|
200 TRIAL OF JOHN \v. WEBSTER.
Parkman went to the Medical College, on Friday the 23d of November,
between the hours of one and two o'clock, upon a mutual appointment,
for the transaction of a certain matter of business between them. The
statement of Professor Webster shows, that he invited Dr. Parkman to
meet him at that place on that occasion, for the purpose of paying him
a certain sum of money, the amount of which had been previously
arranged and agreed upon by them; and he adds to this statement, that,
in pursuance of their appointment, Dr. Parkman appeared, and produced
a part of the papers relative to the business,-received the money,-
closed the transaction, and left the College. All this is denied on the
part of the Government. On the contrary, they allege that no money
was paid; that Dr. Webster intended to pay none; that he was wholly
destitute of funds, with which any such payment could have been made;
and that the proposal to pay was only a false and fraudulent pretence
to induce Dr. Parkman to go to the lecture-rooms of the Medical College,
where the wicked and atrocious design to destroy his -life could be
effected.
The proof of this extraordinary and startling proposition, if it exists
at all, lies in a very narrow compass. It consists of the evidence tend-
ing to show the supposed inability of Dr. Webster to make the payment,
which he professes to have made, and in the notes subsequently found
in his possession, upon which it is claimed there was due a much larger
amount than the sum which is alleged by Dr. Webster to have been paid.
Mr. Pettee, who was the agent of Dr. Webster for the sale of the tickets
to his course of chemical lectures, has informed you of the amount which
he collected, and in what manner it was paid. It appears satisfactorily
from other evidence, the accuracy of which is admitted, that, with the
exception of forty-five dollars,-to which sum for another purpose I
shall presently allude,-the whole of the money received from Mr. Pettee
was deposited in the Charles River Bank, and it was either drawn out
upon small checks, or remained still in deposit, at the time Dr. Webster
was arrested. None of these facts are denied by him; nor does he claim
that the payment to Dr. Parkman was made from the funds he derived
from the sale of his tickets.
The testimony of Dr. Henchman and of Mr. Smith does not seem to
be of material importance. On the morning of the 23d of November',-
the same day on which Dr. Webster asserts that he made the payment
to Dr. Parkman, it appears that he received the sum of ten dollars in
bills, for a check of the same amount which he had drawn upon the
Charles River Bank. He had a right to draw the check, for he had
funds there; and it would have been paid, if it had seasonably been pre-
sented. The funds which he deposited in the bank were those which
were required for his daily use; and it was but in the usual course of his
ordinary transactions, that he drew the check, and received the money
of Dr. Henchman. It had nothing to do with the payment to Dr. Park-
man.
Mr. Smith had a small claim upon him, for which payment was
requested sometime during the summer; and delay of its collection was
asked, until funds should be received from the sale of the tickets to the
annual course of lectures. This, like the transaction with Henchman,
had relation to his domestic expenses; and it was not unnatural or
peculiar that he should seek the postponement of payment, until the
receipt of those funds which were usually appropriated to such pur-
poses.
But, though Dr. Webster asserts that he made the payment to Dr.
Parkman, it must be admitted, that we have produced no evidence of
the source from whence the money was derived. I am free to admit,
that it is impossible for him to produce such evidence; not because he did
not have the means of payment, but because such funds were derived and
preserved in such a, manner as to render the production of proof in rela-
tion to them altogether impracticable. They were the accumulation of
|
