Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

The Estate,'* i Indictment for Perjury in t,S > Merriwelher Sup. Cow t John Clark, j August Term 1535. The delendant was incicted under the penal code of 1817 —Upon the trial, arid aflcr the S<> 1 icitor General had submitted the cause to the v, the defendts. counsel oemutred to the iu : not. The Court sustained the demurrer, and determined, the objection taken to the in dictment, would h ive been good, in the arrest of judgment. The celis. counsel then moved the court lor a verdn t of acqudtal, which pao ti in, was resisted by thajcounsel lor the prose cution—The counsel firth State contends— the indictment should be quashed so that anew indictment may be framed, and the defe idem put upon his trial, by virtue of a legal indiet m nt. The defts. counsel insists upo i a verdict of acquittal upon the grounds that the deft, hns been once tried, and ca mot therefore be legally tried , for the same offence. The defts. counsel aso contend this case, conies within tiic reason and intention of the Statute, which declares, “in no case sh ill a nolle prosequi be en.cretl upon any bill oi indictment after the case has been submitted to the jury.” Prince’s Digest 372—1 tis also stated to have been the universal practice, not only in this, but in the other circuits of the state, to allow the defen datft a verdict under similar circumstances— and that the court will, in overturning a long established practice, u-surue a heavy responsi bility—The Court in determining the question now presented for its decision, is fully aware o( the responsibility which it assumes—The prac tice which has heretofore prevailed in this cir cuit, the court believes to have been, as stated bv the defendant’s counsel, a id the same prac tice may have obtained, in all the other circuits fthe state for aught the coutt knows —It has no recollection at this time, of a different prac- tice prevailing in any of the other circuits, in relation to the question, now before the court although it cannot but think such #iust have been the fact. Experienced and disinterested counsel confirm the statements of defendants* counsel, as to the practice in this, and other circuits—But such a practice, is at variance with the opinion, which the court entertains of the law applicable to the case, now before it— The court may it is true be in error, as to the law; but it ought not to shelter itself, under the j practice of the court, entertaining a contradicto ry opinion, but to march boldly up to the ques tion; and determine it, according to the dictates of its best judgment, giving such authority, and reason therefore, as it can now command—The sth article of the amendments to the constitu tion of the United States contains this provision “no ]• shall any person be subject for the same o ffence to be tried twice or put in jeopardyof life, or Itt6.”Tlie true meaning of this clause of the eon-eitution, undoubtedly is, that no ma •, shall be twice tried for the same offence—Has the c t.e riant been tried for the offence with which be is charged, in legal contemplation? certainly n _ , for the indictment, by which he is charged, s manifestly defective, that he has never yet ’ n jiut in jeopardy by this prosecution—Sup ;•■!%(• the S- iicttor General had arraigned the defendant open a written deed for a lot of land, and h.-d submitted his case to the jury, by virtue of such an instrument only—His counsel de rouVtn it upon me ground, it contains no crimi nal charge, whereon he can be leg dly convict ed- of anv enme. Would such a proceeding constifdteCtnal, in the eye of the law? Equal ly as’ much so, as the case now before the court, constitutes a trial, for the defendant is no more in jeopardy, on account of the charges allddged in this indictment, so tar as conviction, and .punishment is concerned than if it was sim ply a title deed—“ VVherever the indictment whereon a man is ai quitted, is so far erroneous, either for want of substance in setting out the crime, or of authority in the Judge before whom it was taken, that no good judgment could have hepn given upon it against the defendant, the acquittal can be nu bar of a subsequent in dictment, because the defendant was never in danger of his life from the first; for the law will presume prima Jacie, that the Judge would not have given a judgment, which would have been ; ible to have been reversed.” 2nd Hawkins, c 35, sec 8, cited 1 John Rep. 76. in the case <r t;,e people vs. Barrett and Ward. Ch. Justice K it in the same case remarks “I am satisfied tr 1 -b-rc, that the law is not now to be ques ti - . mat if the indictment he defective, so that no good judgment could have been given v,~ on it, an acquittal upon such indictment, is no bar.” The court has already determined this indictment to be so defective, that no good judgment could be given upon it against the de fendant. But let us exhibit this case, in a much stronger point of view in favour of the deft.— Admit ho had not made any objection to the sufficiency of the indictment, but had went or. r gularly to trial, and the jury after hearing the testimony on both sides, the argument of coun sel, and the charge of the court, had returned a verdict of guilty against him, and judgment had been arrested, could he then, be tried again for the same offence? “The arresting of judgment after a conviction on an indictment for a felony, is not a bar to a second indictment for tho same offence, although the second indictment, is precisely similar to the first”—The People vs. Casborus, 13th John Rep. 351. Spence, judge, in delivering the opinion of the court, in the case last cited, uses the follovvi g language— “ The effect of arresting a judgment, is the same as quashing an indictment*:'the latter happens before trial, the former after”—ln the case of t People vs. Robert M. Goodwin, who was indicted for manslaughter, and ihe jury could not agree upon a verdict, but were discharged by the court, the question was raised, whether •iePt could again be tried for the same offmee, an- it was determined in the affirmative—Ch. Justice Spence who delivered the opinion of the court, remarks—'ln a legal sense therefore, a defendant is not once put in jeopardy, until-'the verdict of the jury is rendered for or against him. and if for, or against him, he can never be drawn in question again, for the same offeru 18 h John Repts. 206—The case of the People V 9 Mcßay, who waajnclicted for murder, and sowed gtfftty, was arrested on th’ proceedings —Ch justice Spence says, in oe livering thc’opimon of the couit, *llis counsel have suggested a doubt, whether am sting the judgment does not entiil him to be dischargee,, without being subjected to another tri I—lt will be observed, that the judgment is am sled on the motion of the prison’ r -An net done at the request, and for the ben fit ol a prisoner, we are clearly of opinion, cannot exonerate him from another trial —We know ol no case, which con tains the doctrine that where anew trial is a warded at the prayer, a id in favor of a person, who has been sou and guilty, that he shall not be subject to another trial’—lßth John Repts. 218 According to the authority cited, there can not exist a doubt, hud the defendant been regu larly tried, and found guilty, and judgment been arrest; and, but he could have been legally tried again—Was he in any better situ tion when tho indictment was quashed, before the exami nation of a single witness, than he would have been after trial and a verdict ol guilty against him? The answer < ust be apparent to every one—The objection to the sufficiency of the in dictment was made by the defendant, and upon his motion—lt is true the state declares ‘in no case shall a nolle prosequi be entered on any bill of indictment, after the case has been sub mitted to the jury’—Wlirt is the legal effect of a nolle prosequi ? ‘The effect of a nolle prose qui when obtained, is to put the defendant without day, but it does not at all operate as an acquittal, for he may afterwards be ro-indicted, and even upon the same indictment, fresh pro cess may be awarded’ Ist Cliitty, Crim law, 391 —A nolle prosequi cannot be entered without the concurrence of the Attorney General, or at j the instance of the counsel for the government, Ist Chitty’s Crim. law, 390,2 Mass.T. R. 414. A demurrer to the indictment, therefore, fir a defect good inairest ofjudgment, after the case has been submitted to the jury, is not analogous to the entering a nolle prosequi, after the case j has been so submitted. For in the one instance the motion is made on the part of the state, and at the instance of the prosecuting officer; in the other, it is made at the instance of the defen. dant, and for his benefit. It was the intention of the legislature, in the enactment of the sta. tute, to prohibit the prosecuting officer from ha. j rassing the defendant by repeated trials without his consent. But for the statute, the prosecuting officer could enter a nolle prosequi, whenever the testimony on the part of the State, in his judgment, was insuffici nt to ensure conviction, and oppress the defendant by his continued; efforts to convict him. The statute, however, | justly protects the liberty of the citizen from • the power of the government, by declaring its officer shall not enter a nolle prosequi, after the case has been submitted to the jury. The indict, ment is admitted to be so defective, that the court could uot legally have given judgment upon ft. By going to the jury, the prosecuting officer lost his right to enter a nolle prose qui upon such defective indictment—But the and Pendant had the legal right to be tried upon it, without being subjected to any danger what ever, for if the jury had returned a verdict of guilty against him, judgment would have been arrested—lt was the privilege of tho d-fenda it, to demur to the indictment before verdict, for any defect therein good.in arrest ofjddgme.it, or to bave hazarded a verdict, and if against him, then to have moved the court, to arrest the judgment—He has made his election, and de murred to the indictment, after the case has been submitted to the jury, but before the intro duction of any testimony. By the authority cited, if he had not demurred to the indictment, but had moved in arrest ofjudgment after a ver dict of guilty found against him, he might le gaily have been tried again for the reason, that he has never yet been put in jeopardy, accor ding to the true intent a id meaning of that clause of the constitution which declares ‘nor shall any person be subject for the same of fence, to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb —The court is of the opinion, in as much as the defendant could have been tried ag in, if found guilty by the verdict of the jury upon this indictment, and the judgment arrested on ac count of its defectivecharacter, and that he does not now, stand in any better situation, nor enti tled to any greater privileges than he would have been, provided the objection to the indict ment had been made, by way of motion in ar rest ofjudgment—This motion it will be recol lected, is made at the instance of the defendant and for his benefit, not at the instance ot the State, hence it does not come within the pro visions of the Statute relating to the entering a nolle prosequi, after the case has been submit ted to the jury—There is however another section of the penal code which deserves con sideration—“on every trial for an offence con tained in this code, or for any offence, the jury shall be judges of the law, and the fact, and shall give a general verdict of guilty or not guil ty.” Prince’s Digest 372, The same question again occurs as to what constitutes a trial, ac cording to the legal acceptation of the term, which has been already noticed—The Statute evidently contemplates a legal trial to constitute which, the defendant should have been charged by the indictment or presentment of a grand jury stating the offence, time, and place of its commission, with sufficient certainty to enable the court to gi e judgment thereon, against him—“An indictment is a written accusation of one or more persons of a crime or misdemeanor \ preferred to, and presented upon oath by a grand jury.” 4th Be. Com. 302 —The di Pendant must be charged with a crime or misdemeanor ii the indictment, lor if it contain no. criminal charge upon proof of which the defendant could be j convicted (as in the present rase) he has never 1 been put upon bis trial, in the language of the statute (or‘an qffence’ or‘for.any often- -con - sequently is not entitled to a general verdict of ‘not guilty’—‘The test, by which to decide w hether a person has been oi.ee tried is per fectly familiar to every lawyer, it can only be by a plea of aulrejois acquit, or a plea of autrefois convict —To render the plea of” a former ac quittal a bar, it must he a legal acquittal by judgment, upon a trial for substantially the same offence, and the verdict of a petit, jury;’ See tho opinion of Ch Justice Spence— The People vs Robert M. Goodwin 18th John Kept ’202-3 Would a verdic tof acquittal upon this bill of indictment (if it be not a legal misnomer to call it such) operate as a bar, to another prosecution for the same offence intended to be charged here? Certainly not, for it wasLpon that giound, the defts counsel mainly preuieat-* <:d their objection to the suffi ieney of (he in dictment, and upo . u hich it was sustained by the court, taken in ccjpMTon with thv fact, no good judgment, could have been given upon it •ig.iinst him, f r in the language of Chief Justice Kent already cited ‘I am satisfied therefore, thal Ihe law r is not now to be questio ed, that if the indictment be defective, so that no good judg ment could have been given upon it, ar. acquit tal upon such indictment, is no bar.’ Is it nut a burlesque upon criminal jurisprudence, to call that proceeding a trial, upon which no judgment could be given, and upon which a verdict of acquittal, if spread upon *hc record of the court, would afford no protection to the def ndant? The Court is of the opinion, there has been no trial in this case, in I ‘gal coo'emplation, for the reasons already slated, and determines the defendant is not entitled to a. verdict of ac quittal, but that the indictment must be quashed upon the motion of defts counsel, as being too defective in judgment of law, to authorise a conviction, for any offe .co whatever. Hiram warner. Judge Sup Court. _ at tj vwfo&w&hita* Withdrawal of Judge McLean. —By the fol j lowing letter, which we find in the Columbus Journal—published there at the request of the gentleman to w hom it was addressed—it ap pears that Judge McLean has distinctly with drawn himself from the field of competition for the Presidency: Richland, (O.) August 31, 1835. Dear Sir: Bei :g informed that my friends from different parts of Ohio, having consulted together, have come to a determination to organ ize, and endeavor to produce a concert of ac tion throughout the State, on the subject of the election ufPresident, and as you are chairman of one of the principal co mittees which has been constituted with a view to this object, it is proper tha I should make to you the following communication : On all occasions since my name has been spoken of in reference to the Presidency I have gjyet. my friends to understand in conversation, j and by communications that have been pub lished, that I would not be a party to a contest that shall be likely to lead to an election of C.’hief Magistrate by the House of Represen tatives. Asa matter of choice I would not take the office through the instrumentality of the House. I was fully aware that this course on my part would discourage my friends and injure my prospects ; but I was not desirous of the office except on such terms as would enable me to carry out those principles, which would ele vate and tranquilize the political action of *he country. I was not unaware that there were several gentlemen who looked tot the office, as I believe with more solicitude than myself, and who had •mui'h highen V|JrT>fr Krift*~~tr~~ of their sos- Inw-citiz ns : and, as hr was hardly to bn expec ted that these claims Would be postponed, my resolution was taken in reference to such a state of tilings. My anticipations have been realized. The ground on which the contest seems now to be placed by those who are op posed to the Baltimore nominations—and from the number of candidates in the field, it is not probable that this ground can be changed—ne cessarily, on the principles, 1 have avowed, ex cludes me from the list of candidates. I ad here to my principles, and of course, acquiesce most cheerfully in the decision. Asa citizen, I shall ever oppose that which I conscientiously believe to be wrong in policy or in principle. This declaration is due to myself, to my friends g nerally, and especially to those of them who have sustained the Administration, and who were among the first to introduce my name into the contest. I wish to remove from all my friends any embarrasinent which they may feel in the ensuing election of Chief Ma gistrate on my With great respect, I am, Very truly and sincerely yours, JOHN McLEAN. Moses H. Kirby, Esq., Columbus, Ohio. Why the resolutions of the City of New York were qualified &c.—The Richmond E quirei is not satisfied with the tone of the resolutions of the City of New York. They were not, it saj s, “up to the hub,” like the Albany resolu tions. The following article from the Journal ol Commerce will explain the matter. The citizens of New York had witnessed the out breaks against Tappan by the mob on a former occasion on the same subject, and remembered the great difficulty there was in preserving from total destruction the houses and property, and even the persons of every one suspected of having con exion with Tappan or his society. The free blacks were also threatened with total destruction. It was therefore necessary that the resolutions should be so guarded as not to give the slightest pretext, in the sentiments ex ; pressed by the late respectable meeting con. dcim.ing the abolitionists, for the renewal of the violence it had been so difficult to quell. The expression of tho just indignation felt against Tappan would have signed his death warrant, and led to scenes of violence. The truth is, in ; this city, in Philadelphia, New York, and we believe in every city, there is a deadly hostility entertained among industrious free citizens against the system which tends to bring the worthless colored people iu the path of their pursuits. Globe, The Southern papers express much dissatis faction with the tone of the resolutions passed at the anti.abolition meeting in th ; s city. They appear to think them of a very milk nnd water character, to say the least Doubtless they might have been stronger; and they certainly would have been, if the assembly na a whole had prepared them, which of course was im. possible. One thing was very evident at the meeting, viz that the strongest sentiments against the abolitionists, and in the favor of the South, were most warmly approved. Wbenev r any such sentiments was announced, it was uniformly recejyed with he arty cheers. Pmbst. oly the framers of the resolutions were infim n. eed in part by a desire to alia • excitement h re which at that time was in danger of expressing itself in open violen e. Between Scylla and Charybdis it was difficult to steer, but le ving t e resolutions out of the question, the South may re-d assured that in the city of New York, the feelings of indig alien against the abolition, ist ris nearly universal; that they are at best but a sorry faction, of the saltpetre order, who make a vast deal of noise in proportion to the nuni. ber ; Their adherents and serni.adherenls are diminished daily. It is only those who have committed themselves to abolition doctrines, that stick to the sinking ship. The whole North is at length roused, on the subject, and ’ abolition will have to learn good manners, or be turned out of doors Journal of Commerce. A TRAGEDY. Or Wednesday evening last, one McGrew, accused of a most diabolical murder in April last, for whose apprehension large rewards were offered by the Governor, an I by i .divid ual subscriptions,—was brought i to this town and committed to jail. He ha I fled into Tex as, whither be wis pursued by Mr. Taylor, of Claiborne—who, after the failure of several attempts to seiz him by force, —succeeded by stratagem. The story is altogether a singular one, —and the aid given by the Texas author ities, gives a more favorable impression of the dispositions of the government of that country agai.ist criminals who escape there from the pursuit of justice, than we have hitherto been accustomed to entertain. Mr. Taylor tiaced McGrew, after his flight from this St •te to Louisiana, to Natchitoches, and across the Mexican line to Nacogdoches. At that place he learned that McGrew was two hundred miles in the interior, at a settlement! i called the Saline, at Hall’s trading house— I where he was under the protection of Hall, and ■ the Comanche Indians. Between these Indi ans and the Mexicans at Nacogdoches, hostil j ity existed ; and when Taylor arrived a hostile j expedition had been sent out against the Indi ans. Mr. Taylor, accompanied by two men, followed the party, —having been fur ished with letters to B iwyer, the commander- -requesting his aid. Instead of assisting, Bowyer it ap pears, appnsed McGrew of i heir object, and indeed, shewed him the letters. Thev were obliged to fly” instantly ; and were pursued by McGrew ad two associates —an Indian and a white deserter—for twenty four hours. They escaped by leaving the high road and striking into the woods. On his return at IVacogd ches, Mr. Taylor offered a leward of SSOO to any one who would take McGtew. A Texas Cap tain, named Ferguson, with eight men, under took the enterprise, and marched to the settle ment. Hall’s party aid the Indians made fight, and Ferguson was beaten off. In the skirmish McGrew was shot and slightly wou ded. The defeat of this party produced a procla mation from the political chief of Nacogdoches, a sort of outlawry, ordering McGrew to be ta ken out ol the country, as u.fit to remain there, by reason ofgreat crimes commit! din the Uni ted States. He also placed a civil force, con sisti g of the Sheriff and ten men at the dispo sal of Taylor This, artifice was successfully tried. At Nacogdoches, one of McGrow’s ac quaintances, fflmiliar with his habits and the settlement, was prevailed upon to accompany the party, and assist in the capture. Taylor and the men, wre concealed about a couple of miles from the house where McGtew resided, while the Sheriff and the other man went up frankly to the house to request lodging. The person of the Sheriff was unknown to McGrew, and On seeing him, he was suspicious, and arm ed himself, but his suspicio s were dispelled by the introduction of the other person, and their proposition to give up their arms to hun for safe keeping ; which was accordingly done. His caution was completely lulled, and at night he went to sleep in the tame room with them upon a buffaloe skin, with his pistols under his bead. When he was asleep, they seized him and his arms, and threatening to blow his brains out instantly, ifhe did not keep silence, car ried hint off to the party who were in ambush, and all instantly set out at full speed, and by mor ing wete beyond pursuit. When he was seized, he thought it was for his sh.tre in the recent skirmish, to which impression it is proba bly owing, that he did not give alarm at all ha zards. When he discovered in whose hands he was he behaved perfectly quiet: At Nacog doches, the Emprcsario furnished a guard to Ihe Sabine river. From there to Natchitoches he was brought by Taylor and two others. At Alexandria, the party fell in with Mr. Kemp, the brother T the two murdered children, who was returning from an unsuccessful hurt after the assassin in Arkansas. From that place he was brought without difficulty to New-Orleans and thence to Mobile. The crime of which this man is accused, is one of the most atrocious evei read of in the annals of depravily. Two children, lads of 8 to 14 years of age, were butchered in cold blood, wantonly and savagely, from a demoni ac spirit of revenge against their parents. The crime, the flight, the pursuit and the arrest, form altogether, an exciting, as well as a tetri- J ; ble tragedy.— Mobile Register. Although every stage of your life is foil of danger and exposed to difficulties peculiar to itself*, there is one period of time the most im portant indeed.—Mum ge is doubtless, the most national, innocent, and useful state, if you can form it to any tolerable advantage. It bids luirest for that little portion of happiness, which this life admits, and is in some degree a duty which you owe to the world. How defe celess is a single woman! She cannot move beyond ‘he precincts of her own house, without apprehension. Site cannot go with case nnd safety into public. As she goes down the hill of life, her friends drop away from her, like leaves in autumn, and leave her a punitig solitary creature. Now therefore, sum mon to your aii!, all that reading, observation, and advice of friends, and your short-lived ex perience have power to bestow Pause, before you tie t int Gorclion knot which death alone can unloose; ad before you decide on a measj ure of such (incalculable (importance, be suro that reason approves your conduct, und forget no’ to implore the direction of heaven. If a pers n comes to a serious declaration in your favor, affect no prudish airs of reserve. If you r- ally s-es an affection for him, .nnd c.;n indulge it vvith prudence, do uot scruple to acknowlegc it. or treat him with the greatest openness and candour. This will engage forever the esteem : of every liberal arid honest man. If you cannot receive him as a lover, you will not fail to retain him ns a friend. Suffer net your imagination to be dazzl dby mere splendour. The glitter of wealth and equipage has induced many a poor girl to sacrifice her peace at the shri ie of vanity; and h- r nightly pillow, stepped i teajs, and bitter regret, has soon told her that “ ever is a dinner of iierbs where love is, ,hu s.ailed ox and hatred therewith ” A giod man alone is capable of true attachment, fidelity and affec tion. Others may feel a fugitive passion, but on this also! you can place no true dependence. Look for a person of a domestic cast. Os what consequence to you are even the good qualities ofyeur husband, if he is rarely ever at home?- It has often been asserted, that a reformed reko makes the best husba id. It may be so; but I would not have \ou risk your peace on so dan gerous an experiment. Although not absolute y necessary, yet it is highly desirable, that the man with w hom you are to spend your days should be a man of sentime t and taste. Those qualities will variagate every hour with fresh pleasure, every scene with animated remarks, and every incident with the liveliest interest. Fortune surely should be considered, propor tioned to your habits, education, and station in | life. But if you fi and the other requisites, be as l modente as possible in this. A morsel thus ■ sweetened will be pleasant to the taste. Inn I cottage so enlivened, joy will spting. The Al ! mighty will look from Heaven with approbation, and crown the happy pair with the choicest of blessings! And now, I commit you to the care him, who is the tender Father of all creatures. The world is before you, full of difficulty and danger. Pleasure will spread her thousand snares to deceive you, your passions will solicit for unbounded gratification, and even your own heart will prompt vou to deceive yourself; but yon are in the hands of the greatest of Beings; and whatever your lot may bo, riches or pover ty, health or sickness, the state of marriage or si gle life: fear not. Be virtuous, be cheerful, be contented. See that your heart be right, strive to do your duty, and leave the rest to Him. New- York, Sept. 27. By the Mary Howland, from Liverpool, we have Lo don papers of the 26th and Liverpool of the 27tli August. The pap rs do not contain any important in telligence. Gen rals Alava and Evans had arrived in Spain with 1500 nien. Monny Market and City Intelligence. Tuesday Evening. The city has been tolerably free from reports 10-day respecting the Ministry and the conse quences of the threatened collision between the two houses of Parliament, which would appear at all eve its, to be regarded with little appre hension by the fundholders. Stocks have beou steady all da , with some tendency towards improvement. Consols left off’at 89 3-4 to 1-2 for the account; Omuium at 2 3 8 to 12; and Exchequer-bills at ‘2os. 225. premium. The intelligence of this morning has remov ed all alarm respecting the movements of tho city guard at Madrid, and has, besides, a salu tary effect in regard to threatened insurrections in Spain. These, troops are regarded hero with contempt, since it is perceived, that, though they can set convents en fire, and murder help less mo ks and frairs, they are wholly destitute of that energy and power of combination which is to overthrow or place in danger the institu tions of the country. The best things are now hoped for from the Spanish Ministry. The price of slock has rulli and considerably, but it closed heavily this afternoon, and is “still far from being held with confidence Bargains were done in Bo.ids at 42. but they left off’ at 40 1-2. Portuguese at 3 per cents, were last quoted at 55 1-2. In the other foreign funds scurcely any transactions took place. MARKETS. Liverpool, Aug. 26. The sales of Cotton to-day do not exceed 1500 bags, chit fly American, at rather lower rates; 100 Pernains, &c. 13 1-4 to 14 3-4; 50 Bahias, 13 1-4; to 13 1-2; 70 Maranhams, 14 1-4 to 14 5-8; and 20 Surat 7 1-4 to tho trade. The demand continues very moderate. Members Elect to the Legislature OF GEORGIA. SCHRIVEN. Senator. —M’Call. Representatives. —E. J. Black and B. Green all State Rights men. CHATHAM. Senator. —M’Al lister. Representatives . Gordon, Millen, and Shick—all Uniou men. BU.KE. Senator —Lawson. Reprcse/ftft’ees-_Burke, Allaway, and Burton—all State Rights. JEFFERSON. Senator Stepleto >. Representatives Flour noy, and Turner—all State Rights. WARREN. Senator Gibson. Representatives Wilde, Chandler, and Harris-Jwo Union, and two State Rights men. McINTOSH. Senator Wood. Representatives McDon ald, and Durham, all Union men.