Worcester daily spy., 1859-04-23

indicated.
Mr.. Chilton-I have only to say in reply to
that that we reserve what we have TO reply on
that proposition till the prosecution announce
to us that they have concluded the case
Whether that conclusion be in the form of in
structions or not. When we shall have arriv-
ed at that point of the case, if we hear nothing
from the opposite side, or from the court, or
from the jury. we shall not trouble the counsel
on the other side with any further remarks
but sl:tll understand that we go to the jury on
the argument. That is all | can say at this
time but | repeat that we do not deem it con-
sistent with our duties to this defence to make
up the legal argument till the prosecution an
nounce to us that they have closed their evil
dence, and until all matters of fact on which
they rely are before the court and jury.
Judge Crawford-The United States having
served subp9nas on the parties, and attach
ment having been taken to arrest them, which
attachments are not yet returned; l think the
discretion of the Court will be properly exer-
cised in postponing the farther hearing till to-
morrow morning But there ought to be some
limits to this thing. 1t is to be understood
that we are not to wait further for these wit
nesses.
The District Attorney-Undoubtedl
Mr.. Carlsle-The limit is tomorrow morn
ing.
Mr.. Brady--I have one suggestion to make
to my friends lon the other side, which may
have the effect to save time let them give us
these witnesses now and we will agree to
dissent from them.
Mr.. Carlisle iproducing paper from his
pocket)-In anticipation that something might
occur, prepared this one at late hour last
night. | have submitted it to my colleague,
and he comedies in it, but he has not examined
it so critically as | would desire him to do. |
will give you a copy of it, with pleasure.
Mr.. Stanton-Will that include the whole ?
District Attorney-Oh, no. We have more to
add after the defence submit their instruction.
Mr.. Carlisle-In my own view of the mat
ter, that is all the law which is necessary to be
laid down in the case, unless further instruc-
tons shall be prayed for on your side.
Mr.. Brady-It is agreed that the prosecution
furnish us with a copy of the proposition. We
will in return, as soon as we prepare it, furnish
ours to them. By doing so, the discussion,
when we come into Court tomorrow morning,
will be comparatively brief No time will be
lost by this arrangement; on the contrary,
time will be gained
Judge-I am glad to hear of anything which
will save time.
Mr.. Brady-It will undoubtedly have that
effect.
Mr.. Carisle-We may not in fact disagree
as to certain propositions.
Mr.. Stanton-I think you will agree to our
law.
This arrangement being made, the Court,
at u O'clock adjourned,
The following are the instructions proposed
to be submitted for the prosecution: of the
jury believe from the evidence Ill this whole
cause, that the prisoner on the day named III
this indictment, and in the county of Wash
14I,, / II
by discbarging at, against, and into the body
of him, pistol or pistols, loaded with gun
powder and ball, thereby giving him mortal
wound Or wounds, and that such killing was
the wilful and intentional act Of the prisoner,
and was induced by the belief that the said
deceased had seduced his, the prisoners wife,
and on some dag or days, or for any period
prior to the day of such killing, had adulterous
intercourse with the said wife, and that the
prisoner was not provoked to such killing by
any assault or violence there used or made by
the deceased; then such wiful and intentional
killing, if found by the jury on all the facts
and circumstances given in evidence, is muir
der But such killing cannot be found to have
been wllful and intentional, in the sense of the
instructions, if it shall have been proven to the
satisfaction of the jury that the prisoner was
in fact insane at the time of such killing"
INCIDENTS.
A painful scene occurred at the time of the
adjournment. Mr.. Hart, who has been unre-
mtting in acts of kindness to Mr.. Sickles since
the melan 1holy occurrence, and who has been
constantly by mis- side, comforting and sustain
ing him. was forced to leave for New York this
afternoon. On taking leave of each other, both
exhibited the deepest emotion, Mr.. S. almost
fdinting in the dock.
An act of reconciliation of the counsel took
place in the court about the same time. Mr.
Stanton came up to Mr.. Ould and made an
apology for any harsh remarks he had made
use OF in the progress of the case. Mr.. Ould
frankly accepted the apology aud expressed
his pleasure at the restoration of amicable rela-
tions.
There is a good deal of scandal about town
affecting the character and reputation of others
besides the principal actors in this drama. 1t
would be improper, however, to give the
various stories publicity.
1t is also current that the jury made up their
minds a week ago. This may account for the
remarkable weakness manifested by the
prosecution in their testimony, and also for
the unanimous disposition to dispense with
the summing up speeches. The case will
probably close tomorrow.
After the adjournment Of the Court the
counsel for the defence met in the MarshaPs
room, and agreed upon the following instruc-
tions
First There is no presumption of malice in
this case, if any proof Of aleviatlon, excuse,
or justification, arise out of the evidence.
Second, The existence of malice is not pre-
sumable in this case, if on any rational theory
consistent with the evidence, the homicid was
either justifable, excusable, or an act of man
slaughter.
Third, If, on the whole, the evidence pre-
sented by the prosecution is, upon any rational
hypothesis, consistent with the conclusion that
the homicide was iustifable or eXcusable, the
defendant cannot be convicted
Fourth, If the jury believe that Mr. Sickles,
when the homicide occurred, intended to kill
Mr. Key, he should be convicted Of manslaugh-
ter.
Fifth, 1t is for the jury to determine under
all circumstances in the case whether the act
charged upon Mr.. Sickles is murder or justi-
fable homicide.
Sixth, If the Jury find that Mr.. Sickles
killed Mr.. Key while the latter was in criminal
intercourse with the wife of the former, Mr..
Sickles cannot be convicted of either murder
or manslaughter.
Seventh, If from the whole evidence the
jury believe that Mr.. Sickles committed the
act but at the time of doing so was under the
influence of diseased mind, and was really
unconscious that he was committing crime,
he is not in law guilty of murder.
Sth, Although, if the jury believe that from
any pre-disposing cause the prisoners mind
was impaired, and at the time of killing Mr..
Key he became or was mentally incapable Of
governing himself, with reference to Mr.. Key
as the debaucher of his wife, and at the time
of committing said act was, by reason of such
act unconscious that he was committing
crime as to said Mr.. Key, he is not guilty of