Delaware inquirer. (Wilmington, Del.) 1859-18??, 1859-05-07
THE PRESS ON sICKLES AC-
QUgTAL.

We regard this as a most mistaken and mis-
chievous verdict-a sanction to the substitu-
ton of violence and vengeance for reliance OH
the regular and orderly redress of grievances
through the instrumentality of law. 1t is a
verdict which carries this country a long stride
backward toward the age when might was
right, and all wrongs were redressed by the
red hand or not at all.
Doubtless, Mr.. Siclzles-no matter what
could be said to his prejudice-had been
grievously wronged by Key. That wrong
was a palliation of, not an excuse for, the
homicide which followed. 1t would have justi-
fed the jury in returning verdict of man
slaughter, or of murder in the second degree,
with recommendation to mercy; it did not
and cannot justify verdict Of acquittal.
On what ground could Mr.. Sickles' deed be
excused9 On that of insanity? Preposterous!
His counsel did not venture to call his intimate
friend and confidential adviser Butterworth,
who counseeled with him during the greater
part of the day on which the homicide was
COMMUNICATION whose side he rose to arm
himself for his deed of blood. The deliber-
ate and circumstantial statement of Butter
worth utterly procludes the idea of insanity
on the part of Sickles. Never was man in
trouble more collected and thoughtful than
Sickles during the morning which interviewed
between the might of his wife's confession and
afternoon on which he shot her paramount
That the counsel for defence saw and realized
this, is evident from their declining to put
Butterworth on the stand.
The case, then, stands simply here: Mr..
Key and Mrs. Sickles were guilty of adultery;
Nir. SiclSles was informed and assured of the
fact and eighteen hours thereafter he shot
the unarmed adulter again and again, battling
all his attempts to elude the deadly aim, and
presisting in swapping pistols at the head OF
the offender as he lay dying in the street.
And Washington jury say this was right.
We say it was not that, oulpable as Key
was, Sickels did wrong in killing him that he
ought not to have instituted himself an
avenger to the death of the violated sanctities
of the marriage covenant. We make no ac-
count herein of the alleged antecedents OF
Sickles, so far as his private life is concerned
an inquiry into which was properly ignored
by the Court. But we have no right to for
get that Sickles was law-maker, and in that
capacity under special obligations to abide by
and set an example of respect for the require
ments of law. Nor can we forget that he had
previously been a member SUCCESSFULLY of the
Assembly and Senate of our State, in neither
of which was his voice ever raised in advocacy
of severer penalties for adultery. We have
abundant reason for our belief that the laws
against adultery as they stand were deemed
by him quite penal enough until he learned
that the crime had been committed to his own
especial prejudice, which seems to have thrown
a new light on the subject to his mind. There
upon he killed Key, purposely, deliberately,
on calculation, declaring, hours afterward, that
they two could no longer live on the same
planet. Weeks after, his friend and counsel,
John Graham, went into Court with a
s4nAs &nI
that such homicide was not merely justiiiable,
but laudable. And the jury would seem to
have sustained the plea
The moral of this whole transaction is
Messrs. libertinesl be careful not SO much what
you do, as towhose prejudice YOU do it, Select
your victims carefully from among those who
have no fathers, brothers or husband who can
WELD a club or aim pistol-prey upon the
orphans, the defenseless, the lowly, or you
sin at the risk of your lives. But choose pru-
IDENTIFY, and there are for you neither legal
nor illegal terrors-there is fear neither of the
prison nor of the bullet-there Is, in short,
perfect impunity.
We protest against such legislation, such jul
If adultery be crine--as it
clearly is-let it be denounced and punished
as crime-punished legally, regularly, in
fexibly. Let the seducer of a poor friendless
orphan be punished Just as surely and severity
as if the partner of his guilt were the wife or
daughter of a member of Congress. No other
course can possibly exert good moral infiu-
ence.
We deplore especially the act of Mr.. Sickles,
because It plainly tends to strengthen and
confirm a prevalent Southern misapprehension
with regard to Northern repugnance to duel
ing. 1t is quite currently believed at the
South that Northern men generally decline
challenges not so much from dislike to take
life as from dread of losing it. The circum-
stances and manner of Sickles' killing of Key
are calculated to strengthen that mistaken
But enough.