Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-05-10

|
the Evening Post would be sorry to recoIy,
any peculiar marks Of favor. '..- .IeS =.
ihese, however, were the foolishness of ipdi
vlduals. What the public is concerned with
Is the effect of the determination of the court or
law and morals. 1t is solemnly announced. n
an established principle Of American law, tha
private revenge Is right. Our society is remit
yea pack 10 barbarous ages when faustrecht, OF
the strong arm, was the recognised method o.
redresslng wrongs. Those safeguards and de
fences winch the experience and wisdom of cen
| turles has slowly built up around the weak
which are necessary to the protection of ever,
man against rash judgments and impulsiy,
violence, which secure to the meanest often
der dlspassionate and impartial investigation
on the offences with which he may be charged
winch mark the distinction between ciyilizei
state and condition of mere savsgery, are
STRUCK down ateno fell swoop; and every hus
band who may fancy himself be the foulest
iioertine on the face of the earth, is told thai
ne may shoot and slay at his own will
but is TINS exemption, let US ask to be ex
tended only to men! Are not wives, as well a:
husbands, to be included in its large and liberal
provisions? IfMrs Siekles. for instance. shouId
take into her head to apply pistol to the
Drains OF several ladies, whom she might have
reason to suspect, would she be held unaccoun
table for the result, Why is the poor Van
wort, who shot Edgar the other day, for max.
ing free with his domestic affairs still retained
I'D the Iombs! The pinciple declared by the
jury, if worth anything at all. must be univer.
sally applied, and then, instead of courts sit
tlng IN solemn judicial inquiry we shall have
enraged individuals walking the stfSets with .
battery OF firearms about them and scatterin no
death as 1t may suit their suspicious, thei1
malice, or their desire for shameless noteriety
tFrom the Baltimore American, April 27l
Tue "A
at last ended, as was anticipated in the COM
plete exoneration Of the accused, so far as the
verdict OF the jury can produce that end The
manner In which the verdict was received was
but the crowniDg and significant finale of what
throughout has been but little better than 4
wearisome and disgusting farce A morbid
public sentiment was gratified by making the
accused the hero Of an ovation disgraceful to
the Court which permitted it to occur, and 10
those who took part in it,
Whateyer facts may have been brought to
the surface during this very remarkable trial,
1t Is perfectly plain that the only question has
oeen as to the quality Of the act, which the
prosecution called murder and the defence
called Justifable homicide. On one hand there
mas been no effort made to disprove the provo
cation furnished by the conduct of the de-
ceased, and on the other there has been no dis
position shown to clear Mr.. Sicklcs of the
charge OF Staying him. Virtually, the con-
slstent struggle of the defence has been to
make the prisoner the victim and the dead
man the criminal; to get the Judge, the Jury
and the public TO unite in the verdict which
shall crown with glory and honor the man who.
under the pressure of a sharp proyocation.
committed murder
The result of this trial has been foreseen from
the commencement. Nobody has expected
Mr. Slckles to die upon the gallows or to suffer
imprisonment for it. To attempt to justify his
act, however, has been failure. He who as
sUmcs the character of an executoner of Divine
vengeance, should have clean hands Atilla
called himself - The scourge of God" and CO
sar Borgia charged many of his cruelties and
crimes upon Heaven; but the verdict of human
lty mt this day has given him far different
patron and instigatOr. The most general decis-
ion of the public mind seems to be this Mr..
Sickles comes out of this trial with reputation
which shall never be lost. His name is famous
all over the civilized world. Whatever of sym
pathy man suffering great wrong imposed
upon him il entitled to-and we would give
that sympathy the widest limit consistent with
correct principles and public justice-Mr Sic
kles In this case is entitled to but little of it,
His conjugal infdelity may not in law. nor
perhaps in morals, be urged as a set-of
against tho offence committed by his wife But
asSuredly it precludes him from any claim TO
the sympathy Of the world, or from any right
TO set him up as the high sxemplar Of terri
ly-iDjured husband, outraged where he had no
ground to suspect outrage and deceived by one
to whom he gave all his affection, upon whom
he reposed all his trust, and from whom he had
no cause to expect deception. That is not Mr.
Siekles's position, and no amount of effort can
trick rejecting people into receiving it as such
Upon the dead offender, the miserable and de-
graded woman, and the husband who punished
not the crime, but merely acted upon his dis
torted notions of honor the shame and the OBJ
lo1uy Of the transaction must Justly fall-upon
which it should fall with the greatest severity,
IT would be difficult TO decide One conclusion
IS evident; ii is this the chastity of the wife is
best protected by the purity of the husband,
and that when the husband fails TO protect the
wife from the approaches of tho seduccr, and
the wife has not the moral dignity to protect
herself, the loss Of these safeguards cannot be
replaced by any amount of Willingness 10 as
sasinate or murder.