Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-04-16
LOCAL NEW s..
Trial Of Daniel T.. Sickles for the KILN,
of Philip Barton key. d.
CRIMINAL COURT. IL. CRAWFORD, Jrdgs.
THE MADISON PLACE MURDER

CRIAISAL COURT. III. CRAWFORD ,Jsigs
When our first clifton was put TO press Yesterday
Mr.. Brady was arguing the point raised by Mr..
Carlisle, whether the Court would admit as COM
petent evidence facts tending to show the previous
adultery of the prisoners wife with tue deceased
Mr. Brady said they offered to prove
fIrst. That just before Sickles left his house
and home on the 9th Of February, and shortly
before he met Kew, the latter had used his hand
kerchlef In front Of said house, a signal to
procure her To leave the house and Join him. pro-
coed to said house in Fifteenth street, and there
have adnlterous intercourse with said Key-and
that Sickles saw the said Key his said hand
kerchief, and knew what was the meaning Of
such use, As is above st. ted.
Second. That Key had hired a house On Fiji
teenth street in the city OF Washington, for the
exclusive purpose Of committing adultery therein
with Mrs Sickles, and the key Of such house
found on the person Of the deceased after his
death, and was one Of those which have been pro-
duced in this trial.
Third That said house was rented for the unlaw-
ful and wicked purpose aforesaid, that such kew in
the possession Of deceased one of those found in
his pocket after his decrease and produced on this
trial, and that Sickles knew Of the aforesaid de-
sign, intent, and preparation of said Key.
Fourth That afthe time Sickles met Key on the
9th OF February, at the corner of Madison avenue
and just before any shot, Key was on his way to
the home and house OF Mr.. Sickles, with the un-
lawful and wicked design tn cause and procure
her 10 leave said house, and proceed with him to-
the aforesaid house on Fifteenth street, and then
IBefc 10 nave duulteTOns connection with
him, said Key having the key of the front door
lock Of said house in his possession to be used in
procuring admittancc.
Fifth. That key was in the habit Of exhibiting
and using his handkerchief before Mr. Sickles's
house and home as a 81 gnal. percevng which
she was 10 leave said house and proceed to the
house ON Fifteenth street, and there have adnlte-
rOus connection with Mrs. Sickles; and she had
done 50 ia pursuance Of such signals which said
facts had shortly before the meeting between key
and Sckles, on the 27th of February come to the
edo nf hmm Aiata club
the killing had himself the said Kew using
his handkerchief before the residence of said Sic
ktes for the adulterous purpose above said
At this point, by permission Of the Court the
jury took a short recess
Mr.. Carlisle. This question ID of great impor-
lance to the administration of justice generally.
The consequences Of the courts decision upon il
will stretch far beyond this case. The court is
asked to establish 4 new era in the administration
Of law in of hOmicide-to leave the old paths
OF the law for new aad devious ones. The de-
fence will seek to induce the court to believe that
they merely ask the application of old principles
to a case. IL they show that the testimony
they offer is admissible any well defined prin-
cples of the common law. the prosecution would
not object to its introduction. He had expressed
the Prosecutions views OF the law on the point,
and should 90 little further until he should hear
the unknown arguments Of the defence To induce
the court to decide that the plain rule usually APP
piled in all such cases Is not the rule applicable in
He would not trouble the Court with reference.
IN plain that TO reduce the fence from
adultery must be an open aud apparent one. taking
place immediately under the ewes of the husband
and Such killin. must take place ut that Instant
II not tine law holds il IL e a killing for revenge
and murder The law of the is laid down in
Hale, East, and other English books and in
Wharton and other American books. lie here
referred 10 page l59 of " barton on IIomi-
eide. edition Of 1851 where it was clearly
laid down that the killing in OF adultery Was
murder. if not done the instant Of finding the
parties committing adultcry-tLat is, killing de-
hpr1 IN .anHf md lrHa IL
referred tO the Of Fisher i'm the Eighth of Car.
ringtOn and Payne page lS2. Though not case
1f adultery, 1t was one appealing quite as power
fully To the human heart.
Here Mr. e read the details of that case whe- ein
the prisoner declared that he had only done what
any Englishman and father would have done with
one who had taken unnatural liberties with his
son. and had not seen the man killed until two
minutes before the killing.
This was a case so shocking that he did not
desire TO comment fully il. A father finds that
his 4 youth of fifteen YEAR. had been reduced
TO this unit cradle condition e rhine and disgrace
by the party killed. 1t woula forever destroy the
boy. and blast the hopes of the father and the
offence Of the boy<yas punishable with DEATH so
that for the father Ia bring the person killed to
jastIee would have consigned his own son to the
,Sallows
lie (Fisher) was found in condition Of pro-
found grief. Under these circumstances, when
hs eyes first rested the party killed who could
not even plead the impulses Of nature for the crime
he slew him.
In summing up this case, Mr. Justice Park said
If every man might lawfully right himself in sac
cases, and that there must be instant killing when
the discovery was made to reduce the crime to
manslaughtcr; and that in case Of adultery the
killer must kill in the iirst transport Of passion Oh
himself discovering the actual Preparation of the
act. And further, that the question Of the proper
time for the cooling Of the blood was one not for
the jury. but for the Court to decide. That.
eOrdlng TO Mr.. Justice Park, was a in which
the crime Was not lawfully reduced from murder
TO RlanSlaughter and much less did il embrace
Ter N
Mr.. Graham. The verdict in this case was
one Of mansaughter."
Mr.. Carlisle, admitting that fact, went on to
show that the evidence in the did not make
verdict Of murder absolutely necessary. Jar
Doe case was not one. as had been urged to justify
the jury in this case in setting the law defiance
lie should deplore that he had been spared to live
To SEE the day when this Court would proclaim
the doctrine as law asked by the defence through
THAT high power, (ponting to the jury bOx.) lie
had such confidence in the jurymen OF this COM
Inunity as To satisfy him that they would not be
seduced into the belief that this 4 parallel
with that of JarbOe.
Here MIR. G.. detailed that case as being one of a
Young girl Of sixteen, deliberately seduced under
promise OF marriage. In il, the killer, in the
workshop al WAYS fancied that persons were derid-
ing him about the disgrace Of his sister. lie was
with the sister in the street, and meeting the per-
son killed, asked him mildly what he would do
10 repair the wrong he had DONE and D.
swered insultiRgly, and with refusal to do
aught; and further, it was proved that before the
shot was fired. the party killed drew a pistol on
the killer, carried about him in antici patton Of
such a rencounter
In the case Of the State against John. the hOmi-
eide took place instantly; when the killer break
ing open the door, found the adultereTs actually
in bed together.
Mr.. c. next referred 10 another case In CARING
ton and kerwen. wherein the Court laid down
the rule TINT in the case Of adultery the husband
must find the parties actually in the act of adul-
terry. o. mitigate the killing to manslaughter.
There the Court most alphabetically instructed the
jury that To kill upon anght else than catching
in dgLi
Mr.. Graham. That was a I'm which the
woman the killers mistress -
Mr.. Carlisle, continuing. hid referred 10 IL only
50 far as il laid down the law with reference to
adultery. This c1se was TO be- decided by the law,
as unhapPily that law might result to the
cd The defence now propose To show AN adul-
tery going on. and thatt rOugh the'prisoner never
saw il. he knew il beyond doubt.
AIR e. granted that, for arguments sake. He
granted that the prisoner had cOolly and DELHI
rrately tracked the parties, and rs coOlly and de-
iberately tried and condemned them. That,
however, did not prove that he caught them in
the act. lie (the Prisoner) had been satisfied that