The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-02-13
Resume OF the Burdell Inquest.

inquest was taken yesterday; tomorrow Coroner
COnnery will charge his jury, and possibly Sun.
day mornings edition Of this paper may contain
their verdict What that verdict will be, a
thoughtful review Of the evidence may perhaps
enable us to foresee.
Thirteen days investigation-an amount Of
testimony unparalleled for Coroner's inquest
degree of activity and pressure for evidence
rarely witnessed on any former occasion-have,
it must be confessed left in possession Of very
little pertinent testimony on the subject of the
murder. Over two.thirds of the evidence that
has been adduced will not be required by the
public prosecutor. And we are bound to add,
with the most poignant regret, that the most i'm
portant evidence, which We might have had, and
can never have now is wanting through the igno-
rance and carelessness of the Coroner. We
refer Of course to the testimony Of Mrs. Gun
nfbgbam and Eckel-whose brief examination
only shows how much might have been learned
had they been thoroughly questioned
To sum up the facts: We are certain that Dr.
Harvey Burdell was murdered in his room on
Friday, 30th January, at an hour between 10 and
strument in vital parts Of bis body; that the muir
der was committed Immediately on Dr.. Burdell
entering his room from outside, on bis return
home; that the deed was so skilfully done that
the victim cried murder in choked voice, aud
made no terrible scuffle, though a robust man;
that the assassin in going out left marks of blood
on the wall Of the passage and on the door.
This may be said to be all the evidence we have
bearing directly on the deed.
As to the persons who may have committed it,
we find that there were in the house at the time
Of the murder, Mrs Cunningham, her two daugh-
teIs, her young sons, John j. Eckel, George "
Snodgrass, and the cook. OF these all testify
that they heard nothing. According to the testi-
moDy, all, except perhaps the boys and the cook
appear to have been, according to their own
evidence, awake at the time Of the murder. But
Snodgrass, the cook and the boys Cunningham
were seemingly in the attic, which sound from
DR.. Burdell's room, especially with the window
open az it was might not reach. Mrs. Cunning
ham, her two daughters and Eckel had been left
together in Mrs. C.'s room. Mrs Cunningham
swears that Eckel left her room between ten and
eleven to 90 to bed, and that she handed him
note after he was in his room. But the
witness Farrell, whose testimony has been as
sailed without much effect hitherto, testfes that,
at the same hour, as he sat on the steps Of the
house where the murder took place, listening TO
the sound of the scuffle and the cry Of murder,
this same Eckel, in his stocking feet, suddenly
opened the door, ard thrusting his head and
shoulder out, called to him roughly and asked
what he did there?
II the witness Farrell IL to be believed,
Eckel is not. Eckel, unfortunately was not re-
examined as to what be did with himself that
evening But as the time of the murder coin
cides so remarkably with that Of his appearance
at the door, If we believe Farrell, we cannot be-
lievc Eckel when he swears he knows nothing OF
the murder. At the very best construction Of
the evidence for him, he must have been in the
passage when the dying Burdell cried murder,
and rolled over "as heavily as n -four barrel"
Passing finally to the motives for the murder,
we have no evidence that any person was on very
bad terms with DR.. Burdell except Mrs Cunning
ham AID her friends. We have heard stories
him but the authors of these tales do not seem
very proud of them, at the present writing and
they are not in evidence. But it is in evidence
that with Mrs. Cunningham DR.. Burdell had hal
long and angry intercourse. She had been bis
mistress They had parted on such unfrcndly
terms that she sued and abused him, while he de-
clared he stood in fear OF his life from her. She
wanted TO make him marry her; he wanted to
get her out Of his house. On her examination
she svore that she was his wife, and produced
certificate Of marriage with one Berdell; but, the
Better opinion seems to be that the man whom
she married was not DIR. Burdell, and this opinion
is strikinely confirmed by evidence that one
month after the marriage she gave instructions
to her attorneys TO sue bim-(her husband y
for breach of promise Of marriage. On the day
following the murder the lease Of DR.. Burdell's
house to another party was to be signed this
accomplished, she would have been seemingly
thrown into the street. If DR.. Burdell lived,
then. she had In prospect nothing but dcstiiu-
ion and poverty, perhaps with Eckel, with whom
che seems to have had relations: by DIR. Buydell's
death, assuming that her marriage held good, she
obtained at least her dover, no mean thing; and
very possibly other testamentary advantages OF
which the peculiar turn which affairs have taken
has prevented our hearing anything. Whether
this state Of things constitutes an adequate motive
for the murder, the public and the juries can
Judge.
Such appear to be the leading points of the
evidence as they bear on the crime. The memo
nv of the reader will supply few which have
necessarily been omitted.
On these facts two theories have been con.
strucied One is that Mrs. Cunningham and
John J. Eckel we're the murderers; that they
plugged snoJgrass and the Cunningham girls
with opium or other sopori6c' in the oranges