Daily Iowa State Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1859, 1859-04-17
L A I'E s Il N f. w S.
BY TELmaAPH.)
The Aicklss TsIal

WASHINGTON. April l6-Ws are ssquest-
ed on the part Of Mr. Sickles 70 state that be
deeply regrets for many reasons but partic-
ularly for the sake Of his child Who uust
one day r.sd her mothers shame. thst the
confession OF Mrs. ) was published. The
puoiication was contrary 10 his wishes, and
II 1t had been within his power be would
have suppressed it. The Court opened At
the usual hour with the usual crowdln at-
tendance, The argument on the insdmis
s'bilty Of evidence Of adultery was passed
for the present in order to allow Peter Gag
ger Of Albany TO return home this Z. NJ.
Peter Cagger examined by Mr. Brady
! am . member Of the bar, residing in the
city Of Albany. have known Mr. Sickles for
twelve years ami upwards. knew Mr.. Key
in June 1868. | was introduced to him by
letter from Mr. Sickles and engaged him in
q case ss council. To the court retained
Mr.. n Eye services on the ground Of that let
ter OF instruction. Not cross examined.
MI. Ould would like to refer the counsel
for the defense to one or two authorit.es,
three volumes Of Jones Law reports, State
against Reuben Samuels, the State against
John B CritchtSn. c lredell page ls4, the
State 70 John Ferguson, Hills G reports
paQs 6l9 Mr.. Phillips resumed his srgu-
ment he had discussed yesterday, the fol.
lowing propositions: lst, that II the evi.
dence offered 10 admissable for any purpose
it must be recived; I'd, that the issue pre-
sented by the indictment is not whether
there has been murder; Sd, that 10 con-
stitute murder there must be = killing with
deliberate or malice pretense; 4th, that the
malice Of the law implies q wicked, and de.
N.,1
gsrdless Of social duties. fatally bent on mis-
chief; 5th. that even in cases Of express
malice arising out of past grudge. If these
had intervened new prov ocations. it was not
to be presumed the killing was IN old
grudge; 9th, that in eases where the law
presumed malice from the act Of killing. this
presumption may be rebatted by expressions
Of good will aud facts Of kindness ON the
part Of the prisoner towards the deceased
always considering important evidences As
showing what was his general deposition
towards the deceased from which the jury
may he lead to conclude that his intention
could not have )bcen what the charge i'm
putes, quoting I'd Russell 69s. that this pre-
sumption may also be rebutted by showing
that the killing was in passion arising from
sufficient provocation is evidence Of absence
Of malice, quoting from the Common eath
against Bell, page l62.
7th. That the law declares adultery TO
be the worst Of provocations; there could
he no such legal absurdity as permitting
evidence Of lesser provocatiOn and exclud
ing evidence Of the greater.
sth. This brought me to the consi,lera-
tion Of the admission Of the provicstion.
that II the accused had seen with his own
eyes the very act Of the adultry. then the
provocation could be given in evidence and
not otherwise. This | demonstrated to be
wholly unreasonable and iallscious, by pro
wing that the eye the ear and the touch.
were but media through which facts were
transmitted to the brain, and that this
formed the will and decided the action
was illustrating the position that the
knowledge OF the adultery at ths time Of
it's commission could be as definitely con
veyeh to the mind by the ear and the
touch as by the eye. and cited examples to
this end. when the adjournment Of the
court took place.