The Cadiz sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 184?-1851, 1850-04-10

-@3H D" UFn 10 De mat which
be"uged "a me prisoner the day before; and
on post mottem examination a blade was
found, which. BY The scratched edges of the
broken sleei, tailed with that of The handle.
this circumstance was allowed great
weight. When circumstance Of this kind
IS established, then the absense of any iesli
Inony I"contrary-ihe proof of concurrent
clrcumstnnces-has a strong tendancy 10
strengthen the conclusion. When pariy
has attempted to suppress proofs, the circum.
stance acts to prove the Consciousness Of
guilt. When we apply these principles to
case, certain rules are 10 be applied. First
the circumstances upon which the CONCLUSION
depends, are 10 be fully proven; second, all
must connect together; no one must he in
consistent with an nci OI this nature or alibi.
An aIIbl means elsewhere. II man is charg-
I ed with being in one place, and ne can prove
himself in another at that time, then he must
escape. This is mod. of defence which
easily suggests itself, and may be secured
by little conIrivance. Third, the aircum
stances must not only !im;; inc guilt of the
party, but they must be such MS to exclude
every other reasonable hypothesis. They
must exclude all reasonable doubt. What is
n reasonable doubt? it must be more Than a
probability. The facts must be such rs 10
imPIicale the defendant also. We must now
gentlemen, apply these to the present case.
The indictment CHARGES J. w. Webster with
the murder Of Dr. George Parkman, ON the
23d ot November last. The Indictment has
been referred to by the defence, and we have
taken the matter into consideration. 1t is the
rule OF law that The means ard manner Of
the crime shall BE set forth, so that the pris-
oaer shall prepare for his defence: vet il
death is produced in some ne mode, The law
will not let the criminal escape. II has peb
eral rules which provide for new cases. The
last count sets forth that the prisoner ASSAULT
eJ and killed George Parkman, in some man
ner or by some weapon unknown to the Jury,
The c0uIl nre Of opinion that this is good
count. DR.. Parkman may have been as
S1ulIed with chlorotorn or ether, which stupi,
ned and m ide HIN lnsensble, and then death
would have been caused by The weapons 10
the jury unknown; and the jury were only
bound to set forth all they knew. That is
necessary 10 be proven. First, it is neces-
sary to prove the corpus deficit OF the killing,
so MS to exclude suicide or accident Dr.
PArkman was in good health, as appears by
Mr.. Shaw. on that moring We come now
10 the teeth. These are the principal signs
OF Identification. That other paris of the
body did no. differ in any material respect
from Parkman's proves little in itself, but be.
comes very important, if it is made out that
the Teeth were his. 1t is a serious inquiry
whether by the correspondence Of The teeth
to the mould, the identity can be made out.
We must reply Un the evidence Of those who
have made this subject their study. Doctor
Keep identified these teeth, without pro
nounced them TO be Dr.. Parkman's, and he
has explained to you the reasons which CON
ii IN him in that opinion. You have also
heard the Testimony of Or. Noble to the same
effect. DR.. Morton is of opaion that The
characteristics of teeth are not such rs to ell
able dentist, TO identify his work, under slchI
circumstances with certainty. Three other
eminent dentists have been called, who are
of different opinion, and confirm Dr.. Keen,
This evidence is undoubtedly tu be received
with care. Ii is Of the same nature of that
which is applied 10 fossil remains and by
means o! which single bone is made TO lend
to The discovery Of an entire animal, of an
extinct species. You must be Judges of il
in this case. If these are the teeth of DR..
Parkman, and if, as is stated to you by Dr.. I
Keep, their condition proves that they were
put into Inc furnace in The head, and the
whole body, no part of it being dssimiar 10
Dr. Parkman's, and it the suppostions of
suicide, and accidental death are excluded
the corpus deficit is established, shall pass
over The testimony Of LiltlefeId, il has been
somewhat called in question. But whether
much or little weight be given ii, it does not
materially effect this case.
Ii may bc remembered, that as far as il
does effect tho case il is confirmed by othor
particularly by The officers of the
poIice) From about Sunday or Monday
pretty strict watch was kept of The Medical
College until Friday, Nothing important
could be transacted there without the know.
ledge Of the police, Of Lit,lefeld or Web,
ster. To some OF these parties The existence
and condition of these remains, found partly
under the privy in the tea chest, and Dar,,y
in the furnace, must have been known. You
will judge by the evidence from whom. We
do not think much can be arguedby the con.
duct of the defendant after his arrest. We
have no experience hero 10 guide US. We
do not know how we should act in such a
case, or how he ought 10 have acted.
To come TO tho main proof of this case
here are two theories in regard 10 it, The
government takes tho Que, which supposes
that he invited DR.. Parkman TO The Medical
college, and there slew him, in order TO get
OF two notes which he owed Dr.
parkman, and tina, he got possession of them.
Dr. Parkman had loaned to Professor Webster
S49O in lS4l. In 1916 several parties con.
ributed 10 aaoiher loan, to relieve him, to
tie amount oftwo thousand four hundred and
hirty dollars, to this Dr.. Parkmun contribu.
ed five hundred, and the three hundred md |
hiny'two dollars on the old note and other
'aTties the balance. DR.. Parkman held the
arge notes and mortgage on personal proper.
y, Tor its security, for the benefit of himself
md the other parties, and also the old note,
which was to be given up whenever his share
vas paid. II appears that tho defendant was
n possession Of both notes, and the govern
nen' contends that he never paid either;