choose to carry the case up on a motion for stay of judgment, that is their affair.

I deem that public justice demands, that the sentence should be passed, under these circumstances; in which view, I think, your honor will coincide.

All personal considerations have been lost with me. I had not cared what the sentence of Carlin might have been, if it had only been six cents; but when I learn that Carlin has been reappointed a Deputy Sheriff, while under conviction for a misdemeanor; and that such a course is calculated to bring down the ridicule of the public upon courts of justice, and the verdicts of juries, and that it is an insult to the community; I cannot but believe that it is just he should receive the full sentence of the law, as called for by the statute, on which he was convicted.

I have sought to ascertain the position of myself and the people; and I will devote the remainder of my life to the accomplishment of this purpose, till I ascertain it beyond a doubt.

I am sure that your honor, in view of the exalted station you fill, (and which it affords me pleasure to say you have so far done with dignity and uprightness, which is more than I can say of any other official with whom I have come in contact in this matter,) will excuse my addressing you by letter, when you recollect that your engagements as presiding Judge of the Court of Sessions, prevented me from being publicly heard before you, when I appeared, for that purpose, in court this morning. I am equally sure, that the duty you owe to the public and myself in this matter, will be, as it ought to be, promptly discharged, without fear or favor; and that from the certainty of speedy punishment, offenders will be deterred, and the community be made measurably secure.

Respectfully,

Your most obedient,

ARTHUR T. JONES.

MEMORANDUM.-Delivered a copy of the above to Recorder Smith,

on 20th December, at 6 1-2 o'clock P. M.

J. A. CURTIS.

On the next day, (Friday, the 21st December,) I stuck to the Court of Sessions the whole day. The jury, in the case of Sprague went out at twenty minutes past 12 M., and had not agreed at half-past 5. They then came into court, and stated that there was no prospect of their agreeing upon a verdict. The Recorder said that he would order refreshments for them, and would remain in the neighborhood till 9 o'clock. If they did not agree by that time, he would have to adjourn the court till half-past nine in the morning. I went home and got my dinner. Fearing that the jury might come in during the evening, and that a motion might be made in Carlin's case before the adjournment, I went back to the court, and remained there until past 10 o'clock, when the jurors were locked up for the night. After seeing all of the "officials" leave for home, I left also.

During this day, a man by the name of Patrick Holland was put to trial for "illegal voting." A police officer testified that he saw him vote three ballots in the morning; saw him attempt to vote again in the afternoon, and then arrested him. One of the Inspectors of Election testified that he voted three ballots in the morning, and came again in the afternoon; when one of the Inspectors told him he had voted in the morning, and asked him if he intended to vote again? Holland replied, "that he wished information first." He then asked, if he had not a right to vote the other ballots, that he had not voted in the morning? The Inspector told him no, and the officer then arrested him. This man had been in prison from election day, about 6th November, to the 21st December, for asking a question at the ballot-box! The Recorder said it was an outrage, and that the fault was with the magistrate who committed him, and regretted that the Court had no power to remunerate him for the injustice that he had experienced. What was that injustice, compared with the eternal disgrace he had suffered, by being chained to a gang of murderers and felons, and paraded six times through the streets, from the Tombs to the Park, followed by a rabble that will never forget him? I believe the law supposes

a man innocent till he is found guilty; and yet, men charged with minor offences, and frequently (as in the case of Holland) perfectly innocent, have to submit to the degradation of being chained to criminals, without discrimination, and paraded a half mile through the public streets. It is true, that misfortunes may happen to any man; and he has to submit to the fate that casts a stigma upon him, however hard it may be; but it should be avoided as far as possible. This chain-gang system is a disgrace to the city of New-York. There should be vehicles provided for those who are not charged with the basest crimes, and in no case should a man be disgraced, by being chained to a gang of criminals, and dragged through the public streets, until he is convicted. Holland told me that he was

a stone-cutter, and at the time he was arrested was earning good wages-enough to pay the rent of a house for his two sisters, and support himself respectably. Several gentlemen present showed their sympathy, by presenting him with sums of money.

I went from the court-room, after 10 o'clock that night, to the office of the Broadway Theatre, where my good and gentlemanly friend Caleb Marshall informed me, that although it was Mr. Whiting's intention not to have returned to New-York till the following week, the moment he got my letter in Baltimore, without even having time to telegraph me, they both jumped into the cars, and had just arrived, for the express purpose, on the part of Mr. Whiting, of being ready to serve me in the morning; both having sacrificed their own important business to the emergencies of my case. Mr. Whiting confirmed this, when I saw him, early on the next morning. This was one of the very few "green spots" I had seen, during the whole of my labors in this matter; and it is with the greatest pleasure that I record it. On Saturday, the 22d December, the gentlemen on "tother side" were probably somewhat surprised to see the worthy Judge elect enter the Court of Sessions. It will be a matter of history that he made his last appearance in this court on an "old gray horse;" the same that had thrown the Hon. ex-Judge Beebe, A. Oakey Hall, Stoughton, Esq., Clinton, Esq., the

handsome Andrews, Esq., ("partner of ex-Judge Beebe,”) and their ostler, "Tom Carlin, Esq. ;" and all of his assistants, comprising Collins, Esq., Thompson, Esq., Bishop, Esq., Sloane, Esq., and Donohue, Esq. How well the Judge elect rode him upon this occasion, will be seen by the following report of the exercises on that day.

COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS.

SATURDAY, DEC. 22, 1855.

BEFORE HON. RECORDER SMITH.

ARGUMENT FOR ARREST OF JUDGMENT IN THE CASE

OF DEPUTY SHERIFF THOMAS CARLIN.

Counsel for the Defendant, HENRY L. CLINTON, ESQ.

Counsel for the Prosecution, JAMES R. WHITING, ESQ.

[Reported by Roberts & Warburton, Law Reporters, 115 Nassau-street, N. Y.]

Mr. CLINTON said :-If your honor please, Thomas Carlin, one of the Deputy Sheriffs of this city, was convicted at the present term of this court, upon an indictment for misdemeanor, which indictment I hold in my hand.

Since the trial, my associate in the case and myself, have carefully examined the indictment, and the law applicable to it; and we both came to the conclusion that no offence whatever is described in it. And here I will premise, that having understood that a motion to quash this indictment was made before your honor, upon the ground that the Deputy Sheriff was not a public officer, within the meaning of the statute, I shall not discuss that point, as the Court have decided it adversely to the defendant.

There are several points which I will press upon the considera