The Daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1845-1850, 1850-04-01

!
is bound to set forth the fact as accurately the
tIre of the circumstances will admit.
If the jury doubt, well they may doubt, whether
DR. Parkman came TO his death by blow or hammer
the Attorney General hoped show that DR.. Webster
had had such connection with to convince them he
was guilty of the murder.
The next point reviewed was the abb attempted to
be proved by the defence DIR Webster started al the
outset, in saying that the remains were those
of DR. Parkman than. his own.
The testimony Of Mrs. Hatch is perfectly reconcia-
bic with the testimony of the government--the hour
and place all show he might have been where she states
he But she speaks of ''chin' may she not as
her only recollection is confined to this point have been
misalen-haye deemed some other man DR. Park
man. As to Thompson, it has been proved that the
clock the Court House, at East Cambridge, is
riousy inaccurate And it was from this clock that he
took the hour when he left East Cambridge.
| Wentworth DIR Parkman under peculiar circum-
stances, but he mentions seeing him only to his wife,
for the whole time. Mr.. Russell does not corroborate
Wenworth-his testimony is therefore entirely unrea-
BILE.
Mr.. Cleland had not spoken to DR. Parkman for years
He did not speak DR.. Parkman at the time he pas
sed.
Now, as to Mrs. Rhoades evidence. The sunset oc-
CURED on Nov. 23d at thirytwo minutes past P. M.
1t was near dark. Mrs. Rhodes says the gentleman
did not bow first, which would be quite different
hings Suppose she had bowed to a stranger resemb-
ling DR.. Parkman, would he not have returned the
bow! Mrs. Rhodes speaks Of gentleman being with
Or Parkman But where is he! Mrs. Rhodes, it is
clear, must be mistaken Mrs Greenough not certain
by any means that she saw DR. Parkman.
Acomputaon shows that 80 900 persons pass through
Court street in IL hours. In this great city would not
more than five persons have seen DIR. Parkman if he
had been abroad on Friday afternoon after ~ p Nj.
But it is fact that gentlemen was in the city at the
time, TO whom persons addressed themselves as to Dr.
Parkman.
He urged that the testimony of the defence in re-
latlon to DIR Parkman's being seen on Friday after
noon, was not entitled TO any weight whatever
certainly not sufficient 10 call up reasonable doubt
in their minds. But if DR. Parkman was seen, as
testified to, and DIR Webster is connected with the
murder OF DIR Parkman, and this connection is fully
proved, the fact Is of no material weight in the case
The day or the hour are not material Where was
Or Webster on that Friday aternoon-where did he
dine! Is it not shown that DR. Webster was dinner
less and alone at the laboratory on that Friday after
noon! Could not DIR Webster have shown where he
dined if he had been minded The Parkman al
lbi, as it is called, is therefore of no weight in the
case.
The remains were identified before DR. Keep had
examined the teeth. The demonstrative testimony
was next reviewed; the testimony of DIR Keep. DR.
Noble, and DR. Wyman. 1t is singular fact that
set Of teeth was made for DR. Parkman, that he
might be present at the opening of the Medical Col
legea still more singular fact that this same set of
teeth SHOULD be found In that same College, to pre-
serve his memory, and TO vindicate justice Such
fact directly points to the everything hand of Proy
dence Drs HARDWOOD and Tucker testified that the
dentist could recognise his work as readily as the
sculptor his work. But here comes the testimony of
DIR Wyman, who finds the lower Jaw, or fragments
of the lowerjaw of DR. Parkman, in the contents of
the furnace. Amid the ashes off the furnace. science
detects and reconstructs as to be recognized the
remains OF the deceased. The remains of GEORGE
Parkman were found In the room of DIR Webster
lhe condition OF the remains negatived and without
argument, the propositions that DIR Parkman died
by his own hand, or by the visitation of God.
The defence admits that DIR Parkman was at the
College on Friday. But DR. Webster did not admit
TINS except for the purpose of turning off suspicion
from himself. The hypothesis were: first there was
no direct evidence that the remains were those or
DIR Parkman; secondly, they might have been the
remalns thirdly, that Dr. Parkman did not die bv
violence; and, ourthly that DIR Parkman was killed
out OF the College, and his remains were taken into
the building.
Mr. Clifford reviewed the testimony of the defence
that there had been separation of the parties-Dr
Parkman and DIR Webster; and then contrasted this
with the hypothesis that DIR Parkman had heen Till
ed out OF the College, and the body was taken in aud
treated IN the manner it was. He pronounced the
"hoie iiauer mass OF aDsurdlty. After l O'Clock
on Friday night and o'clock on Saturday. whore
was DIR. Webster? Il does not appear from his own
evidence that he was at home.
The dissecting room door was found omen hv lit
tleheld on Saturday morning, although he boted il
on the inside the night before. How does This bear
upon the fact that DIR Webster is not proved IN he n,
home on Friday night or Saturday morning. = :
If DIR Parkman was killed in the Colleoe either
DIR Webster or Little6eld must have know, i
There IS no escape from this proposition. The pro-
position that an assassin lurked in that entry and
killed Dr Parkman is perfectly absurd-tha he ,vas
killed outside, and his body taken into the bu;Id;ng
without the knowledge Of DIR Webster. Is eoualy
as absurd. If taken in for purposes Of consuming
Dy hire, Dr Webster must have noticed the onerao
tions All the other facts testified TO- abopt Tho
appearance OF the rooms, 90 to show this. Tho
person who is supposed by the defence to have Mac
ed the remains In the College, acted most moon
sstent part if he wished to procure reward ~ -
cast suspicious on Dr. Webster.
NOW as to the testimony of Mr. Little6eld The do
tence admits that his testimony if believed bears hard
upon the defendant. The defence did not dare ~ all
ms character in question. The government coud
sustained H. and shown that he had the confidence ne m
honorable men as any in the community
/ lhe Attorney General commended that the Jurv v,o
nonhn 10 receive the evidence Of Ltefeld as true
The talslty OF the argument for the defence lies 81 ho
TACT that they consider the suspicion Of Iefeld. AZ =
settled conylcton--at the time too when he mept;ono
IL TO ms wiie on Sunday evening. lie would moi ILL
everything by going into the laboratory or the nr;vy
IL Is tor this that he dias through tho nr;,,,