|
191
week, Dr. Webster was at a late hour in that laboratory, where he
toiled for his daily bread, reading a chemical book, as Littlefield has
said. You find Dr. Parkman, I will not say intruding upon him,
but calling upon him. A conversation ensued, and Dr. Parkman
departed, with a menace upon his lips. °° Something must be done
to-morrow," said he. The time i's passing, - the morrow passed.
Dr. Webster, in the morning of that day, according to Littlefield and
Maxwell, wrote a note to Dr. Parkman. I wish it were here,
and did hope, at one time, that, with the multifarious papers pro-
duced on this trial by the Government, that also would be presented.
He wrote a note. Its precise terms are not communicated, but you
will have no doubt that it had relation to the circumstances existing
between them. Dr. Webster says that he came to him. That is a
part of the memorandum found upon his arrest; and it is, therefore,
competent for you to take into consideration that Dr. Parkman called
again. At any rate, during that week, he was watching the high-
ways, endeavoring to anticipate the approach of Dr. Webster to the
Medical College. He was more than once at Cambridge Bridge. He
was on the watch,-he was on the inquiry. He asked the toll-
gatherer of the passages of Dr. Webster.
On Thursday, having been at the bridge, according to the testimony
of the toll-man, he procured a conveyance, drove out to Cambridge,
and, when near Dr. Webster's house, made inquiries for it, and re-
turned. The next day they met, and by appointment, under the state
of feelings and excitement which had been generated by their whole
course of dealing, and by the pursuit of Dr. Parkman, so constant and
so unintermitting, so pressing and urgent. They met. Is it strailge
that men, meeting under such circumstances, should get into a wran-
gle ? Is it strange, or unnatural, that one party, who felt himself to
be pursuing a dishonest man, that he had been personally injured,
would therefore take, I will not say the law into his own hands, but
take that which would do more for him than the law could do, and
would pursue his debtor ? Is it strange that the debtor, who had been
thus pursued, should retaliate ? - that this should breed angry words,
and that personal collision should follow, and that personal collision
should be followed by that from which, when done, death would
ensue ? I am arguing upon probabilities. There is in morals, as
well as in politics, a regular succession of events. Passion has its
sway, as well as the laws of nature. The action of the mind is as
regular as the motion of the planets in their spheres. It was as nat-
ural that men should fall into altercation - that altercation should be
followed by blows, and that blows should be followed by death - as it
is that any cause should produce its effect.
Gentlemen, the parties met under these circumstances - in this
state of excitement; and we are now to suppose the death o(' this
individual. This is all that we know. The creditor, pressing with a
firm, if not with a hard hand! The debtor resisting! Justice may
sometimes seem to be too exacting in its requisitions. The claim of
right may seem to him against whom it is pressed to be urged too
far, and the party will turn upon the other, who seems to him to be
the aggressor. Word after word will be followed by blow after blow,
and deadly consequences may ensue.
Which, when we are speaking of probabilities, is more likely-
|
