The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1859-04-21
WASHINGTON, April 10th.


We are requested on the part Of Mr..
Slckles, u state that he deeply regrets on
many reasons, but particularly for the sake
OF his chi. who must one day read the
record of her mothers shame, that the con
fessiou OF Mrs. Sickles was published. Ii
was contrary to his wishes, and il il had
been within his power be would have sup
pressed it. The court opened at the usual
hour, and with the usual crewd in attend
ance. The argument on the admissibilty OF
evidence Of adultery, was passed for the
present in order TO allow Peter Cagger Of
Albany, to return home this afternoon.
Peter Cagger examined by Mr.. Brady. |
ON member Of the bar, residing in the
city Of Albany. have known Mr.. Sickles
twelve years and upwards. Saw Mr. Key
in June, 1858. | was introduced TO him by
letter from Mr.. Sickles and engaged him in
u case as counsel. BY the COURT retained
Mr.. Keys services on the ground OF that
letter Of introduction. Not cros-examned.
MIR. Ould would like to refer the counsel
for the defence TO one or two additional au-
thorities-2d vol. Of James Law Reports,
State rs. Reuben Samuel the State rs,
John Il. Crichton the State rs. j. Il. Fer.
guson and others. Mr., Phillips resumed
his argument.
lie had discussed yesterday the following
proposition lst That il the evidence OF.
fered Is admissible for any purpose II must
he received 3D. That the issue presented
by the indictment 10 not whether there has
been murder. Sd. That to constitute muir
der there must be killing with delberatcin.
tent of malice prepensc. 4th. That the malice
Of the law implied u wicked, depraved and
malignant spirit--a heart regardless Of so.
cial duties, and fatally bent on mischief,
9th. That even in cases Of express malice
arising out Of past grade, II there has in.
tervened new provocations, II was not to be
presumed that the killing was on the old
grade 9th That in cases where the law
presumes malice from the act OF killing,
this presumption may be rebutted by ex-
pressions of good will and acts Of kindness
on the part Of the prisoner, towards the de-
ceased, always considered important evi.
dence, a. showing what was his general
disposition towards the deceased, from
which the jury may be led to conclude that
his intention could not have been what the
charge imputcs
Quoting 20 Russell, p. COS, that this pre-
sumption may be also rebutted by showing
that the killing was in passion, for pas
sion arising from sufficient provocation,
is evidence Of the absence OF malicious In.
tention. Quoting from the Common
wealth against Bell, p. l62, says that us the
law declares adultery to DO the greatest
of all provocations there could be no such
legal absurdity AZ permitting evidence Of
lesser provocation, and excluding evidence
OF the greater.
It'll This brought me to the considera-
ton Of the admission Of the presumption
that the accused had seen with his own eyes
the very act Of the adultery. Then The
provocation could be given in evidence, and
not otherwise This ! demonstrate TO be
wholly unreasonable and fallacious, by show.
ing that the eye, the ear, and the touch were
but media, by which facts were transmitted
TO the brain, and that this governed the will
and decided the action.