|
TRIAL OF JOHN W. WEBSTER. 203
l
orandum taken from his pocket at the time of his arrest, and now put
into the case by the Government as evidence, states that there was such
an arrangement; and it is but fair and reasonable, that the prisoner
should now have the benefit of the statement. No matter, then, that the
amount found due by a computation upon the notes, according to the
indorsements upon them, will not correspond with the amount alleged
to have been paid. It is not to be expected that it should be so; for the
parties, having had some differences before, had agreed in advance as
to the amount that should be paid upon this occasion. It must have been
so; else why did Dr. Parkman have both notes with him? If one only
was to be paid, why carry them both? He did not carry all the papers;
the mortgage was kept back, but he had both notes with him. And I
appeal to you if it be not reasonable to say, that they were there because
the parties had before come to an arrangement which required them
both to be brought forward by Dr. Parkman.
You cannot fail to observe, in this very connection, another very strik-
ing, because altogether incidental, corroboration of the statements of Dr.
Webster, as to what took place at the interview in the College. He has
uniformly stated, that the mortgage was not given up,-that Dr. Park-
man agreed to see himself to its discharge, upon the records, in Cam-
bridge. And now here upon this trial, you see, produced from the pos-
session of the family of Dr. Parkman, the identical papers which Dr.
Webster says Dr. Parkman took upon himself to discharge at some
subsequent day.
Look, then, most carefully at the whole series of transactions, and
determine for yourselves, if the simple narrative of Dr. Webster must
not be substantially true. Mark the incidental, but strong, corrobora-
tions which accompany and fortify it. It is beyond all question, that
the creditor was pressing for payment. He went down to the College to
receive his money,-he carried the notes to give up in exchange for it,-
the notes were given up, the mortgage was retained, and it is now pro-
duced from the possession of his family,-and if not all, yet some portion
of the funds came from the students attending the chemical lectures.
Now I submit to you, with the utmost confidence, if the explanations
which are offered are not abundantly spfficient to refute the extraordin-
ary assumption of the Government. I do not say that the argument is
absolutely conclusive, because it must be admitted, that the proof of the
facts relied on is in some particulars incomplete and imperfect. But is
there not amply sufficient to indicate to you the way, and lead you
to the truth,-to repel the awful and fearful imputation of the Govern-
ment, that the prisoner at the bar, destitute of funds, and utterly incap-
able of meeting the payment to Dr. Parkman, deliberately contrived
and calmly premeditated his destruction, by the most atrocious crime
which can be committed against the rights of humanity? And yet, you
must reject all these reasonable explanations, and sustain, to its fullest
extent, this startling hypothesis of the Government, or you cannot
affirm that the, homicide, if it ever took place, was of malice
aforethought.
I beg you to weigh it well, for on it are the issue of life and death.
At this point, the hour of adjournment, two o'clock, P. M., having
arrived, Mr. Merrick suspended his address, and the Court adjourned to
half-past three.
Afternoon Session.-Friday, March 29th.
The Court came in at half-past three o'clock, and Mr. Merrick imme-
diately rose and resumed his closing argument for the defence.
If I have succeeded, Gentlemen of the Jury, in repelling, as I trust
I have done, the imputation of express malice, I desire next to call
your attention to those circumstances which must disclose the real char-
|
