New York Globe report of the Webster Case, 1850,
Image No: 69
   Enlarge and print image (113K)           << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

New York Globe report of the Webster Case, 1850,
Image No: 69
   Enlarge and print image (113K)           << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
ss That night Littlefield closed the doors; the next morning, Webster was at home and afterwards came to the dissecting room, and the dissecting room was found open ; on the following morning somebody had been there-and on the following morning Professor W. is found at home in Cambridge, he is found at home, also, on Thanksgiving day, and during this period of time his rooms are accessible, and no means are taken to bot the doors. We come to the following Tuesday-Kingsley was there on that day. He saw the tea- cheat partly. covered with minerals. Now, between that time and Saturday, there was no evidence that there was any change as to the tea-chest, but then it was only partially covered. Now this all the time was accessible. In this tea-cheat what has been found? That knife, of which we have heard so mach, and yet as clean and polished as when it was taken out of the shop of the merchant and that knife was placed there, and by whom? By Prof. W.. who made no disguise of it. He showed it to Littlefield in the College. The yatagan too-that silver-hasped and exquisite- ly finished weapon-was exposed there. Why had Dr. Webster these weapons there ? If a murder had been committed so as to bring them in direct connection with himself, why has he then gone exposed. We have yet to ask why has he put this twine, which we have heard so much about, around.the thorax and thigW Might it not be for the purpose of removing them? But I cannot answer the question. Are we to suppose that some mysterious being had used the twine and changed it? It might have been to bring that portion of the body so as to connect the fragments that were found together. I do not know but that the Professor might have left the College very early Friday morning, and then I may suppose that some person placed those remains there. I now come to the question of the tea-chest, when we hear something ofthe remains of a human body. It has been said that Parkman was murdered in the aboratory, ye:. we find no blood, so that the whole conjecture is alto- gether extravagant and visionary. We are not to suppose that he has been taken in there naked; but these probabilities-these facts-all give the case to the Government beyond all reasonable doubt. I shall for a moment ask your Honor's attention to some testimony in reference to some of the witnesses. I regret being obliged to make any allusiou to the witnesses, calculated to injure their character, but I will take upon myself the responsi- bility, in alluding to one of the Government witnesses, that I don't mean to impute to him-far be it from me to im- pute crimes to any man-but it is my duty, and it is your duty to fearlessly discharge the responsibilities that attend your position. Littlefield has been to some extent corroborated by some witnesses, and his testimony has been corroborated by that of his wife. Now, when such testimony is to affect life and liberty, the testimony of witnesses becomes of the highest importance, and here the question arises for us to inquire into. Is Littlefield entitled, as a witness in this case, to that implicit reliance, where it goes to affix the awful crime of murder up- on one with whom he had always maintained the most friendly relations. If such evidence is admissible, then human life cannot be safe. I do not wish to impeach any one, but if testimony like this be admitted, and witnesses of such a character be allow- edto testify in cases upon which depends the feeble thread of human life, we are bound to scrutinize the character and conduct of witnesses, and hence I consider it my duty to call your attention to some portions of Little- field's evidence. You will perceive that at the-first time suspicion broke in upon the mind of Littlefield as to Dr. W. having committed the murder, he communicated them to his wife who told him not to communicate them is any person. Up to this time all his suspicions were concealed, and yet entertaining them, we find him going on that same night to Grant's,where he danced some 16 or 18 times, and returned home late, after which he went around to the rooms and examined them all; on Saturday he watced; on Sunday he barred the doors; he passes through the laboratory and nothing seems to attract him; Prof. W. he knew, was engaged there, and yet he made no search; afterwards, Mr. Clark comes; then again the same day, Mr. Kingsley comes to make a search, and yet he tells them to make no search at oil, at that time. f The counsel here commented at much length upon the en- tire testimony of Littlefield, shewing the friendly relations that existed between him and Professor Web- ater, while Littlefield entertins the terrible suspicions as to his guilt., receiving at the onset from the Professor the present of a turkey for Thanksgiving and never openly communicating his suspicions until the time that notices were posted up offering a reward for the discovery of the remains of Dr. Parkman, and then, coincidently making the effort to undermine the walls of the privy in which a portion of the remains were found. He next particularly called the attention of the Jury to the fact of the certainty with which he made his way in boring the wall to the exact position where the remains were found, which he looked upon as calculated to throw a deep suspicion upon the witness lAttlefield, and which he was of opinion required explanation. In the course of his elo- quent remarks. he concluded by passing a high eulogium upon the private professional and public character of Prof. W. in the community where he has been known for many years, mainly relying upon his character, which in cases like the present, where circumstantial evidence throws doubt over the case, and wholly relied uon, should have the proper weight. Gentlemen, his character he brings before you. It is for you to do your duty, and give him all the length of the law and evidence which has been offered here. May you never regret your last day's worklin this laborious and protracted case. God grant him a good deliverance; and may he grant the same to you, and that you shall never reflect upon your final determination here with any other feelings than those of satisfaction. ELEVENTH DAY. Mr. ClifforWs Closing Address. The Jury entered at five minutes before nine o'clock, and the Court followed at five minutes past nine o'clock. The names of the Jury having been called, Mr. Clifford, Attorney General, rose to make the closing argument for the Government You, Gentlemen of the Jury, as well as myself and the community, must have been aware at the commenement of this trial that everything that human ingenuity and talent could do would be done by the defence to avoid the fate which the contrasting of ciroumstancas has been inevitably drawing the unhapliy man at the bar. I did hope when this cause commenced that the prisoner would be able to adduce some evi- dence and proof to show that he was innocent of the charge which is made against him. and I expressed that hope with all the sincerity of a compassionate heart, but, gentlemen of the Jury, that hope has been utterly and en- tirely disappointed. In the whole argument of te defence the learned counsel of the prisoner has advocated his cause with transcendent ability and eloquence, yet he had made no explanation of the peculiar circumstances attending the finding of the remains in his laboraory at the Medical College. The counsel for the defence had argued that the prisoner had been incarcerated in his cell in the jail alone, unaided and friendless, yet he had been ready at all times to give full and satisfactory proof of his innocence. How stands the case in reality ? The prisoner, though he has had opportunities at all times to come forward and vindi- cate his innocence he has chosen rather to close his own lips and those of his counsel, until this time. when- he could remain silent no longer. Counsel for the defence had complained that there had been two secret judgments made already upon the guilt of his client-two secret tribunals where he was not present; but did it ever occur to the Jury that there had been one tribunal before which the prisoner had been brought to answer to the charge against him; and that the prisoner had appeared before that tribunai,attended by one of the ablest counsel of the