The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-04-19


of his position, nor all the ingenuity of coun-
sci, could betray into the smallest semblance of
doubt, contradiction or inconsistency. So with
respect to the statement of CHENowIrH, that
RICHARD HARRIS confessed to him that he killed
BENTON. That confession, according to CHENo-
WITH, was made first to him--then to MORGAN
and finally repeated to GAMBRILL himself in the
presence of HOWARD DAVIS and others, at NOR
CAMS public house. Is it not strange that among
all that audience of GAMBRIIL's friends there
was not one to communicate the fact to GAMBRILLs
counsel or to the officers of the law? That they
have not been Indifferent to his fate, has been
attested by their efforts TO save him from the
galows-by their attempt to rescue him, on the
night of his conviction, from the hands of the
Sheriff-by the murder of RIGDoN, and by the
funeral of Sunday week. Do they value the
life of HARRIS yet more-that rather than be-
tray him, they would let GAMBRILL hang? The
statement of CHENowITH bears the stamp of
improbability upon its face is its credib!ity
at all increased by the fact that it comes from
a man who, according to his own showing, was
selected by HARRIS as the fttest instrument he
knew for the commission of perjury-who admits
that he assented to the suggestion-and whom
HARRIS pointed out to others as IA fellow who
twill swear that he saw me on the truck-house
pavement drunk when he heard the report of the
"pistol.' But after all-whether HARRIS did or
did not make such confession of guilt, as
is stated by CHENowITH, is question altogether
immaterial to the case The only point is-did
he commit the murder? That he did not, is suffi-
GENTLY attested by the fact that he has made
any attempt to escape arrest, or manifested the
least unwillingness to undergo a trial. Does any
body suppose that if really guilty he would not
long since have left the city-or that his conduct
in remaining can be explained upon any other
hypothesis than that of his innocence, and
his consciousness of his ability to prove
it? The only other fragment of ''newly
discovered evidence is the affidavit of the oman
who swears that after the murder she saw HARRIS
run by her house, in which certainly there is
nothing improbable, and which proves nothing.
There is one other feature in the remaining to
be considered, and only one. 1t is the fact that
GAMBRILL died, denying with his latest breath, his
participation in the crime. In this there is nothing
unusual or remarkable. One half of the criminals
who are executed die protesting their innocence.
Some are led to this step by feeling of pride, which
makes them unwilling to acknowledge the justice
of their doom. Some, by sense of shame and
desire to spare the feelings and preserve the good
opinion of surviving relatives and friends Others,
again, are stimulated to such course by love Of
life and lingering hope of mercy, which
a confession of guilt would effectually ex-
tnguish. This, probably was the princi-
Reconsideration with GAMBRILL. The fact that
executive clemency had already been twice inter-
posed in his behalf to avert doom which he had
been previously told to regard settled doubtless
encouraged him to hope until the last moment
at least, for reprieve; nor is it at all
unlikely that he altogether failed to realize
his awful position, until the fatal trap fell
from beneath his feet and his unhappy soul was
launched into eternity. We cannot, therefore,
accept his own assertion of his innocence whether
contained in the formal plea of ''Not Guilty."
with which he answered to the Indictment when
first arragned for trial, or in the dying speech
with which he quit the word, as casting the least
shadow of doubt over the conclusive evidence of
his guilt the general features of which we have
thus briefly endeavored to present.