Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-04-09
LOCAL NEW S..
THE MADISON PLACE MURDER.
Trial Of Daniel T.. Sickles for the killing
Of Philip Barton Key.
CRIMINAL COURT. II. CRAWFORD, Judge
SIXTH DIKSATNR

ent, adversely upon the request of the counsel for
the defence that Samuel +. Butterworth, r. j.
Walker: and Geo. b. woolrdge should be placed
uPoH the stand by the District Attorney as United
States witnesses .'r -...
The Court thought there was nothing in the
circumstances Of this case which would necessarily
make these parties witnesses for the prosecution.
La the first place. the cOroner's inquest was held
within two hours after the homicide, and was held,
So Tar as he knew without the presence OF counsel
Tor the United States; and he did not think the
United States hound by the action of the Cor
oner in summOnng Butterworth. But il Is said
that Butterworth gave the affidavit upon which the
prisoner committed. The evidence shows
that at the time this melancholy affair took place
ButterwOrth was present and after IL was over
took the arm OF the prisoner, the prisoner took
his arm, and retired from the place. In the opin-
ion Of the Court il was not too much To say that the
anidayit was friendly act, 10 avoid the necessity
OF n thorough preliminary examination of the pris-
Oner. With regard To Walker and W oolrdge 50
Tar Is the evidence has gone II shows that they
were not present when the homicide was commit
ted; and so flr rs their being before the Grand
Jury Is concerned. there IS nothing to show that
they were not called in reference to some other
matter instead OF this.
THE RUSH THIS MORNING.
This morning 50 great was the excitement with
respect to seats that by 10 O'Clock every available
SQUARE inch within the rail of the Court room had
been taken, and the occupants adhered to them
with a pertinacity unequalled by anything we
ever witnessed before in or out Of Court. Mem
bers Of the bar came into Court in regular process
sion. bearing chairs taken from their Offices with
them. and which, in many instances. they were
compelled to hold in their hands over their heads,
for want Of space on the floor where to plant them
The greatest dificulty was experienced by Deputy
Marshal Phillips, in providing accommodations
for the vast crowd, and no pains We're spared by
him To dispense even-handed justice to all in this
as in other respects.
OPENING OF THE COURT.
At 81 minutes past 10 o'clock, Judge Crawford
came into court, and order was in some measure
restored
Mr. Sickles was conducted into the dock. and
instantly greeted by many friends who had previ-
OGsly collected.
The jurors, who had been some time in their
box, Were then called. and all answered to their
names
THE OPENING SPEECH FOR THE Defence.
Mr.. Graham arose to make the opening speech
Of the defence to the jury. commencing at IS min
utes to n, a. IN. As Mr.. Graham commenced, the
prisoner buried his face in his hands. and in this
position remained as the speech progressed ] This
was to him time for solemn thoughts: - pros
perity is the parent Of friends; bad fortune the
fire ia which they tried" The speaker here
alluded To the friendship which had existed be-
tween himself and the prisoner at the bar, and he
was now here 10 share in his sorrows. The same
great influence which had spread and stretched
over the face Of nature verdures green mantle was
the will which guided and the rod which pun
iShed.
4 few weeks since the body Of a human being
was found in tine thrOes Of death in one Of the
streets IL proved TO he the body Of d confirmed
adulterer. II happened on day when he should
have arisen above the grossness of his nature. We
found him bcsie2ing, with the most deli berate In
trntiOns the castle where placed the jewels of
his neighbor. The injured father and husband
rashes upon him and. in the frenzy Of the moment.
inflicted such punishment in WIS deserved. The
jury here Ia nix the price OF the marriage bed.
They were here in city sacred To liberty. but hot
t the liberty of the libertinc. They mi ght feel u
pity for the life which had been taken. They knew
not how soon the wife daug liter Of some Of them
might have been marka by the same eyes which
DESTROYED the happiness Of this defendant. They
were here to decide whether the defender of mar
rage bed was a murderer. The murderer was a
detestable character far DE it from the speaker
To defend him before this any other jury. IL be-
tween the act Of this defendant and 4 murderer
they could trace any similarity, ii was for them to
do SO; the speaker was unable 70 do so.
The course adopted in emPanelling the jury was
here commented upon by Mr.. Graham in severe
terms who cOntended that in the empaneling Of
this jury the prisoner at the bar had been deprived
Of his rights, especially through the enforcement
OF the property qualification. whereby competent
jurors were excluded simply because they had lad
the misfortune Ia be unfortunate.
The speaker here commented on the character
OF the opening Of the District Attorney. which,
while he paid a high tribute to its eioqnence and
power. be contended had not been confined strict
ly 10 that species of mercy which il was the duty
az The prosecuting officer 10 exercise in conducting
case. He continued to comment on the manner
in which the District Attorney had conducted the
examination of witnesses for the prosecution in
respect to the questioning as to what witnesses
at the time OF the homicide.
In answer 10 the portion Of the opening address
81 the District Attorney, in which he spoke of the
prisoner a. a walking arsenal loaded with deadly
WeapOnS Of every murderous capability Mr.. G in
ouirrd il the weapons by Kew that day-the
opera glass and the white handkerchief-wfre not
Just Is capable Of carrying death as any used nv
The prisoner,
Mfr Graham complained Of the course Of the
prosecution in employing additional counsel, and
urged that the nature Of the case did not demand
.urh. tiA lvU W HFt.xe IN Inns via
Ously managed Was il an unlalowcd prosecu-
ton, Was there anything in the case requiring
II TO be tried as il had been That none but prop
erty holders should be permitted to sit the jury
and that the United States should have additional
counsel,
la this case the Court had invested the jury with
The speaker here congratulated the jury that
the decisions Of this court had ever been such Is
gave juries the utmost Of their rights.
Here the SPEAKER defined the crime OF murder as
lid down in Blackstones Commentaries He ask
ed the question. was the adnltcrer, rs he went
forth his GRAND Of wickedness. in the pence OF
tiOd and his country. The crime of nanslau9 hter
was then explained. and the difference between
the two crimes laid down. Fosters Crown Law
page 3J, also referred To as 10 the latter crime
AlsO To pages 2j6-257 Of the same authority as to
the proper definition ~ malice. and 10 show the
state Of mind Of the man who slew the man vino
had contaminated the purity of his wife. IL Wa,
perfectly immaterial how the deceased 10 his
death The whole question was as to the condi-
ton Of mind Of the defendant when he took the
life If tin, deceased.
In order To constitute. the term malice. the jury
had find the act tO he the result Of wicked
and depraved mind Was the act Of this defen-
d1nt in indicating his family altar the result OF
malicious mind, Human laws do not shield
in defending all our rights Our legal system did
not reach the case Of certain Wrongs which some
times befall men. When they do not We have
right 10 throw ourselves in our instincts. the law
OF nature. 10 protect IL is only the law Of
ture that allows a man to defend himself against
ALI attack The law comedies that social Laws must
WELD al times ~ these instincts which planted
ia the human breast by nature. To certain
extent. natures laws We're our protection; and in
those cases the great council chamber of the heay
tGs was the power from whence that law Is to
come.
He inquired IL a man should not be safe
against the adulterer As the burglar. Yet he was
justified in Staying the burglar who entered his
house, La this District there lad been provided
no protection against the adulterer and the result
was that the either was thrown the law Of self
defense. The law, by not providing for this great
crime. left il Ia every man % protect himself and
there was nothing revolutionary in IL. We might
assume that when a right is given by the law Of
God. even when not expressed By human law TO
exercise that right Was acting ON the principle OF
seli-defence.
IL was i more aggravated crime surely to enter