|
TRIAL OF JOHN W. WEBSTER. 273
Chief Justice.-What was the date of the note of 1847?
Attorney General.-It reads as follows:-
"Boston, -Jan'y 22d, -1847.
Value recd, I promise to pay to Geo. Parkman, or order, twenty-four
hundred and thirty-two dollars, within four years from date, with inter-
est yearly; a quarter of said capital sum being to be paid yearly.
Witness: J. W. WEBSTER.
CHARLES CUNNINGHAM."
You see that this note is at four years. Hence, the amounts due upon
it to the respective parties were not then payable. A quarter of it only
was to be paid yearly. If Dr. Parkman had received his own portion
of it, what would he have done? Would he have given up that note
to the debtor, cancelled the mortgage, and left the other creditors, for
whom he was a trustee, without security and without remedy? Dr.
Webster had his statement from Mr. Cunningham of the amount due Dr.
Parkman in April, 1849. It was a sum without interest. Having got
these notes into his possession, he is to make up his story; and, in order
to do that, he must fix upon the sum he was to say he had paid Dr. Park-
man. He did not owe Dr. Parkman $483.64 on the 23d of November.
We prove that by his own documents; we prove it by the papers found in
his wallet. He sits down to frame his story; and there is that docu-
ment!-the most extraordinary that was ever found in the pocket of
an honest man. I desire to call your attention to it more particularly.
You will remember the interviews which the prisoner had with Dr.
Parkman. On the 9th of November, Dr. Parkman calls on him. On
Monday the 19th, he calls again, and leaves him with that declaration,-
"To-morrow, something must be done!" The next day, Dr. Webster
writes him a note. You will find that the Monday night's interview is
entirely ignored in this memorandum. So, also, nothing is said about
Dr. Parkman's going over to Cambridge to see him; nothing as to what
occurred between them, from the 9th until the fatal 23d. What now is
the story he prepares? He tells it twice on the same piece of paper.
What is the object of that? Is a man keeping a journal on such a piece
of paper as that? If so, why a double version of the events? If he is
writing an account in consequence of the disappearance of Dr. Parkman,
he had already communicated it to Dr. Francis Parkman, to Mr. Blake,
and others! But, Gentlemen, there is intrinsic evidence that, on the 23d,
$483.64 was not the sum he owed Dr. Parkman. Here is his paper:-
"Nov. 9th, Friday, rec'd . $510 00
234 10 out Dr. Big.
Pettee, cash $275 90
Dr. P. came to lecture room,-front left hand seat." Of what importance
was that? "Students stopped-he waited till gone, and came to me, and
asked for money-Desired him to wait till Friday, 23d;" thus you see,
stepping over entirely the evening of the 19th; "as all the tickets were
not paid for, but no doubt would be then-he good deal excited-went
away-Friday, 23d, called at his house about 9, A. M.; told him I had the
money, and if he would call soon after one, w'd pay him. He called at
1-2 past, and I paid him $483.64." Now, there is added at a different
time, with different colored ink, in the last line of the last paragraph
but one,-"Said I owed him $483.64."
Here are his own figures; and yet he states that Dr Parkman says
he owed him, on the 9th, $483.64. Then he says, on the 23d, after a half-
month's interest had accrued, that he paid him just that sum. Do you
think, if Dr. Parkman was standing on points like these with this
man,-that, if he owed him that amount on the 9th, he would not have
insisted on the one or two dollars interest, which would have accrued
on the 23d?
17
|
