Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

3

Report.

This case, like many others of importance, had its origin in a trivial occasion: One Philips, together with his wife, was indicted for a misdemeanor in receiving stolen goods, the property of James Keating. The vigilant justices of the police discovered that after lodg ing his information before them he had received restitution, and thereupon had him brought up and interrogated him with a view to further discovery. He shewed so much unwillingness to answer, that suspicions fell upon him and he was threatened with a commitment to bridewell. He was admonished that it was his duty on his oath to reveal the whole truth, and the duty of magistrates to enquire into it, and to enforce obedience to the law. He then mentioned that he had received the restitution of his effects from the hands Reverend Mr. Kohlmann, Rector of Saint Peter's. Thereupon, a summons was issued to that gentleman to appear at the police office, with which he instantly complied. But upon being questioned touching the persons from whom he received the restitution, he excused himself from making such disclosure, upon the grounds that will be fully stated in the sequel. He was then asked some questions of a less direct tendency, as to the sex or colour of the person who delivered the goods into his hands, and answered in like manner. Upon the case being sent to the Grand Jury he was subpoenaed to attend before them, and appeared in obedience to the

of his pastor, the

process, but, in respectful terms, declined answering. Bills of indictment were found, upon other testimony, against Charles Bradley and Benjamin Brinkerhoff, both coloured men, as principals, and against Philips and wife as receivers. These indictments were filed on the 3d of March, 1813, and on Friday, March 5, the parties having respectively pleaded not guilty, were put upon their trial. One jury was charged with both indictments.

The Court was composed of

The Honorable Piere C. Vanwyck, who sat in the absence of the Mayor, then attending the duties of his office as Lieutenant Governor, at Albany, together with Aldermen Morse and Vanderbilt.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Riker prosecuted as District Attorney, on behalf of the people.

Mr. George Wilson appeared as Counsel for the several Defendants.

Among the witnesses returned on the back of the indictment was the Reverend Anthony Kohlmann, who being called and sworn, was asked some questions touching the restitution of the goods. He in a very be

coming manner entreated that he might be excused, and offered his reasons to the Court, which are here omitted to avoid repetition, but will be found at length in the sequel.

Mr. George Wilson objected also on behalf of his clients. The case was novel and without precedent, and Mr. Sampson, as amicus curiæ, interposed, and observed that in no country where he had been, whether Protestant or Catholic, not even in Ireland, where the Roman Catholic religion was under the ban of proscription, had he ever heard of an instance where the clergyman was called upon to reveal the solemn and inviolable secrecy of sacramental confession, and with the ready assent of Mr. Riker, obtained an adjournment of the trial until Counsel could be heard in deliberate argument. A juror was thereupon withdrawn and the following Monday was assigned for hearing the argument. [From various intervening circumstances the cause was deferred till the June session. In the interval, by a change of office Mr. Hoffman suceeeded to Mr. Vanwyck as Recorder, and Mr. Gardinier to Mr. Riker as District Attorney.

On Tuesday, June 8, the traversers were put to the bar, and the following jury sworn :

Frederick Everts,

[blocks in formation]

William Rhinelander,

David Mumford,

Elijah Secor,

Jacob Scheffelin,

Joseph Blackwell,

William Painter.

The Court was now composed of

The Honorable De Witt Clinton, Mayor.

The Honorable Josiah Ogden Hoffman, Recorder, (Who, on account of the importance of the case, took his seat upon the Bench.)

Isaac S. Douglass,

Richard Cunningham, Esqrs. Sitting Aldermen.

Mr. Kohlman was then called and sworn, and examined by Mr. Gardinier.

He begged leave of the Court to state his reasons for declining to answer, which he did in the following terms:

"I must beg to be indulged in repeating to the Court the reasons which prevent me from giving any answer to the questions just proposed; trusting they are such as to prevail upon the Court to dispense with my appearing as an evidence in the present case.

[ocr errors]

"Were I summoned to give evidence as a private individual (in which capacity I declare most solemnly, I know nothing relatively to the case before the court) and to testify from those ordinary sources of information from which the witnesses present have derived theirs, I should not for a moment hesitate, and should even deem it a duty of conscience to declare whatever knowledge I might have; as, it cannot but be in the recollection of this same honorable Court, I did, not long since, on a different occasion, because my holy religion teaches and commands me to be subject to the higher powers in civil matters, and to respect and obey them. But if called

[ocr errors]

* See St. Mat. c. 22-v. 21. "Render, therefore, to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's." St. Paul to the Romans, c. 13-v. 1. 2. "Let every soul be sub

« PredošláPokračovať »