OCR Text |
Show THE FAIR CASE. An article by a gentleman of this city on the Fair trial and its result will be found elsewhere in this issue, with which we cannot agree. While it pectus almost incomprehensible why a jury should acquit Mrs. Fair, her case is not a proper one to place in comparison compar-ison with that where the seducer creeps into the bosom of a famuy and wrecks a life of domestic happine by the seduction of a w.t'e, as in some other cases that might be cited. Nor dj we think the gentleman's logic sound. For if there should be no greater penalty for a breach of the seventh oommaudment than for a breach of the eighth or ninth, why should not tho same rule apply to the sixth? The person who steals money, or even blasts & reputation repu-tation can in tho former, and may bo able to in the latter, make ample reparation in time; but the perron per-ron who destroys life takes what cannot be restored, while the adulterer who seduces se-duces the wife of another destroys what neither man nor angel can make reparation fur. The simple fact with regard to verdicts such as was rendered in tho Sickles' case, is, that juries are not blinded by the plea of insanity. They know it is a fiction of the lawyers; but they know also that statutory law provides no proper penalty for tho adulterer and seducer; and when a man or woman vindicates his or her honor, and takes life iD so doing, a verdict ver-dict of aciuitta! i3 rendered, because the people are in advance of legislators and lawyers, and their great instinct of rlae ju.H.Gc, tho extreme punishment for the defilement of chastity. In the Mrs. Fair, thou,h, she had not Jcd honor r,or dc&lcd charity to charge upon hcr victim; and both were appareQlly, from the evidence, equally |