecn as
certain' as that one remains after taking two
from three,-and he could have had no monf usg
-for a jury in arriving at-it, than lie Avoifld have
lmd for a jury to'assist him in deciding a mo
tion fbr a non-suit: wouhl’ thin be .allowing the
jury (o judge of the lair and the fact? It
would lie to obliterate the fine of demarkatibn
between tlie province ofthe Judge and the jiro-
vinec of tlic'jury in criminal cases, and to unite
them both- in the person of the Judge. To
, udge of tlie law and the fact in a criminal case,
is to Jyrermino"from tin? ©rHo***^ wi»«t not)
were .lone, and with what.intentions, and then
to decide whqt Crime they constitute, or whether
they constitute any crime at ail. In this case,
the Judge allowed thejury twdecide irhat Crime,
liuLrefuscd tb allow them to consider whether
there might be no crime. They were entitled
to decide all the law of tlie case, but they were
precluded freiiv deciding a very important part
ol it!. In the <sisd of Holder vs. the State, 5 (ia.
Rep. page 445, this Coilrt, consisting at that
time.of its first three-Judges, said: * “In short,
the Court, in the full exercises of its own func-
tioohjiniist still obey tlie behest'of the Statute,
and cWifcde’to thejury, the exercise of their
judgment on all the hue of the cate.” In an
accusation of murder where, as in this case,
the defense turns ujion the grading of the homi
cide, fn order that tlie jury may exercise their
judgment on all the law of the case, all of the
grades jmt in issue either by the argument or
the requested charges, ought to be submitted to
their decision,, along with proper instructions
as to what constitutes eacli grade. TheJudge
instructs, but thejury decides. Every person
accused of crime, is entitled to have tho deci
sion of a jury upon any defense of law which
he may choose to rest upon tlie facts in evi
dence. Courts may distrust juries, hut the Leg
islature confided in them.
2/ In grading this homicide what instruc
tions ought to have been given the jury con
cerning the drunkenness of the nccuscd-? This
Court, njqirovjng of the Judge’s refusal to give
tlie instructions asked by tiie.dcfen.se, thinks
that other important instructions not given,
would, have been approjiriate to the facts in
evidence. I shall point out what we think
would have been the proper instructions, but
s^all first present those views of the general
subject which lead my own mind to the conclu
sions at which the Court arrived.
One side in the argument, affirms as a great
irineiple, tliat no man drunk or sober, should
>e punished for a crime which’ he die? not have
sufficient mind to perpetrate, and the other re
plies with an equally imjiorlant principle, that
drunkenness is no excuse for crime. The two
sides, each relying upon its chosen principle,
l(ave arrived at singularly conflicting conclu
sions. The truth is That both those principles
are correct and constitute, with the just de
ductions from them, but jiarLs of one harmoni
ous whole, sustained bv law and sanctioned .by
reason. The cr/or .which the side of tlie accus
ed commits, lies in assuming too large a quan-
tum ’of mind as the minimum which can fur
nish the necossdry mental element in all crime
■in.erecting too high a standard of mental ca-
jiacity: Different classes of crimes, do involve
different degrees of iiiind, and in all classes
there may arise particular iristanoes, which in
the mode and circumstances of tlieir perpetra
tion, may involve even a high deg.’ee of scien
tific knowledge. But subject .to tills qualifica
tion of the general truth, the general truth it
self is that the minitnnm of mind which can
furnish the necessary mental, dement in crime,
a far smaller quantity than was claimed by
the argument for the accused.
The argument rightly assuming- that there,
can he no murder without the mental clement
of malice, proceeded to claim, as being neces-
-,in'lv involved in nialire. :m amount ofmemn-
rv and reason which, I think, is not justified
by the legal dimensions of that malice which
enters into The constitution of .murder. . The
lojndar idea of malice 1 in its sense of revengo,
latred, and ill-will, has notlring to do witli the
subjecL A numlier of cases might be given to
show the difference between the popular idea,
and tliat malice whidl forms a necessary jiart
of the legal crime of murder. The qrime. of
infanticide jiresents tiie difference in a striki
light Thjs crime is dear murder, and the
mother who destroys her infant to conceal her
own shame, has legal malice, though in point
of fact, she may fed no hatred towards any hu
rt being in the world, nor any indifference
. . human life in general, and may actually
have the yearning- nf a unithcr's lm e toward'*
her innocent victim—loving its fife, just less
ban her own reputation. Here there is no
malice in the popular sense assumed in this ar
gument, and yet the law says there is malice,
iind that tlie killing is murder; and reason
gives its undoubting sanction to the law. The
legal idea of malice in the crime of murder Is
being, in
is the simple intent to kill a human being,
such a case as I have stated. Whether this
tent springs from hatred, or from a sense of
shame, or from (he mere phrensy of drunken
ness, it is malice, it is the mental constituent
of murder, unless there is something to justify
the intent, or in some decree to excuse it.—
Now the kind of a cue in wiiidi this intent
happens to be formed, obviously has nothing
to do with quantum of mi ml involved in its
formation. Whoever then, lias mind enough
to form the simple intention to kill a human
being, has miml enough to have malice, and tc
furmab the mental constituent of murder.
And even this quantum of mindsniall ns it is,
to bo viewed and investigated in the light of
important rule of evidence, applicable to all
men alike and founded on reason and necessity.
It Is tliat all men are presumed to intend the
natural and proainato consequences of their
actions. When a man-kills another by the
use of means appropriate to that end, ho is
presumed, drunk or sober, to have intended
that end. This is but a presumption, but it
must jirevail until it is-rebut tod by. other facts
and circumstances,.showing that the end was
not intended, but was accidental—it cannot be
rebutted by the mere vague opinions of wit-
ncsiies, that tlie man had “no mind,” or “didn’t
seem to know what he was doing!” The result
is then, that any ma^ sober or dnuik, sane 01
insane, has mind enough to furnish the men
tal clement in murder when he lias enpugli to
form the intention to kill a human being; and
lje shall be presumed to have formed that in
tention whenever he has done the act of killing
l.y tin i e of.appropriate-means, unless'there’
are circumstances to show that death wa,s
accidental and not an intentional consequence
of his act
This doctrine faithfully inforced, offers no cs
cnjicto the drunk man. from.punishment for
the crimes which he commiit, and fbr those not
committed by liini, lie ought not to be punish
ed. Under this doctrine, if it were the whole
law applicable” to his case, even tlie poor idiot
qould “scarccly.-be saved.” But it is not the
whole law applicable to'his'cose. And this
brings me to a consideration of the great per
versions which have been made of the doctrine
that drunkenness is no excuse for crime.
Tiie foundation stone oftheSe perversions, not
distinctly shaped in the argument bnt uncon-
scously assumed .in it, is a feeling or notion,
that the exemption of insane persons and young
children, from criminal responsibility, is not the-
result of positive law ’excusing tliem.-hut is the
simple consequence of their mental deficiency,
ivhich'is supposed to he so complete as not to
he capable of furnishing the mental clement of
crime; while the drunken man with the same
actual.mental dcficieiicy, is’held rc.sj>onsiMe for.
his actions, not becausethey are Crimes, having
tlie mental and physical-element ofrtirimg,. but
by virtue of a certain’’ com true tire eajiacity in
fused into him, from reasons of policy, -by the
latv which declares that drunkenncsssiialt he no
excuse for cirne.- • •; •- , *'■■1
The reverse of all this i4 the-true philosophy
of the law. Tlie law deals With all thcseclasscs
of people as haring a sufficient quantum of
"mincT to have had .passions and evil intentions
and carelessness in their action, and so to furn
ish the mental element of crime, hut as tailor
ing also tinder an .infirmity of reason which
serves to betray Them, into these evil intentions
and carelessness, and at'tho-samc time breaks
down their .power of resisting tcmjitation. The
taw comes in then and excuses'the young and
the insane out of tenderness towards an infirmi
ty which, is involuntary, ami at the same time,
to guard against the possibility that men might
make the same. excuse .whenever . there jjs the
same infiriiiitv of reason, the law takes special
care to excliide-drunken men from the excuse,
because, tlieir infirmity is voluntary. The re
sultis, that,the young aijd the involuntary in*
sane, occupy a jnatfnrnj'of their own, by yirtue
o( an exception triade in their favor, while the
voluntary insanity of-drunken net#! being exclu
ded from the exception, stands jiist as if no ex
ception had been made, "and tbc drunk man and
sober man occupy the same great platform of
resjionsibility for the crimes Which they commit
amt for no others. When their aetjons have the
criminal mental clement united with them, they
become crimes, but not till then. Tiie crimes
of drunk men, like those of sober men, are ac
tual crimes, not constructive ones, whole criiyes,
not pieces of crimes. And drunkenness, like
ait other things which are not made excuses by
jiositive law, is no exciisc for crime, but is like
all thg rest, a flict which ought' to be used when
ever it can, as it often tnay do, shed light upon
cither branch of the alleged crime, the physical
or mental, in investigating what crimCj or wheth
er nny criftie, hits been committed.
.The argument might safely be left where it
now stands, but I prefer to." trace the fallacies
which have been founded on a sound principle,
through the two sjiccial forms in which they
have p reach ted themselves.
OneisWhis: Drunkenness is’no excuse for
crime, therefore drunkenness cannot Reused tor
any purpose of defence in it criminal accusation!
A non tequiterEitever there was one. Tgnorance
ofChCniLstry is no more an excuse for crimo
than drunkenness is. Thereforeif the reason
ing bo good, ignorance of Chemistry cannot be
used for any. purpose of defence in a criminal
accusation. If Dr. Webster,- on his celebrated
Trial at Boston some years ago, ior the murder
of Dr. Parkman, could-have shown that he was
ignorant of Chemistry, lie would have .shown
conclusively, not that he had an excuse for the-
murdcr, but that he did not commit it; for the
stayer, whoever he was, -had carried the dead
body through a process of destruction involving
high chemical knowledge. ’ No doubt the court
would have allowed him to save Tiis life by
j roving his ignorance of Che'mistry, although
gr.or.mce of Chemistry was no excuse for crime.
Suppose now the ’Doctor? cortlil have, proved
that he had bctSli drunk to the point of stupor
or maniapofu, during the time when that Chem
ical process must’have been jierformed.- 'No
doubt tlie Court would have allowed him to do
so, not to excuse, mitigate or extenuate his
crime, but simply to show, in a very satisfacto
ry way, that ho had qot committed the crime;
for it is exceedingly improbabic'tliat a man in
that degree of drunken IK'S.*,'■coulil have conduc
ted tiie Chemical process. And’Dr. Webster
would (iaVe been allowed to save his life by
proving tliat lie was drunkj Some years ago,
I knew an attempt at house-burning,, where the
Slow-match found after the fire had been extin
guished, exhibited great ingenuity in the bend
ing of wires nnd crooking of pins in. a peculiar
way, so as to secure both slowness and certain
ty of ignition. The arooking of the pins espe
cially, in n manner so peculiarly adapted to the
end inoriew, was the theme of viltage wonder
for weeks afterwards, and is still remembered
by many persons, as a remarkably display of
mechanical genius!
Now there wore two or three men who fre
quented that viltage fn those days, any one of
whom, if suspicion had fallen on him, could
liave proven that at any tune for a week before
the fire, he had been too drunk to crook a pin.
Would any man have discarded that evidence,
if lie had been seeking for the truth t- Both
these’ illustrations show tiie absurdity of exclud
ing the ro’nsidoratihfi of drunken Acs* inYovpsti
gating- (he net. which, enters jnto the "alleged
crime; but another form’ of tlie fallacy is. that
whetvthe act .’ipi>ears to have liecn done by the
accused, he sirall not tic allowed to excuse his
act by any consideration of his drunkenness.
It might be Sufficient to reply to this, by saying
the law says that for crime*, not acta, drunken
ness sliall be no excuse. Tills form ofthe fal
lacy ignores utterly (be most important cle
ment of the crime; for the mental jiart of tlie
crime, is criminal in morals and religion with
out its union with any net whatever, which neith
er in taw nor morals, has the act any criminali
ty whatever, until connected with a criminal
state of mind. Acts need no excuse, crimes
do. Tiiis form of tho Misty pntaa drunk man,
not on tlie same platform with sober men, but
ona uiiich more disadvantageous one. Tlie act
when done by approjiriate means, carries a pre-
ption against all nten solid' or drunk that it
intended to be done, but tiiis proposition is
Baltimore I mittec to prepare business for tlie meeting.
Convention. ju*t as truly- and as fully as
■call to Baltimore. Furthermore, the wove-1 once you get it, is the
simply an intent to kill a li
»e where the law’would neither justify, nor
in any degree excuse tlie intention, if tiie kill-1 to leave it but a presumption against sober men,
jng should take jilace as intended. I make no l and to fix it irrevocably as a conclusion against
distinction between malice expressed and tnal-' a drunk man. Tiie proposition admits that
ice implied in tiiis definition, for there is no ilif- j drunkenness, like any other “no excuse” for
foresee except in tiie mode of arriving at the crime, tnay be used to throw light on the inves-
fact. You may prove tho particular intent, tigation into the physical constituent of the
..... or you may jirove a more general intent which i crime, but denies that it may lie used in exam-
the include it and implies it, but tlie thing, when ining into the mind which is the special field
in both cases, and where drunkenness displays its power. That
is to say, it may be used in tliat part of the in
vestigation on which it ordinarily throws least
light, but must be excluded from tliat branch
on which it usually throws most light Can
there be a sensible reason for such a discrimina
tion between the jmrposes for which drunken
ness may be used ? It is too apparent to need
argument that when the act is shown, thcmcn-
tal constituent of tlie crime still remains to be
investigated, and in this investigation there can
be no rational discrimation made between the
light which inav be shed upon it by drunken
ness, and that which may bo shed by any other
fact in the world. Let me illustrate this branch
of the investigation. The fact of being a skill
ful physician is no more an excuse for crime
than drunkenness is, and therefore, if the rea
soning in tlie last form of the fallacy bo good,
the fact of being a skillful physician ought not
to be used for the purpose of showing with
what intention an act was done. A man indicts
another for an attempt to poison him, and proves
that the accused actually administered ar
senic to him. Hero the act is dono and the
the sole question is to tlie intent with which it
was done. The accused simply shows that he
was a skillful physician, and this single fact,
in connection with the other fact that tho man
did not die but got well, explains- the whole
case and shows that the act was done with an
innocent and praise-worthy intention, for if a
skillful physician should intend to kill by ar
senic, lie would infallibly regulate the dose to
kill and not’ to cure. And here the man is
permitted to “excuse” his act, in the language
of the fallacy, by proving his own superior
knowledge a fact. Which of all others, is surely
the last which ought to be allowed to excuso
any crime. Is it not plain, that he does not use
the fact to “exouse his act,” but simply to show
that the act was an innocent one which needed no
cxcuSe? Shall not drunkenness he used for the
same purpose when it can shed the same light?
A skillful marksman shoots at a bird at a short
distance, hut misses the bird and kills a man,
who was behind tlie bush and who turns out to
be one with whom tlie marksman had a deadly
fouih He is indicted for murder. The fact that
a man so skillful with his gun, shonld have miss
cd the bird at so short a distance, and should
havehit his enemy, makes a strong impression
that the shooting at the bird was hut a pretence
to cover the real intention to stay his enemy.
MBut theman shows that he was rery drunk
a fact which renders it!at once very probable
that he should have missed the bird and very
improbable tliat he had a sufficient capacity for
so deep an artifice as the one imputed to him,
for drunk men arc much more apt to be the yic-
tims than the perpetrators of tricks. Is there it
th \ world, an enlightened Christian ora barbari
an who will say that this man oaght not to be
allowed tb save, his life by proving tliat he was
drunk t The fact lias np effect to excuse his
act, hut to show that his act, though an unfor-
tunatc_pne, was innocent anti needed no excuse;
or else to show that it was not an act of mur
der,-bat an act of involuntary manslaughter
the pursuit of a lawful intent, without due cau
tion and circiunsjiection. On the question of
murder, his drunkenness is in his favor, but on
the quostion.of carelessness in the pursuit of his
lawful intent, it is against him ; for carelessness
is tnucltmore easily believed of a drunkenman
than of a sober man. Ilis drunkenness saves
him from the one charge and convicts him
perhaps of the other, not by excusing the one
crime nor aggravating the other, but simply
liy shedding the light of truth upon both.
Apply these principles To tnecase before ns.
Osborne, with one hand, seizes Jones by tlie
arm, and with the other, by tlie throat, and
nishes him back. Jones stabs Osborne and
tills him. Jones is indicted for murder. Ilis
defense is that the killing was but the repelling
of an assault antf battery which reduces it to
manslaughter at all events,' and will also reduce
it tq justifiable homicide, if the j my should
think he had reasonable fear that Osborno would
choke him to death! The State replies that
though such an assault and battery occurred,
the killing was hot produced by it, and was but
the execution of an intent formed and in pro
cess ofexecutfon before tlie assault and battery
occurred. Right here lfangs the" case—the de
fense maintaining that the intent to kill was
produced Iiv the jirovocation, and the State
maintaining that'it existed before. What is the
evidence to support the view of the State ?—
Jones was walking up to Osborne with a knife
in Ilis hand, and he was very drunk. Here his
drunkenness is against him', for it is easier ’
bcli?vc tliat a’ reckless drunk man intends
kill without provocation thah that a thought
ful sober man has such an intention. This
the who!c case made by the circumstances
tiie fatal rencontre, to show that Jones had an
intent to kill before he received the provocation,
But the Stale wisely chose not* to rest the case
there,- and the strongest evidence on the point,
is light reflected from a previous rencontre in
which Jones had much more clearly manifested
the intent to kill. The argument was, that
liaving had the intention in tlie first rencontre,
lie must be presumed to liavo persisted and
.continued in the same state of mind to up the
second rencontre a very short time afterwards.
The interval between the two rencontres, is not
definitely stated, but it was sufficiently long for
Jones to be put put of the house and come back
again, and be the interval long or short, the
whole force of the argument lies in his presumed
persistence and continuance in tho state of mind.
from the first rencontre to the second.
And right here, his deep drunkenness was
evidence in his favor, tending to rebut the pro
sumption of such a persistence or continuance
in the .same state of mind. Who needs to be
told that drunkenness may almost destroy mem
ory for the time, making it a mere tciec, letting
events and thoughts and intentions slip througll
it as soon as they fail into it ? He might hav
forgotten the first rencontre and all its jias
sions and intentions, and so have brought none
of them to the second—if he was reru drunk.
But drunkenness, far short of the point of ex
treme' forgetfulness, renders the mind incon
stent in purpose, and exceedingly whimsical
and rapid in its changes from one emotion to
another, and even from one class of emotions
to another class. Who has not seen the drunk
en man breathing threats one moment and the
next, littering maudlin professions of friend-
ship-—in one moment, an imaginary hero, in
the next, an abject whimperer? The whole
tendency of drunkenness was to change that
state of mind, which the State maintained had
not been changed,, but had continued from the
first rencontre to-the second. Its tendency
was to rebut the strongest- evidence which
showed the formation of an intent to kill before
the jirovocation was given. And’it is exactly
for this jiurjiose that the drunkenness, in the
ojiinion of this Court, ought to have been con
sidered by the jury—to assist them in deciding
whether the intent to kill, preceded the provo
cation, or was produced by it
Judgment reversed.
N. B.—Judge Lyon was not prejiared to cun-
cur with the majority of tha Court, when tiiis
decision, was made, and reserved to himself the
privilege of waiting a dissenting opinion, ifsub-
sfcquent reflection should incline him to do so.
GEORGIA, Hancock Cotxtv.
1, Charles T\ . DuBo-e, Clerk oftheSujiremc
Court of tho State of Georgia, do hereby cer
tify that tho foregoing pages hereto attached,
a fruc copy of the Opinion of the Sujircine
Court of said State, in the case of Jones vs.
the State.
Given under my hnn<l and the seal of said
Court, tin's 18th tlavof March, I860.
-'US | CHABI.KS W. Dr ROSE,
Clerk Sujireinc Court.
CORRECTION.
Wc are glad to see that tho truth of the ru-
ofFUlmore’s adhesion to Lincoln is denied.
The editor of tiie Jersey City Standard iias
seen a recent letter from cx-Prcsident Fillmore,
in which lie says:
“If it was iu mv power I would at once elect
Messrs. Bell and Everett, than whom bett
could not have been made.”
Sena tub Dol’ui..is’ IIoim: Uxiioofeo.—A se
vere thunder storm accompanied by heavy
wind, last evening, (28th) tore the tin from the
top of Mr. Douglas! residence, and caused the
interior of tiie house to lie seriously damaged
by water. Political old women say it is omi
nous of the scaljniig Douglas will get himself
by tlie political storm at Baltimore on the 18th
of June.—He raid.
I r *i • • - For tUe Daily Telegraph.
HISSING OUT.
Dear Telegraph:—It has surprised and dis
appointed some wiio look upon you as a dis
criminating and honest judge, in matters with- -
out as well as within the paie of your political
opinions, to witness your persistency in ascrib
ing unworthy motives to the Baltimore Con
vention of Union men for refusing every attempt-
to bring up that national bone of contention
slavery, or courso you speak as a partisan re
it may be excused upon that and the ground
that it is a difficult matter to find audit in
**“* ^ od !>’ 1 V ut Suc !l tritles toroid up to censure.
Take offfor an hour your Deraodfoo shirt,
and thus bared of prejudices look at tho pro
ceedings of the Convention, then assign * if you
can, any but noble motives to that “hiss'in-
out” which is now such an eye sore to your cx-
cdtant journal There were assembled men
who had gone beyond tlie milk and <*ruel of
patriotism—who saw witli the eyes of experi
ence that it was by means of negro agitation
brayed by political jackasses from all platforms
for the corn and fodder of position that has
caused all our present troubles; that such
cheap political humbugs as Henry Wilson \n
son Burlingame and A-bra-liam Lincoln have
brayed themselvesinto places of trust bv eter
nally carping to their ignorant constituents
slaves and slavery. They saw that by this
means these political upstarts, these abortions
of statesmanship were standing in the sacred
places once held by earnest patriots’who once
spoke out their love of country in actions, then
in exalted thought-and burning words to a no
longer sneering England; therefore were deter
mined to overthrow this ladder by means of
which these pettifog politicans hive been able
to rise above the real manliness and intellect of
our country. For such reasons did they hiss"’
down every attempt to forward this fruitful
cause of contention. Should they be victori-
ous in the coming contest, they will continue
their hisses until they have sent it far hevoml
the walls ol Congress. Put the question to anv
American, and if he speaks from the earnest
convictions of his heart, he would bid a God
speed to those who will no longer clog the wheels
of government by wasted time in the discus
sion of slavery, except when real infringement
on Southern rights demand it
NO PARTY.
I)eab “No-Paktt”—Every man in the world
looks at every subject through a medium more
or less colored and distorted by his own prepos
sessions and prejudices, but endeavoring to
strip ourselves of bias, and to render an iiupar-
tial judgment in the case: We say the Conven
tion hissed the subject of slavery off tlie floor
becausa every moil there preseh- knew that it
held opinions on slavery and its constitution'll
status, totally irreconcilable; and this von
know as well as we do, to have been the fact.
We do not believe there were a dozen men from
the non-staveholding States in that Convention,
who were not \\ ilmot Provisoists in principle •
and well, then, might they hiss out a subject on
which, if an expression of opinion had been
evoked, it would have been fatal to that body.
Now you talk about throwing'taegro agitation”
out of politics and “out of Congress?” How
can you do it except upon the principle of
‘ leaving it to the people to settle for themselves,
when they form and organize jwlitical eomrau-
nities (new States) ?—in other words, upon the ’
principle of.non-intervention ? IIow can you do .
it under a political organization composed for
the most part, of those who assert and believe
in the right of Congress to probibitslavcry—or
the duty of Congress to. protect slavery in the
lerritories? That moment cither of these wings
of your party attempts to carry out its principle,
the same moment the “negro agitation,” “the dis
cussion of slavery” begins. If you could pos
sibly smoulder the fires of “agitation” on this
subject tinder your “ignoring” platform of “tjie
Constitution and the Union,” while a general
election for President was pending, do you apt
sCe that they must hurst outafresh tho ftrettime
tlie discordant opinions of your organization arc
developed in an exorcise of positive legislation?
Naturalists say tliat the bird of the desert, when
hard pressed by the hunter, will bury its head
in the sand, in the fancy that it has escaped
danger by blinding its own eyes to the peril.—
Now tliat jiolicy which hopes for permanent
peace by ignoring or adjourning fatal discrep
ancies of opinion, which must inevitably come
into collision in tho ordinary administration
of governmental affairs is, in our opinion, not a
whit wiser or safer than that of the ostrich.
THE. DEMOCRATIC MEETING
Which assembled at Concert Hall on Satur
day last, was targe and respectable, and its tone
mild and conciliatory. - We refer our readers
to the proceedings to be found in another
column. A resolution was passed instructing
delegates who are unable to attend the Mil-
ledgwillc Convention toapjioint (heir own sub
stitutes.
TIIE CROPS.
We have accounts from different parts ofthe
State relative to the growing crops, nnd witli
tew exceptions they are favorable to a large
yield. In this section, although the crops arc
a little backward from the drouth at the begin
ning of the planting season, they are looking
tine and give promise of an’ abundant yield,
should no untoward circumstances occur to
prevent it
COTTON BLOOM.
Mr. J. J. Alien lias laid on our table a cot
ton bloom grown on his plantation situated seven
miles from this city in Bibb county. Although
tiiis is not tho first of the season, it L«. wc be
lieve, tiie first that has opened in this latitude.
Mr. Allen informs us that lie has used exclu
sively in tlie preparation of his cotton lands the
American Guano, and attributes to this cause
the early maturity of the crop.
SENATOR IVERSON,
In a letter to Col. R. A. Crawford, complains
“that the Macon Committee did not honor me
with a circular.” A copy was addressed to
the Senator contemporaneously with other
members of Congress, but must have met
with some misiiap on the way.
Failure of fa Requisition—The Governor of
Ohio on Slave Property.—Tbc Memphis Argus
says: “A few days ago we briefly mentioned
the arrest in Cleveland, Ohio,' of Kennedy, who
clojied from this vicinity some time since, with
a young unmarried lady, having also in charge
six or seven valuable slaves, the property of his
wife. Shortly after the arrest, Gov. Harris is
sued a requisition on Gov. Dennison, of Ohio*
for Kennedy, who was to be brought back here
to answer the charge of negro stealing. Depu
ty .Sheriff Swan, of this city, was dispatched for
Kennedy, but Gov. Dennison refused to pbey
the requisition, not recognizingtlaresasproper
ty, and the officer returned yesterday without
his prisoner.”
fW*A significant point, and one worthy of
jcneral attention, was made at the Convention
at Chicago. In the courso ofthe debate on the
platform, Judge Jessup desired to amend a ver
bal mistake in the niane of tiie party. It was
printed in tho resolutions, “National” republi
can party. He wished to strike out tlie word
“National,” as that teas not the no me by which
the party was property known. The correction
was accordingly’ made—tlie offensive jihrase !>c-
forthwith expunged.
Judge Mauvin cs. Jr hue McGrath.—The
crew of the bark Wildfire were brought before
Judge Marvin, at Key \\'c.*t, on tho IGth inst.,
under a writ of habeas corpus. A motion to dis -
charge was refused, but all wore admitted to
bail. The Key of the Gulf adds:.
T he Judge declined construing the law ot
1*20, making the slave trade piracy, but inti
mated tliat bo should dissent from tho recent
opinion of Judge McGrath, of South Carolina,
1 that lie was now of tlie opinion that, when
tho negroes came on heal'd of an American ves-
tbo coast of Africa they were free, though
they were slaves in Africa, ’.vinca is in accord
ance with the opinion of Judge Story in tlie
of U. S. r*. Banish, 2 Sumner Reji.”
I E Aiimv of Virginia.—There arc in com
mission in the State of Virginia, (58 troops of
—Valrv, 81 companies of light infantry, 82 com
panies’of riflemen, and 21 companies of artillery.
;-#Tlie sum of $4,001; has been subscribed
California to the Broderick Monument Fund.
