William J Hatch married Catharine Browning on March 1, 1831, in Gloucester, New Jersey.

Dreadful Affair in Camden — Homicide by Trespassers — A terrible event occurred, yesterday morning, in Camden resulting from the act of trespassers upon private property. Mr. William J. Hatch, a respectable and wealthy citizen of New Jersey, was, with his wife, visiting his father, who resides on a farm near Cooper's Creek. A short time previous to 10 o'clock in the morning, three men, believed to be Frenchmen, were seen along the river firing at some kins of game. The farmers of the neighborhood are much annoyed by this practice, their property injured by trespassers, and they endeavor to put a check to such depredations. Mr. William J. Hatch went towards the men alluded to, it is said, and after an interview took a gun from one of the party, and demanded the two other guns belonging to the Frenchmen. This demand, it appears, was not acceded to. The trespassers started towards Cooper's Creek, followed by Mr. H. When about half way across the creek, a scuffle, it is said, ensued between the deceased and one of the men, who had a gun in his hand, which terminated in the death of Mr. Hatch, who was shot through the head, and his body left lying where he fell, upon the ice upon Cooper's Creek. The shot killed him instantly, blowing his brains completely out. The perpetrators of the act immediately fled, and two of them made their escape. The third man, Adolph Delso was arrested near Cooper's Point while lying in the street, pretending to be asleep. He was taken to the lock-up, and subsequently placed in prison for a hearing. The prisoner acknowledged himself as one of the party, but would not tell who fired the gun. He gave the names of Joseph Urbrandt and Ordult Baizteau as the other two men who were with him at the time Mr. Hatch was killed. Dr. Birdsell, Coroner of Camden, took the body in charge, and will hold an inquest this morning, at 10 o'clock, when the particulars in regard to the murder will be ascertained. Mr. Hatch was 45 years of age, resided on the corner of Sixth and Cooper streets, and has left a wife and four children. He was a member of the City Councils, and for three years represented North Ward in that capacity.
During the afternoon, Officer Johnson arrested one of the parties, who, it is alleged, participated in the affair, at the Kensington Depot, where he was just about to purchase a ticket for New York. After the commission of the fatal act, he had shaven his mustache and whiskers off. He is a shoemaker by trade, and keep house at No. 86 Locust street, where he rented rooms to others. He is a married man.
Courseer Erlsend, the other one in the party, was arrested at the house of Lernshardt, in Locust street. He is a Frenchman and a shoemaker. The two were taken to Camden and had a hearing before Mayor Shieff. Two Germans, who reside on the place, testified to seeing the transaction, and also stated that the three arrested were the parties engaged in the affray. They were committed to await a trial on the second Tuesday in May.
The jury impanelled by the Coroner to investigate the causes of the death of Mr. Hatch is composed of the following named person:—....
From what facts we have been able to gather in relation to this terrible affair, it is uncertain whether Mr. Hatch was accidentally, while in a scuffle with one of the prisoners—or whether, while standing a few yards from him, he was deliberately shot down. The investigation before the Coroner this morning will probably develope the correct state of the case.
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Monday, March 24, 1856, p. 1

The Homicide of Mr. Hatch—Coroner's Investigation.—Yesterday morning, the jury selected by Coroner Birdsell, to investigate the causes of the death of Mr. William J. Hatch, on Sunday morning, met in the new Court House, in Camden. There were a number of persons present.... Dr. O H Taylor, then testified as follows:
About a quarter before 11 o'clock on Sunday morning, I visited the body of William J. Hatch, in the house of his father, Hugh Hatch; I found the wound, which was of the brain and cranium, to be very extensive, lacerated and contused; the brain was entirely removed from the cranium and deposited in a basin; the laceration was on the left side of the head; the wound was produced by the discharge of a gun or fowling piece; a blow from a bludgeon could not have produced such a wound as so effectually to separate the brain from the cranium; I think the deceased was shot while standing, but a wound similar to it might be made while lying; did not find any shot in the wound, because I did not investigate closely, as I anticipated the arrival of the Coroner for such a purpose; the contents of the gun, I think, struck in an oblique direction from behind the deceased, as only a portion of the ear was blown away; did not find any injuries about the face or body; I think the deceased could not have been standing more than 3 to 5 feet from the gun when it was fired; have no doubt the discharge of the gun occasioned instant death, as the entire brain was removed; the farm of Mr. Hugh Hatch is at the junction of the Delaware river and Cooper's creek; I never witnessed a scull so extensively fractured as that of Mr. Hatch from a gunshot wound; the perforation of the skull led me to the opinion that the wound was from a gun shot; the occipital bone was fractured in three distinct places, causing four fragments; did not find a place of exit for the charge; the skin had a blackened appearance, and seemed as if occasioned by powder. {A portion of the skull was shown witness, which had been found on the ice.] I believe the bone to be the petrious portion of the temporal bone; the blackened marks about it are indicative of powder; the bone corresponds with the place behind the ear where I suppose the discharge of the gun entered.
Joseph Urblen, (a German,) sworn —Lives in the same house with Linhart, No. 86 Locust street; knows the three prisoners; the names of two of them are Adolph Delasaule, and Jacob Linhart; don't know the name of the third; they all live in the same house with me; have lived there fourteen days; the third asked Linhart, Delasaule, and me to go gunning; I refused; the others went off together, each having a gun—two double barrel guns and one single barrel; they took a dog along; after they left, the first one I saw come back to the house was the Frenchman, or third person, about 11 1/2 o'clock yesterday morning; saw that he was excited and troubled; Linhart's wife asked him where her husband was; he told her that he had lost her husband in the woods; he said nothing more in my presence; I saw Linhart first after he came back in a bar-room corner of Fourth and Library streets; the woman who keeps the place said to me in Linhart's presence, "Linhart had killed a man across the river;" Linart was in the bar room at this time, but I don't know whether he head this remark or not; I asked Linhart what the matter was; he said "nothin—I will tell you by and by;" I then told him what the woman had said; his reply was, I will tell you about it by and by; did not stay in the bar-room long; Linhart seemed excited; I went home to dinner; Linhart did not come home; told me that he was going to stay there, and that if I would come round in the afternoon he would talk about this matter; I went round in the afternoon with Mr. Mueller; Linhart was not there; I did not see Delasaule after the party left the house in Locust street; Linhart did not appoint to meet me in Fourth street, but at another place on the Frankford road; Linhart did not tell me he was going to New York; I went to the place he had appointed, but he had left about an hour before; I saw the party with their guns; Linhard carried a single barrel gun; he did not bring it back; the Frenchman did bring his; the party left Locust street about 6 /12 o'clock in the morning.
John De Beck, sworn—Lives in Race street, No. 160; knows Linhart; saw him at a house in Locust street, above Ninth, No. 86, in the morning after he had been gunning; went to see Linhart as a friend on Sunday morning; was there when he came from Jersey; I was the first person who saw him; he looked excited; stayed about half an hour in the house in Locust street; was during this time in Linhart's room; Linhart left the house with me and went as far as Fourth and Race; he did not tell me where he was going; I went home; after this I did not see him again yesterday; I was not at the railroad station in Kensington yesterday; I saw the officer at the corner of Edward and School streets, in the afternoon; was there all the afternoon; it is a cigar manufactory, kept by a man named Sherman; Linhart had been there yesterday, but had gone before I came; Linhart did not say where he was going, but he said he must leave the city; I had not made an appointment to meet Linhart at that place; did not see him until he was arrested; don't know where Linhart shaved off his mustache; when I was in Linhart's room at his boarding house, Linhart did not say anything to me; a man named Peter Lanis and Linhart's wife were in the room; Mr. Von Lent was also in the room; I heard him say nothing to any person in the room; he said something about shooting a man, but he did not say so to me; he did not tell me nor his friends any of the particulars about the shooting; I left him at Fourth and Race streets; these persons, to whom Linhart was talking, were Peter Laurio and Von Lent; they were all who were along with Linhart and I; when I was at the house, and when I left him at Race and Fourth streets, he had his mustache and goatee on; his hair was long; all I know about the murder is that Linhart told me that he had killed a man; he did not mention the name, nor did he give me any particulars; he did no mention the subject to witness; witness saw the Frenchman come into Linhart's room while witness was on the balcony in the front of the house; I saw the three, Delasaule, Linhart, and the Frenchman, (whose name I do not know,) go out gunning in the morning; did not notice their guns; did not see them come back. When I went to the cigar manufactory, the owner said that Linhart had been there, but did no leave any of the particulars of the murder; I was conversing with the cigar maker when I was arrested by a policeman; the policeman was brought to the cigar shop by Urblen; I did not blame Urblen for bringing the policeman to the shop; Linhart was a ladies' shoemaker; when I went to the cigar shop the owner of the shop told me that Linhart was going to leave the city because he had shot a man.
Samuel Johnston, High Constable of Philadelphia, sworn—Met High Constable Millwood and another man whose name I do not know, proceeded to 86 Locust street and arrested this pock-marked man. (Identifying the Frenchman.) I arrested all the men in the house; taking the pantaloons, coat, powder flask and a gun which I found in the third story, in the room where I arrested the Frenchman; Mr. M. and myself took two of the parties whom we had arrested, and started to Kensington; I had De Beck with me and he identified him in the Depot; as he was going to buy a ticket, I caught him by the collar, put him in a carriage, and took him over to Camden; on my road down De Beck and another man were walking on the sidewalk, when Linhart knocked on the glass of the carriage window to draw their attention, but they did not notice the action, and I made him stop. (Mr. Johnson here identified the gun which he took from the house in Locust street; both barrels were loaded.) The Frenchman gave witness the name of Erbien at the Mayor's office.
Francis Von Lent, sworn —Linhart did not tell me anything about his killing a man yesterday; heard of the murder first this morning; was not at Linhart's boarding house except in the morning on Sunday at 6 1/2 o'clock; saw Linhart when he went away gunning; saw him after he came back from Jersey, at his house in Locust street; Mr. Urbein was in the room; Mr. De Beck was also present; as soon as Linhart came back, the witness went away; De Beck to Fourth and Race streets; I was in Linhart's room after his return from Jersey, and left with De Beck; I went with Linhart to the cigar maker's; staid with him there until four o'clock, P. M.; he then went up Franklin street, and I lost sight of him; don't know where Linhart was going; he had his mustache shaven off at a barber's in Brown st., between Front and Oak sts.; do not know the barber's name; I was with I'm at the time; this was before we went to the cigar maker's; he had his hair cut a little; he had his imperial and goatee shaven at the same time, and all the hair cut off his face; as long as I knew him he wore a beard. I have known him about two years. Linhart went up stairs, at the cigar maker's, and laid down to sleep. The cigar maker and myself went up with him. I knew of the murder on Sunday at 12 o'clock. I was told by a man in the street that a murder had been committed in Camden. Don't know his name. He did not tell me who committed the murder. Did not hear anything about the murder in Linhart's house. Did not know about it when Linhart was shaved. Linhart was with me when a man told us a murder had been committed in New Jersey. Linhart replied: "It's terrible; it's not a good thing." This was after he was shaved. Linhart had not changed his clothing. Mr. Joseph Meyer acted as an interpreter for this witness.
John Hill, sworn.—I lived with the old man, Mr. Hatch, on the farm; was at home on Sunday; saw Wm J. Hatch shot; Mr. Hatch saw three men on his farm; I was in the yard, and Mr. Hatch told me to come and help to catch the three men; Mr. Hatch took a club and told me to ge one, and Mr. Smith to get another; Mr. Hatch took the gun away from one of them; could not recognize which one; all three had guns; cannot say that these prisoners are the men; Mr. Hatch took a gun from the first one; they then went down to the other two, and Mr. Hatch went to take hold of one of them when he shot Mr. Hatch dead; the first one went away and was not with the other two when Mr. Hatch was killed; the man whom Mr. Hatch tried to catch shot him; they were so close together that they could take hold of each other; the two persons were ten or fifteen yards apart; Mr. Hatch looked in his face when the gun was discharged; the man was backing and Mr. Hatch following him; did not see Mr. Hatch have hold of the gun; Mr. H. had his cane raised, but did not see him strike; I was about nine or ten steps off from them when the affair took place; they had not scuffle; Mr. Hatch was only trying to get hold of him; they had words together, but I could not understand them.
John Schmidt, sworn.—Believe the prisoners to be the men, but think that one had a mustache; I saw them when Mr. Hatch was shot; I believe them to be the three men, cannot distinguish which one fired the gun; Mr. Hatch took the gun from Adolp Delasaule, and the witness recognized him; he believed the other two were there when the deceased was killed; after Mr. Hatch was killed one of them came towards me, but he had a beard, and I cannot distinguish him; Mr. Hatch and the other man had a scuffle on the ice, and as soon as the gun went off Mr. Hatch fell, and the man run towards the bridge.
Adolph Delasaule sworn, (this was one of the three gunners)—He said—We three went out gunning together, and he (witness) drank as soon as he came on the Jersey shore, and was somewhat intoxicated; I was on the farm of the deceased, and we three were coming down together; the man took my gun, when I took another gun; I was arrested by the police, who told me I had killed a man; the other two, after my gun was taken, went around the corner, and I saw them no more; I gave up my gun without resistance; did not see Mr. Hatch shot; heard reports of firing, but could not tell who shot; the other two prisoners were about two hundred yards from me when my gun was given up.
Courcier Auguste Arnable, sworn.—After being cautioned that he was not required to criminate himself, he gave the following evidence:—Myself, Adolph Delasaule and Jacob Linhart, on Sunday, were on a farm on the border of the river, but don't know to whom the farm belonged; I shot in the woods; when the shot was fired, a gentleman came up and told me I should not gun there; I then took two caps off my gun and put them in my pocket; the same moment Mr. Linhart came up and made words with Mr. Hatch; as Mr. H. and Linhart talked English, I could not understand what they were saying; the witness asked Linhard, 'what is all this about?' He told me that Mr. H. would not allow gunning and me (the witness) and Linhart went off together immediately for the ice; the moment we were on the ice, Mr. Hatch came with his two men; Mr. Hatch had a club in his hand, and his two men had clubs, and another young man had a gun in his hand; this was a small man; they were past the house, and Mr. Hatch ran after Linhart; did not see him take the gun away; myself and Mr. Linhart were alone together when Mr. Hatch came down to us; Delasaule was somewhere in the woods, but behind us; I saw Linhart shoot Hatch right plain; am positive of it; Linhart had his gun leveled, and told him he should not strike; he as backing, and told Mr. Hatch he should not follow him; the three were standing and looking at them when Linhart was backing; when the gun went off they were close together; can't say whether Mr. Hatch had hold of the gun or not; Linhart's gun is hid somewhere up at Cooper's Point; I passed between the two men who were witnesses here; I asked Linhart this morning where he had hid his gun; he said somewhere at Cooper's Point; Linhart told me after I asked him, that Hatch was the landlord there, and would not allow gunning there; Linhart said to Hatch, "If you come towards me, I will shoot you!" I went home immediately afterwards to my room; do not know where Linhart went; but he told me he went around Cooper's Point; I was standing about fifteen feet from Mr. Hatch; I called Delasaule but he did not answer; this was after the firing; the whole three of us had guns; Linhart's was a single barreled shot gun; at the time when the gun was fired they were face to face, and Mr. Hatch's back was toward me; Linhart told me he did not know exactly where he had shot Mr. Hatch; Mr. Hatch, as he was following up Linhart, had his cane or club raised, as if in the act of striking; after Mr. Hatch was shot, I walked away a short distance when I started to run; Linhart said nothing to me after Hatch was shot before he run; as soon as he came home Linhart said to me he would leave the city; Linhart ran as soon as he fired; I hallooed to him not to shoot, and I repeated it; Linhart made no threats.
The jury returned a verdict that the deceased came to his death by the discharge of the gun in the hands of Linhart or Lenars. The prisoners were then committed to answer at the May Term of the Oyer and Terminer of Camden county....
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, March 25, 1856, p. 1

Died,
Suddenly, on Sunday, the 23d inst., at Camden, WILLIAM J. HATCH, in the 50th year of his age.
The relatives and friends of the family are invited to attend the funeral, from his late residence, corner of Sixth and Cooper streets, Camden, this (Wednesday) afternoon, the 26th inst., at 2 o'clock. P. M.
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Wednesday, March 26, 1856, p. 2

Camden County Oyer and Terminer—Homicide of Mr. Hatch—The trial of Jacob Lenard, charged with the killing of Wm. J. Hatch, on the ice, near Cooper's creek, on the 23d of March, is now in progress in Camden. This is the case in which three persons from Philadelphia trespassed upon the property of Mr. Hatch, while gunning. Mr. H. pursued them and took a gun from one of the party, and was demanding a second gun when he was shot. We give, below, all the testimony bearing directly upon the case:—
John Smith, sworn—Lived with Mr. Hatch, and was there when Wm. J. Hatch was shot; I was Wm. J. Hatch, with a man named Hill, passing my house, and they called me to go with them; Hatch handed me a stick and I followed the, and saw one man standing neat, with a gun; Hatch spoke to the man, and asked him to give up the gun, which he did, and Hatch handed it to me; I then followed them; after a short while I hared some high conversation or talk between them; I then came out of the woods and stepped on the ice, and I saw Hatch and another man standing on the ice, the latter with a gun in his hand; I saw, then, a man standing before Hatch with a gun, letting it down; then I heard a shot, and I don't know who fired it; Hill went towards Mr. Hatch, and said Mr. H. was shot, and I saw Mr. Hatch fall; the gun load struck the back part of his head; I cannot say, on my conscience, who the man was that fired the gun, it was so quickly done; I cannot describe the man; after it was all over I saw three persons passing my door; two I recognized as having been at the scene of the occurrence, and one was the man I got the gun from; all three had beards, but I cannot describe them; I was 25 or 30 yards behind Hatch, and I cannot tell how far apart they were when the gun was fired; I cannot say how the gun was held.
On the cross-examination, the witness stated that Mr. Hatch and Mr. Hill had sticks similar to the one he had, but he could not tell who fired the gun; it was fired on the ice. Could not say whether any sticks were raised, but I heard loud conversation.
John Hill testified that he lived at the house of the father of Wm. Hatch. On the day of the occurrence, Mr. Hatch saw me in the barn and told me to go with him. He had a basket in his hand, which he left in the house, and I went with him. We both went into the yard, and each of us took a stick from the wood living there. Hatch then said, "I will call on John Smith." Hatch and I then jumped over the fence. Hatch then found a branch of a tree and broke a piece from it and handed it to Smith. We went along towards the ice, and saw one man standing there with a gun in his hand. Hatch then went toward him and took the gun from him and gave it to Smith. Hatch and I then went forward, and Smith followed us; we went about twenty five yards, and saw two men with guns, and as soon as they saw Hatch and me coming, they jumped on the ice; one of them stood in the wood close to the ice, and the other sprung on the ice. As soon as Hatch saw the man jump on the ice he followed him, and as soon as the man on the ice saw Hatch following him, he turned and shot his gun. The man went backwards on the ice, and they conversed before he fired, but he could not understand what was said. Hatch raised his stick and the man went backwards and raised the gun. I heard the report of the gun, and Mr. Hatch was dead.
On the cross examination, he said that Mr. Hatch appeared to be angry when he demanded the gun from the first man. Hatch's club was up when he was shot, over the man's head, as if he would strike the man. This occurred about 15 or 18 feet from the land, and from 20 to 25 feet from the water. The ice broke up the beginning of the following wee, It was at the time Hatch had the stick raised that the gun went off.
Auguste A. Courcier, one of the three men who were gunning, testified that they were in a little wood together gunning; I shot once at a bird and loaded a second time; a person came towards me looking very angry, and told me not to shoot; I took the caps off and passed on; we did not know the wood belonged to the gentleman; we left immediately, and went towards the ice; at that time Mr. Hatch was alone; we went on the ice, as we wanted to go away; as soon as we got there, we saw two persons with sticks and a gun; we saw Mr. Hatch coming; he came towards me, and then towards Lenard, at the same time Lenard retreated as much as he could; Mr. Hatch advanced with his stick raised until it was over defendant's head, then the gun went off; the gun was fired from his hip, and the two were very close together; I said don't shoot, because I saw both were angry; the two talked in English, but I could not understand what was said; I had a conversation with defendant on board the boat, after he had been arrested, and I asked him what Hatch had said to him; he replied that Hatch told him to go away, but still he (the defendant) did not know if he was ordered or not; he did not tell me anything he said to Hatch or that he would shoot him (Hatch) if he approached.
The witness was cross-examined at length, but nothing additional of any importance was elicited. He repeated that Mr. Hatch was very angry, and that the defendant retreated as long as he could.
George Ivens testified that he resided in Mr. Hatch's house, at the end of the lane; he went to the spot where Mr. Hatch fell, and from there to the first land was 110 feet; made no other measurement, and can't say how far it was from there to Cooper's Creek.
Dr. Taylor, who made a superficial examination of the wound received by Mr. Hatch, testified as to its character. S. Birdsall, Coroner, of Camden, also testified as to the nature of the wound. E. H. Saunders, who made a survey of the premises, exhibited to the jury a plan of the survey.
Paul C. Budd and Benjamin F. Browning testified to the fact of Mr. Hatch having a felon on the left hand.
The evidence for the State here closed, and Mr. Schenck opened for the defense.
Adolph Delasau testified to going to Camden with Lenard and Courcier, and after crossing the railroad loaded their guns; we went near a farm, on the river side; I shot at that time, and defendant and Courcier went in advance; I then went down the bank and stood on the ice; I saw three men coming, and they were very fierce; they said give up the guns; I gave them mine, after that I thought they would go home, but they passed me in a straight direction, and went on the ice; the sticks in their hands were fire wood, and when they saw me they all raised their sticks; I know nothing more.
Peter Lono sworn—Said he saw Lenard about 3 o'clock on Sunday at his house in Philadelphia, and he (Lenard) said he had had trouble in Jersey; that three men came across him with clubs raised, and that the gun went off accidentally while about warding off the blows.
A number of witnesses was then examined, who testified to the general good character of the prisoner.
Fred. Swarts—Had known Mr. Hatch five years, and lived next neighbor to him. He (Mr. Hatch) generally made it a practice to race people off his land and take guns. His temper was violent. On the cross-examination he said he had had a trouble with Mr. Hatch three years ago—no ill feeling, however.
Mr. Lerensey also said that Hatch's temper was bad.
Several witnesses testified to the good temper and character of Mr. Hatch.
Timothy Newall testified that he visited the shore where the difficulty originated; went on the ice about sixty feet from the shore, and saw blood; about twelve feet further oof, and pithing fifteen feet of running water, picked up a set of false teeth, which he supposed belonged to Mr. Hatch. The was was running and the ice was ebbing and flowing. He went no further on the ice, because he did not want to get into the river.
The testimony here closed, and the arguments before the jury will be made this morning.
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Thursday, May 15, 1856, p. 1

The Homicide of Mr. Hatch.—This case was continued in Camden, yesterday. The evidence having closed the day before. Thos. W. Mulford, District Attorney, opened the argument for the Commonwealth. He contended that Mr. Hatch was acting as an officer of the peace in driving armed men or gunners from his premises; and, also, it must be shown by the prisoner, before he could be acquitted, that the deceased aimed at his life. He contended that the evidence did not warrant the prisoner in taking the life of Mr. Hatch, for he well knew that he was not in a perilous situation. He also contended, that the prisoner resolved upon the killing of Mr. Hatch, because, as soon as he saw Hatch in pursuit of him, he turned and pointed his gun towards him.
F. U. Brewster followed for the defence, and said he was surprised this morning not to hear the prosecution waive the indictment for a murder, and press one of a lower grade. He then entered into a definition of the various grades of homicide. He then read the law which authorizes the owner or possessor of land to arrest those who may be trespassing thereupon, and contended that no evidence had been offered on the part of the State to show that Mr. J. Hatch was either the owner or possessor. If he was either, the title deed of the lease would be sufficient evidence. The only evidence in reference to the matter adduced, went to show that the land was owned by Mr. Marmaduke Cope, of Philadelphia, and that Mr. Hugh Hatch was the possessor; therefore, W. J. Hatch was acting as a stranger, he only farming a portion of the land on shares. He said that at the point at which this affair occurred, there was no fence, sign, or anything else to indicate that this was private property. He also contended, that according to the provisions of the laws of New Jersey private citizens were only authorized to detain offenders, and not to take away their guns. There is no authority to use force until the parties offending make a resistance. He read authorities to show that if an officer was killed in the discharge of his duty, those killing him, if they knew him to be an officer, would be guilty of murder in the 1st degree—but if they knew him not, it would only be manslaughter. He contended that the testimony of the State's witnesses showed that the prisoner and his two companions left the place when directed to do so by Mr. Hatch, and got upon the ice, and the pursuit by Hatch and his companions was an after thought, and the prisoner only turned upon his pursuer when he found that he could go no further without jumping into the river and thus lose his life. Mr. Brewster at the close of his able and eloquent argument, exhibited to the jury the gun of Lenard and pointing out several marks upon the stock which he contended, according to the testimony, were made by blows from the stick in the hands of W. J. Hatch, and that the gun at the prisoner's hip went off in consequence of the jar from the blows given by Hatch.
David Paul Brown, the counsel for the prisoner, continued the argument when the Court reassembled in the afternoon. He argued the case in various aspects, contending that there was no malice in the act of the prisoner, which he argued was done in self-defense, Mr. Hatch at the time aiming blows at him with a club. The counsel continued his remarks in a very eloquent strain for more than an hour, and was listened to attentively by a crows occupying the court-room in every part.
Richard Thompson, Esq., the Prosecuting Attorney, followed in conclusion of the argument. He described the crime of which the prisoner stands charged, as a most brutal, unnecessary and unjustifiable murder. He combatted very ably the argument of self-defense, contending that the prisoner was not in danger, and he had been previously warned from the farm by Mr. Hatch, who, after being continually harassed by marauders from the city of Philadelphia, had finally fallen a victim, and his family have now to mourn this loss, cut off suddenly by one of three trespassers upon his farm. He urged the jury to call this murder by its right name and bring in a verdict that would prove a warning to marauders, that murder and killing were not to be committed with impunity. The farms in the vicinity of Camden have become almost worthless from the liability of having crops trodden down and fences destroyed by persons in pursuit of birds or plunder of orchards.
On the conclusion of the argument, Judge Potts adjourned the Court, announcing that he would deliver his charge to the jury this morning, at 9 o'clock.
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Friday, May 16, 1856, p. 1

Camden Oyer and Terminer.—The Homicide of Mr. Hatch.—At the assembling of the Court yesterday morning, Judge Potts delivered the charge, in the case of Jacob Lenard, charged with the murder of Wm. J. Hatch. We give below the substance of what was said by the Judge. He said—The jury, in its consideration of this case, should dismiss everything like passion, prejudice, or personal feeling, and come to its consideration, seeking only to ascertain the truth. The Judge, after stating the prisoner at the bar was charged with the crime of murdering Wm. J. Hatch, on Sunday, March 23d, proceeded to recapitulate the evidence given to the Court and jury by those who were eye witnesses of the transaction.
As to the statement made by Lenard, that the shooting was accidental, the Judge informed the jury that it was introduced by the State, and its credibility was for them to consider. He said it was their duty to apply the law to the facts. He then proceeded to explain the various grades of murder and homicide, and said that where the weapon is deadly, the intent to take life is a necessary conclusion, where circumstances do not show that the taking of life was accidental.
The presumption is, it was otherwise, and the burthen of proof rests upon the defendant. To make the killing excusable, it must be shown that the assailed was closely pressed, and retreated as far as he could, and that he was in danger of life or enormous bodily harm. He said that if the jury believed the testimony of Courcier, it established the fact, that the prisoner was on the ground as a trespasser, and that deceased went to him (Lenard) alone and unarmed, and forbid him to shoot on those grounds, and told him, at the same time, that he was the owner. The prisoner did not meet this with an apology, but answered "how do I know." An answer, which in its very form questioned his (Hatch's) veracity, and was well qualified to provoke him. Here the mischief began; here was the contact of steel and flint, which first struck fire, and that was soon thereafter to be quenched in blood. Up to this time there was no summoning of assistance, no sticks or clubs, no demand of guns; and if defendant had behaved as Courcier did, the trouble would, in all probability, have ended here.
After charging the jury to carefully weigh the evidence, and see under which, if either, of the various grades of murder he is guilty, he stated that he had not discussed the statuary right of Mr. Hatch to arrest or detain the prisoner, for the simple reason that he does not appear, by the evidence, to have claimed or acted under any such authority. Independent of the statute at common law, Mr. Hatch, as the agent of his father, who was tenant of the premises, had a perfect right to order these men off the place. They were there without right; they were there in violation of law; they were trespassers; and when the prisoner questioned his (Hatch's) authority to order him off, he had a right to compel him to leave, using, of course, no more force than was necessary to effect this object.
If a trespasser comes into your house, or on your lands, he is bound to depart when you order him away, and you are not called upon to exhibit your title deeds, leases or evidence of agency. It is enough that he knows he has no business there. It is for him to show his right, and not for you. A man's lands are his own, as well when covered with ice and snow, as when covered with vegetation, and a man may be a trespasser without doing actual injury. Unenclosed lands, between high and low water mark, are as completely the subject of dominion and property, in New Jersey, as upland, and no man is by law compelled to fence his land from the public highway. A right of way may be established by use and occupancy in the public, or by other legal modes, but he who claims the right must show it. In conclusion, he said that the case must stand where Mr. Hatch left it. Upon his common law right to compel trespassers to leave the premises he had the care and charge of; nor have you anything to do with the fact that Mr. Hatch took Delasule's gun. The prisoner knew nothing of that, and it could have no influence upon his action.
The jury retired, and, after about six hours' deliberation, returned a verdict of "murder in the second degree." The jury stood, a portion of the time, 1 for murder in the first degree, 3 for manslaughter, and 8 for murder in the second degree. The extreme penalty of the law for those convicted of murder in the second degree is twenty years.
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Saturday, May 17, 1856, p. 1

CAMDEN AFFAIRS.—Sentenced.— Yesterday, Linare, convicted on Friday last of the murder of Wm. J. Hatch in the second degree, was sentenced to twenty years in the State Prison at hard labor. This was the utmost limit the law allows for that grade of crime.
—Public Ledger (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, May 20, 1856, p. 2