The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-04-15
Especially reported for the Daily Exchanged
TRIAL OF DANIEL {. SICKLES,
FOR THE
MURDER OFPHILIP BARTON KEY
TENTH DAYS PROCEEDINGS.
CRIMINAL COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF CO
LUMBIA-JUDGE TH0S. H. CRAWFORD,
PRESIDING.

WASHINGTON, April IA, 1859.
The Court met at TO- 80 A. NJ. and the prisoner
was brought in
Mr.. Brady called
George B. Woolrdge-[B lame, he was per-
mitted to remain seated during his examination. i
Resides in Sullivan county, New York; on Feb
ruary last lived at 534 18th street, in this city,
came here in the latter part of November last to be
here at the organization ofHouse ofRepresentatives
being clerk in that body; knew Key, but not init
matey; never had occasion to speak to him but
once or twice; on Saturday, February 26th, in the
afternoon, in 18th street from about 10 o'clock
until three; Mr.. Sickes that day between 4
and p M. at the Capitol; at first he appeared diff
I terent from the previous day, more like himself;
Sickes then in the hall in the rear Of the speak
ers chair; had conversation together; went into an
ante-roOm and there left him. after endeavoring to
pacify him; he was then very much distressed and
affected; one with him when witness left him;
did not see him again that day; left him about five
o'clock; saw him next morning about ten O'Clock
in the library of his own house; his eyes were red
and bloodshOt and he told witness he had sent for
him to come there; he appeared to have been cry
ing; witness remained there until all had left him
in the atternoon-that is all the strangers; during
! the day he acted like man in great sorrow and
distress, so much so that witness watched for his
| coming and going constantly.
Mr.. Brady.-'Why?
Mr.. Carlisle.-.,rhat is not material"
Mr.. Brady.-'fGes it is"
Mr.. Carlise.-''I don't see how it isl
| Mr.. Brady.-"I can't help that"
| Witness proceeded to describe the conduct of
| Sickles on that day; he would 60 up and down
stairs, and go to and every and then giving
way to bursts of intense grief, pressing his hands
| to his temples and sObbing and weeping; he went
around the room strangely, and then would go up
stairs and then down to the library and talk about
matters, and then go up again; he would sob, and
press his head against the secretary in the library;
| wDuI hapd md doriv tt,Na
! tons; sometimes he clasped his temples with his
! hands, as though his head was affected witness
advised him to give vent to tears to relieve him;
saw Key there that day; the first time he going
! out the southwest gate of Lafayette square next
| the avenue; he crossed the street, and witness
thinks he went up the avenue; the second time was
| about quarter before two O'clock him about
opposite Sickles' house, in company with lady and
| genteman he was next the curbstone the gentle
man next to him, and the lady on the inside; Sick
les then up stairs; the library is the side
| the house next Pennsylvania avenue; while Key
was passing the house he took out his handkerchief
and waived it three times, his eyes being the up
| per window of Sickles' house; the gentleman was
talking with him, and he appeared if he did not
want the gentleman to observe what he was doing;
next saw Sickles enter the library door in two OF
three minutes afterwards he said "that villain has
! just passed my house"
Mr. Ould-"Never mind what he said The
| question what he did"
Witness-He was very much excited; he spoke to
Mr.. ButtcrWorth, who was endeavoring to calm
! him; he threw him off and went into the hall; die
not see him again until after Keys decease when
he came into the house with the officers; Mayor Ber
rett and Capt. Goddard were there; also R. j. Wal
| ker, Mr.. Butterworth McBair, McCluskey and one
or two policemen; this McCuskey was not the Post
Master of the House of Representatives but Young
! gentleman employed in subpoenaing witnesses
Sickles went into the library and afterwards went
up stairs; did not go into the parlOr where Sickes
was; witness remained in the front room; knew
| Sickles was there from seeing him come out after
| wards.
Mr.. Brady-"Did you hear him sobbng?"
MIR. Carlisle-'That's leading question"
Mr.. Brady-"Well did you hear anything ?"
Witness-'1 did not"
Mr.. Brady-"I will put another question,
suppose leading one. Were you not very mucl
excited at that time 2"
Witness-"I was, and | wish never to see another
such day as that made communication to Sickle
at the House of Representatives on Saturday, which
! excited his mind"
Mr.. Brady-"What was it 2"
! Mr.. Ould.-I object. The defence has Offered
| evidence that communication was made and now
propose introduce the entire subject matter of tha
communication, as going to show the excited state O
| the prisoners mind on that occasion. Now, insan
ity is fact distinctly capable of proof 1t can bc
| shown in variety of ways. The only certain ties
is the acts and declarations of the party. 1t is no
proved that party is insane when it is shown tha
there Is hereditary insanity in a family. We know
that some persons who have that hereditary tain
| escape it; there may be no exciting cause tt
bring it out. If this is offered to show the in
sanity of the prisoner, it is uncertain, unreliable
and leads to no fixed conclusions. Whatever ma,
have been the nature of that communication, i
does not follow, as matter o. course that INSANITY
would necessarily, even probably, follow Tha
would depend great deal more on the nature of tn
mind to which it was addressed, than on the natur
of the communication itself. This does not rise eve
to the dignity of secondary evidence. The prsone
was all this time under the eye of his friends; am
no objection Is made to the Introduction of testi
n Sbpw that ha uaci ipco
declarations; but this communication is not offere
to show that he was insane, but to lead to that in
ference, for 1T can be more than an inference
Where fact is susceptible of proof, we are not t
depend on differences. The mere fact of adulter
does not constitute any excuse for homicide unles
the parties are caught in the act and then it onl
reduces the crime from murder to manslaughteI
What punishment the ancient law affixed to thi
crime, has nothing to do with this case.
Mr.. Brady (interruptng) said he should not fo
low the eminent counsel for the prosecution a
this time into any argument on the subject of adu
terry. That would belong to another branch Of tn
case
Mr.. Oud thought it directly connected wit
the introduction OF the proposed communication
He had endeavored TO show that it was incompC
tent to be offered as evidence of Insanity; and tba
being so, it could not be offered to prove state
mind less than insanity, such as grief, anger o
frenzy. He objected to it, because it could not e
feet the question of the guilt innocence of tn
prisoner at the bar. The only evidence which ga
reduce the crime from murder to mansaughter
where the party is caught in fagrante delicto an
it is not pretended that such is the case in the pre-
ent stance. He quoted the case of the State
North Carolina as. Johns, in Sth Iredell to sho
that all the evidence offered before the Court an
jury must have some direct connection with the ca.
trial. The ruling of Judge Battle in that case VIZ
upon the admissibility of evidence. The Judg
said that the legal effect of the evidence offered W:
not such as so reduce the crime from murder
manslaughter, and therefore it could not be r.
ceived. The present case was identical with tn;
cited. He, therefore, contended that it became in
material whether this communication was made c
not, or whether being made, it was true
not. 1t was not of such a nature as to excuse
mitigate the offence. In addition to that he urge
that the effect of this communication would be
. show that the prisoner had malice towards the d
ceased. Was it anything less than murder becaus
the prisoner, under the influence of an inflame
state of rage on the previous day, did slay the d.
ceased?
Mr.. Stanton replied that the question just dis
cussed by the prosecution was one which they ha
distinctly waived 1t had been shown that on tn
day previous to the homicide, Mr. Sickles present
ed an extraordinary appearance, to persons in eve
ry condition of life. Rev. DR.. Pyne, Mr.. Wake
and other witnesses him in this state of minC
it was not an ordinary condition of mind. This
fixed fact. and the defence propose to account fc
that remarkable condition of mind by showing tha
this communication which was made to him was
a nature to produce such state of mind. Tt
questions of mental character, physical temper
ment, &c, were for the jury to determine. I'll
prosecution had argued that the offence could nc
be reduced from murder to manslaughter unle
there was ocular demonstration of the adulterr
he denied that to be law, and when the propt
time should come he wonld undertake to prove tina
lie would call attention to some of the rulings
this case. The letters between Sickles and Key
reference to his wife, had not been allowed ev
l dence; and the communication from Sickles wi
to him, which would authorize him not only to tai
one life but whole hecatomb of lives, had ais
been ruled out. Now, if one mans blood had bee
spilled, it could not be gathered up by spiling al
: other mans blood. The North Carolina case W
the of a slave and his wife; and as it W
known that in slave States the wife Of slave a
quired no civil rights by marriage, for that
y such decision was rendered in this case. w
@ not the prisoner at the bar to have Il
same rights as negro slave? Do no
D | our wives by that tenure alone? There W
not man within the sound of his voice wi
would not wade knee deep in blood befo
| he would consent to any such doctrine as that
N He had nothing to say about slavery; it was leg
institution where it existed. But the rules tn
apply among slaves were not the rules by whi
the rights of free white men were to be governe
Never from the time of the Norman conquest t
W this hour has man been held amenable in En-
land for Staying the seducer of his wife. The on
case loosely quoted authority Manning
case, decided by corrupt judge in the licentio
= times of Charles the Second He also alluded
70 the rulings of this Court in the cases of Jarb
and Day, and claimed the same need of Justice f
l. his client, which had been accorded to them.
d also spoke of his having been hunted down wi
10 yindictiveness.
e 1t is impossible to give more than an abstract
what Mr.. Stanton said, he spoke rapidly a.
8; under such excitement, that it impossible
II. f-l1l H. --r4 II