New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-04-11
MR.. SICKLESS DEFENSE.
To Re rI:to~ Of Tn ~. Y. Tyi5cAs.

o
SIR: EMytbipg can be judged from the long ard
yet uIfnkbed speech OF Mr. Graham, however sure
the counsel Of Mr. Sickes may be of the scqu.A OF
their client, they have great difficulty in sxrg upoa
any particular hns OF defense psusiby consistent with
tie established principles of law.
Mr.. Graham begins With insisting that the pro'ec1-
ton has net made out prims tscie oase The doc
time hitherto Uniformly received in al criminal courts
hss been that the act OF killing being proved the psy
vho kns shall be presumed 20 have done the e: IL
teuioraly ard malcou.ly ard that 'ests upon him
TO show the CONTRARY. Mr.. Graham insHs, on tae
other hard that when kills another. the legal
pr,suu p.op is that he did i. either Enthusiastically
ius sbly or nssnsy am tos. re5ts with the prose-
cutor to negative ell L presump.ons. l. mast be
reco'eoted t. q, Mr. Graham ia member Of our New
YOk bsr He has got ais des Of modern ias, we pre-
sumo, from the decisions OF our Court OF Appsds
Even that Court however has 70. yet gor. quite so
fer a. THE though tee recent Police 70 De
decided step toward It.
TheIe1t point get up by NJ. G.snsm s that !. is no
ofense to Kill an sdulterer. Before scquttng the prs-
oner Oh this ground il w0ud seem to De rather in-
portart that the Jniy should be satisfied that Nh Key
vas an eduerer. But here Mr. Grab sIns ideas sbOu!
the presumption Of nnocerce seems to undergo COM
plete and total change SJme Of the wtne,ses to tne
Li1g testified that when ckles appealed to not
10 continue shooting al the PROSTATE end dying Key
he replied: He hes violated my bed and this bare
declaration Of Sckles must according 10 Dir, Grsasm,
be taken true un-ss the prosecution show the con-
trary; and, having closed the case without showing 1t,
thew are bourd by Sckless declaration, and it must
be ore sumed that Key was sdulteIsr. Taking this
fact Is thus established Mr. Graham goes on TO Insist
that a6uery i, very heirous and aggravated cr ne.
Yet the law, except 10 few Sts,es does not punish it,
and even in those States the punishment is inadequate
Mr. Graham insists that the tIus, proper, rghfu and
only adequate punishment Of this oense is that pre-
scrbed by the Mos5ic lsw-tae death Of the suterer
and es the law Of he land hss no, adequately pro-
vded for this case the higher law the ovine Law, the
Law Of human nature and If instinct in,sryenes and 1t
becomes not merely the right but the duty Of the In
iurtd busoord to irfict this punishment Of death.
Il Mr. Graham should succeed in establishing the
pruc PIE tfa in oil in which lave failed to pro-
VIDE al adequate remedy fr wrongs infc ed, she su
ferrg party mas legal night 10 resort 10 the Law OF
human nature and Instinct, veryrcmaksbls change
might be expected in the criminal iurisp'u- euce OF
some Of the States Husbands are not the only per
Sons for the invasion Of whose rights the Law mas pro-
ylded no remedy or none at all adequate. Toe legis
lstion Of the Southern States and of the District of Co
lunbs fails to give the ssve ary protection whatever
egapst any wIOrg however great which his MASTER
may be impelled by rage or passion to ibhct upon
him According 70 the doctrine above stated in defect
Of hun an law the suffering party in these cases has
right legal as well a moral right, TO throw himself
on bis instincts and to puoish the g. grsssor.
Mr. Graham seems 10 esteem II the great, If not
the only duty Of hubbard TO guard the purity of his
marriage bed. Nor does he seem 10 think that any
other adequate means for doing exists, except thst
Of putt ~ the sduerer to death. The wife being the
weaker vessel It is he tell the duty of the bus
band TO protect her against frsy rs much az against
the violence Of the rsvisher He does lot appear to
place much confidence in the power Of women to pro-
tect themselves L. has been common ides that the
purity Of women ia mainly to be secured by their own
virtue. M. Graham seems to be Of opinion tnat but
for TIE Of husbands no. IN keeping th,se
frs wives ont Of empta'ion but in Furnishing sdul-
terers with do sth female virtue would totally fail Of
adequate security and it is in this character of guard
ian OF female purity that he especially comneuds Mr..
sckes to the favorable consideration Of the Jary.
From The extreme length al which ne read from the
Old Testament ana the New-rsther an unusual fea-
ture in forensic eOquencether, seems resson to con-
clude that in the volumes usually cited by law
ytrs be did not find anything to hrs purpose; yet,
however strong HE Bible quotations might be 10 favor
OF severe lav for the punishment Of adultery, they
do lot seem TO 60 very far to establish the proPrety or
expediency Of allowing private vengeance to take the
ace Of public iusice Indeed ST tie conc On Of hs
Scrptural citations be himself stroosly illustrates the
dangers which attend upon this method Of proceeding
since his argument seems TO 90 le length Of subeoting
Ia. hot ha of the
ret merely the actual sdulterer, but every man who
NAV have looked on that husbands wife with eyes of
desire, or in the language of Scripture, may have
committed adultery VITA her il his heat.
Having established, as be seems to think, that the
killing of ar adulterer by the injured husband is not
on., Justified by the natural instinct, Of the human
soul but is an express duty Of revealed religion Mr.
Graham proceeds to argue tbs. the Law will not inter-
fe1e TO purith for yelling TO this instinct and
fulfilling this rel eioul duty The doctrine is laid down
in some law books that for q hu'band to kill an
sdulterer taken in the fact is not murder, bot man
slaughter sno that Of the east criminal DESCRIPTION
To thu. doctrine Mr.. Graham undertakes 10 give new
extension. BE srsues that the provocson I'D excite
ment ae Whist the law looks TO- and ths these are Just
a. gres, where the husband s satisfied OF ae inhdsiy
Of lie wife by other evidence "a where ne reaches thai
conc uson Of the testimony Of his own eyes This seems
plsusibe. but Mr.. Grsbsms fondsess for quoting
Shakespeare bstrsys MIN forthwith into an ansser 70
bis own argument. He cites with appreciation, and a.
showing tie sbsur5i;y of demanding ocular testimony
lagos speech TO Othelo-the very speech by listening
to which 0thelo put up to the murder OF an lnno
cent woman. However well i, may sns yer to allow
Courts, proceeding cautiously and deliberately weigh
irg every piece Of testimony TO base their dec'on on
circumstsn,is syieence it ~l hardly dc to concede
the same privilege TO Mr. GrAtsms seli-eonstituted
defenders Of female purity and sefsppointed instru
tns1is Of divine yergearoe. who. beside the.e high