Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1859-03-07


statement of his part in the Sickles affair, made
by Mr.. Butterworth, does not seem to give SAT-
isfaction. It is not regarded as exhonerating
him from completely in the horriblecrime. The
Washington Star, of the 2nd has an article of
considerable length, in which it reviews the
positions taken BY Mr.. Butterworth, and the
evidence affecting him. As this is the first ex-
preston of Washington opinion it may be-
regarded as somewhat significant.
At the coroner,s inquest Mr. Butterworth tes-
titled, in distinct opposition to the testimony of
the other witnesses, that Sickles did not place
the pistol in contact with Keys head. The APP
parent aim of his testimony before the coroner
was to create the idea that Sickles killed Key
under the impression that the latter was about
drawing weapon. The Star says that the ac-
count published in the N Y. Times, in which
it was stated that Sickles requested Butterworth
to follow Key and engage him in conve! sation,
while he (Sckles) rushed up stairs to gSS- his
weapons, and that Butterworth did as requested,
was written under the supervision Of Mr.. John B.
Haskin, of New York, Mr.. Sickles nearest friend.
Mr.. Butterworth denies any knowledge of
Mr. Sickles anticipated attack, but admits that
but one course to pursue as a man of honor
1t is proved in the testimony before the coroner
that instead of interfering to prevent the murder
of an unarmed man Mr.. Butterworth stood by
out of the range of the Shots when Key being
killed he Joined arm in arm with Sickles and
moved away. All this looks bad. We had
hoped when we learned that Mr.. Butterworth
had made statement that he had exhonorated
himself fully, but it seems that he has not done
so. According to the evidence against him, he
has played much worse part than Sickles.
Having no vengeance TO satisfy, no honor to re-
trieve, he assisted coolly in conspiring against
the life of man with whom he was on terms
of personal friendship. However, much this
NAV sreak for Mr.. Butterworths fidelity to Mr..
Sickles, it places him in anything but an envia-
BILE position before the courts and the country
1t is evident, that although popular feeling in
Washington is in favor of Sickles, it is dead
against Butterworth for the part he has acted.
The question of honor in this country has
come to be regarded as one that can be settled
in no way but by blood. 1t is false pride
which believes life necessary to the publication
of honor The code of blood is false code;
anu tne oeSt iieh uIc OeSHlt5 sO W ISto"'u IL
The question is. did Sickles do right? He acted
the part of a violent man-nothing more. He
added to existing crimes that of murder; he
ruined himself in addition to destroying the
life of fellow being; he still further ruined his
wife by disgracing her in the eyes of the world |;
and above all, and last of all on whom the curse
should have been laid, he ruined the future of
the innocent children-thoSe that he made or
phans, and his own, with whose names he linked
his crime and eternal infamy. Just what he
should have done may be rather difficult to de-
termine-much more so than what he should
not have done. A truly noble man, guided by
reason and love for his children, would have
taken very different corF.e than that pursued
by Mr.. Sickles.