|
ee
to-~ot, labroes 0 Math IS p 8 him this privilege. These different
DU are M e4l u is says that
11 roll -V~
nei th law p
tl ee W any 4
rm z d I
F tI
because Wor h*7 n oes w - To Itivel "a
0
cuts u h im d the w
Thc W U ad b ght tot
t "
u
wh
nal at D a lit On he exec Y' and if th they are not to be I!=-
In
ud to y le la ' but
ve
e r ent i to be held u nt in e s him this privilege-theme
x
a G
ca of set forth the manner of the death and uch fo i re
t toy t ma of the counts in the Indict-
which do by law, that Is, in a distinct
cth a re he , and hat the Gover men d a c 06 y hat form in the indictment,
th r n ot v rp than b
I so t t n
aft a d ctia e t falls, and t t It moun 8 to no more t as
whi fe al t p ! u i u a 13 t the G(
we con nd h t a I e words,-that Jim. W. Web-
L Par c wor mor p
~ u co V in I e v cc of
:rdered G r k an on d ap yl g th e ideal overnment introduced here to
us u t a I let nf~ y u mu apply t at !v! a c t rst or $coo our
h nd me 0 st h a n e 0 the A nd c at which charges murder,-
I t I t f t li d Do y t ve me t
a vernment. T e Government charge with striking
use ha, 8 he mode o den, re upon b he Go ro la . The Gov(
a h e 11 n y
upon the floor, with hands and feet, in the third count. They will not rely
upon this third count alone. I sub-
mit that we cannot apply it to any of the first counts. and say, that
beyond all reasonable doubt, death was caused
by the hammer or the knife. It is not thought quite so certain, by the
gentlemen on the Inquest. that the knife,
had been the instrument by which the deed was perpetrated. The only
evidence tending to show, in my opi-
nion, that death was occasioned either by a knife or hammer, is the
evidence of Dr. Wyman, in reference to the
fracures upon the skull, of rather upon the left side of the skull.
Remember. that the Government are saying
that George Parkman was murdered by premeditation. Do you think that Prof.
Webst-r left that fatal event to
the chance blow of a hammer or a knife, or that he prepared the way in
which it should be done, in advance?
Will you say that be did not etxangle him. when you believe that beating
him with his hand or feet, he caused
des re that;death was
in a particular form ! Will you say, I would ask again, that liquid poison
Um not have been poured down his
throat, or that he came to his death by some other means than that averred
--t he indictment? ! W e are in the Dyad
field of conjecture. The Government only ask you to decide by conjecture ?
It may be that there was a knife, it
may be that there was a hammcr,but if it be decided that it is so, orif it
is proved that death was occasioned in the
manner set forth in the indictment, the case is legally brought before its
legitimate tribunal. 1 know thpt the:
ALtap_y General in this ease will contend for an opposite position, but if
such be sustained. I will regard such. deei-
don w casting a reproach upon the law of the land, upon our criminal system
of jurisprudence. It may be' said `
that this is a question that ought to be set down aceo;ding to fired
principles of law but grant we are not in
oar public Courts to legislate upon what ought to be law; but we are simply
to inquire what the law is,, Under sash .
circumstances, I would ask, is the law really binding, and are our Courts
and Jurors, knowing what the law is, to
legislate upon he means by which they are to apply it to a particular case?
If this is not the law, I say, there is
great doubt how to dispose of the charges in this particular ease which you
are now trying?
What says the law ? There is a beautiful maxim. '• Better that one hundred
guilty men should escape punish., .
ment than that one innocent man should suffer," and, therefore, it throws
about its Courts that protpe-
lien of law which forms the basis of human righ. It makes rules upon which
to frame Indict-
ments, and it hampers its own officers with forms upon which it founds the
protection of law.
I Bay to you, gentlemen, to aoquitieven a known felon of an offence alike
odious and atrocious is a noble triumph
of the law, wether he is acquitted of an offense of a minor. or of a crime
that would doom him to the scaffold; gentlemen, if you cannot find beyond
reasonable doubt, how this death came about, for your sountry's
laws and your country's honor, I ask your verdict for my client. _
r
TENTH DAY,'
Continuation of Mr. IIIerriclc's Address.
I shell now proceed to the continuation of the evidence upon which the
Government claim to have brought hoses
the charge-and here let me ask you to see the position which we occupy up
to the time that George Parkmsa
entered the College between the hours of 1 and 2, on $he 23d of November.
The defendant admits that he was
there between the hours of 1 and 2. The Government will not take the
admission of Doctor W, as to the time tic
left, bat choose to take a different hour. Now I wish to call your
attention particularly to the evidence involved
in the ease. The Government claim that Parkman came to the door to Webster.
Webster denies it. The Got.
vernment claims that Dr. P. came to his death by Professor W. Professor W.
denies it. The Government claim.
thak the remains of the body of Dr. P. were found in the College. Thidis
neither admitted nor denied by Prof.
W., who says he knows nothing about it. He stands then In ibis position :
when Webster, on the morning of the,
let of December, after such a night as man has scarcely ever passed,
recovered his power of speech and uttered,
in simple but expressive language, -` I do not think these remains are he
remains of Dr. P., but how they came there
I do not know." His proposition then. gentlemen, is that, by some means or
other, these remains were placed
in. that building without his agency or instrumentality. He never has
professed to know anything 'about them,
nor is he able to explain the circumstances connected with the finding of
those remains. There are one or two
matters connected with this subject, which we had better dispose of now as
early as wg can. The great proof-the
circumstance on which the government mainly rely,is, first-the entrance of
P. into the Medical College-and nest,
the remains that were found there; and they would go to show that Webster
must have control over the living as
well as the dead, under the circumstances under which he is charged to have
committed the crime. Next, three
letters have been brought forth to shew that Prof. W. wrote them, to divert
attention from the place. If an oo-
oasion for directing attention from the Medical College had arisen at all,
it would be difficult to know the objee;
of Prof. W., except thus to divert it from himself; that is utterly denied.
I mean to state as strongly as I can. 1
am''sorry that these letters came so recently upon us. and that we should
have so little opportunity to make exam-
inattoa of them, and that they were put in at the last part of the
testimony for the government. We were going to
close pp, entirely, thinking our attention would not be drawn to any new
points in the testimony, trusting that
the wcidance already put in was sufcient for the government. The evidence
of these letters His then intro-
duced through the testimony of experts. I do not claim to have very great
knowledge of hand-8r3- -
ting, but I think it cannot have escaped your notice that effective
evidence has been given, which east
show by experience that this is not the way to test with accuracy the
testimony as regards hand-wrjlting. Smith,
the engraver, s~stains Gould in relation to some of the letters, and says
that these letters are genuine. I have:
not had much opportunity to make personal examinations, of them, so as to
trace the resemblance in the baiad-
writing of certain letters. I profess not skill-I have not practised in
this business of an expert; but I do wish dis-
tinctly to say, that from my knowledge and experience in this peculiar line
of art, and most will agree with me, that
this Gould is the merest visionary that was ever called upon to testify
before any Jury upon such a point. I am
not going to ask you to rely upon his testimony upon this point; I merely
ask you, that when you retire to your room,
that yon will take these papers, compare them and judge for yourselves. You
are not to be governed by the opals- 1
ion of Mr. Goulil upon a matter of this kind, but you are to consider
whether the evidence, as it comes up before a
you, proves the character of theband-writing of the defendant beyond all
reasonable doubt.
Among other things, the witness said that the figures 1 3, 4 and 9, as they
appeared in some letters, resembled very
much the style of writing of the defendant. The last eball be first, and
the first shall be last. I wish that yon wouid
look at the figure 9 in these letters, and look at the 9's in everyone of
these checks which I now show you. If tea.,
timony of this character was to be relied upon, no man inthe community
would be safe. I express it under my, owl
conviction.
|
