The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-04-09

moi tai U, even severe; IL was wound which would
grleVously disable man; witness attention had
been called to the affair by the shots; when wines,
went into the Clubhouse, six seven persons were
there, but no one was in charge of the BODY when
ne nrst saw 1t; was present when the coroner took
the opera-glass case; it was taken from the left
hand breast pocket of the coat; thinks the
case was closed when he saw it; when
witness felt for the wound in the thigh, he
eit loose change and Keys in the pocket of the pan
falcons; everything was given to the coroner as
soon as taken from the clothes; witness also saw
very small pearl-handled penknife; the indita
about the skin on the left side, by which witness
wouid determine that the abrasion there was made
by gun shot, would be the correspondence be-
tween that abrasion and the injury to the clothing
the coat vest and Shirt immediately over il; this
OPINION OF course was not nallible, but it was wit
ness opinion; there is no law that infallibly req
ulates the coarse of ball after it enters the body
no one can tell, without an anatomical examination
what bstaces interpose to change the line of BALL
mr.. hey was tall man, 81 or feet high, witness
thinks.
Mr.. SickleS here was asked to stand nm and the
witness stated, in answer to question of Mr. Bra
dy, that he thought Mr.. KEYS height was abont
the same as that of Mr.. Sckles. If Mr.. Key was
falling, and his body was in the same position that
witness assumed it to be when he saw it. the resnlt
OF the examination would be as witness has des
crlbed; witness reiterated his opinion that person
receiving wound of this character must have been
IN reclining position; whether that position was
Drought about by his being in the act of falling
OF on the ground, he would not undertake to saw
Dr II: H. Stone, recalled. Examined the BODY
VI MI. hey when he was shot, and also assisted at
tne Posf-mortem examination; found him lying on
the noor In the Club house, and found Dr. COOLIDGE
there; FOUND that Key dead, and left the house;
was summoned by the coroner and held an exami.
nation of the body, and held also A rost-,norte,n
examination; witness described the wounds sub
sIantaly In the same with the last wtness;1
the abrasion on the right side was short distance
IRON ron me pail which remained under the skim iden-
lihes the DALI the wounds were mortal in their
characters caused death of deceased.
Inns witness was not cross examined
Inc jury here took recess for few minutes.
Mr. Reed was re-called.-Saw no pistol in rho
Key) '"e ''"e'' \"r'
Mr.: Van Wyek was re-called-Could not dis
tngulsh from where he stood whether either of the
parties had anything in his hand.
Mr.: Phillips objected to these witnesses benp re-
called and examined again on matters unconnected
with the cross examination
The Court decided that as a general ruIa the
practlce was Objectionable; but if through inadyer-
tence question has been omitted the witness NAV
be recalled and the question asked. The permission
was granted in the present case
Charles H. Windcr, called Was present at the
Club house on the day of KEYS death about omar
ter past two, and remained there until the close of
the coroner's examinations assumed sort of CHARGE
oi the oouy until the Mayor came; everything was
taken from the body when it was stripped; there
was an opera-glass case, some keys and money;
there was also pair of sleeve buttons and a ring
KEYS VI
Not eross-examined
Mr.. Ould proposed to offer the pistol and ball to
the jury as evidence.
Mr.. Brady.-''On what ground ?"
Mr. Ould.-"As being the instruments of death :"
Mr. Brady.-"Who proves that? ?"
Mr.. Ould.--''The doctors prove that the death was
caused by this ball, which was taken from the body
OF deceased and the pistol was found near the place
where the transaction occurred.
Mr.. Brady denied that there had been anv proof
tnat Slckes used this pistol. 1t was found in the
| street ard delivered to the coroner at the Climb
mouse mouse. To whom it belonged, who had it, or who
9lscharged 1t, no witness informs us. No witness
had expressed any opinion land the Court had ex-
pfeSsiy prohibited the expression of any opinion
as to whether there any relation between that
pan ana TINS pistol Who owned the pistol, was
| matter about which he not informed; but il
was almost universally supposed that Sickes used
revolver He was not prepared to say that the
picking up of this pistol, and its having been found
near the scene of the affray was not to he re-
garded as coming within the res gest,e; but he
dld not wish it to be received upon the assumption
that there was any evidence connecting it with the
| prisoner.
| Mr.. 0uld supposed that was a question to 90 to
| the jury. One of the witnesses had sworn that this
plstol-or that some one picked up By one of the
| witnesses corresponding to this-Was found near
! ~, II not exactly at the very place where the par
ties stood at the time of the first report Mr. Van
Wyck testifes to that fact. This was question to
go before the jury, and it was for them to draw
their own differences. If the counsel for the de-
| as lney seem to admit, that the bullet
now shown inflicted mortal wound it cannot do
any harm for the pistol to 90 to the iury as being
the instrument OF DEATH just the same as if it had
neen proved to be the id ntical pistol which fred
| the bullet.
! Mr.. Brady wished to be informed nv tha Court
OF the rule under the operation of which this pis
to should be permitted to go before the jury.
Inc Court ruled that the pistol having been found
at or near the place where the mortal wound was
inilcted and the ball proposed to be shown to the
jury having been taken from the body, it was for
| the jury to draw their own differences as to what
use was made of that pistol, BY whom and with
what erect The finding Of the pistol was a por-
ton OF the whole transaction and the Court was
clearly OF opinion that both the ball and the pistol
might be exhibited to the jury Whether the prs-
oner used the pistol or not was another THING. that
was matter OF fact for the jury to determine
The pistol and ball were then examined bv the
jury.
Mr.; Oud announced that the United States had
closed their testimony in chief
Mr. Ratcllfe announced a motion recurring the
District Attorney to place among their witnesses
on the stano Samuel f. Butterworth r. D. Walker
anu peorge d. " oorldge. In support of this mo-
ton he would occupy as little time as possible. 1t
was necessary to the ends of Justice that all who
knew any thing OF this transaction should be called
on to testify The object for which Government
was instituted and the machinery of A prosecution
put IN notion was that in transaction of this sort
everything should be known, and the testimony
OF every honest witness to the affair given in. II
might be matter of policy taste for the prose.
| ~ settled
practice in all free countries and common iusticn
required that all who were present at the trausac
| ton should be summoned. This was in accordance
with the previous ruling of the Court in the case of
Edwards, who was indicted for murder Edwards
had rented house in the suburbs of the eli to some
women, who were disturbed late at night by mar
| ty OF disorderly men. They sent for Edwards who
came armed with gun; an alteration ensued and
one OF the men was shot, and another injured
Two grls-Louisa Garcia and Josephine RAYMOND
Testified to the affair before the coroner's iurv
were Imprisoned as witnesses in default of bail and
testified before the Grand jury They were not
however, called up on the trial, and himself and
Mr.. Carlisle, who was engaged with him in the
case, offered motion, that the District Attorney
WHO, from unknown motives, had not called them,
should be compelled to put them on the stand The
Court then decided, that as thew had been used bv
the United States in all the preliminary stages
they should be brought forward now, and he ruled
that the Government should put them on the stand.
In the case OF Herbert, where the Court ruled
differently, and which would, doubtless be referred
to by the prosecution, the circumstances were
not analogous Gardner, the witness who it was
proposed that the Government should adopt as its
own, bad never been used by the Government; he
had testified in behalf of Herbert on application for
hd6eds corpus. In the present case the circumstan
ces were similar to those in Edwards case except
That none of the witnesses went to jaI which was
an immateral fact. Walker and Woolridpe both
testified before the Grand Jury, and Butterworth
was examined on the Coroner's inquest
- Mr: Katchfle then read from the record of the
Court the action of the Court in the case of Ed
wards, and the ground which the decision was
based
Mr.. X. continued In Herbert's case all this was
reversed. The witness asked for had been sum
moned by the defence on the application of hqJeas
corpus The decision of the Court in Edwards
case was evidently predicated on the fact that the
Government had taken possession of the par
ties, and ought to them, and he saw no differ
ence IN the case now under consideration and thai
Gee. Did not Woolrdge 90 the Grand jury
Mr.. Ould-"'I don't know
Mr. Radcliffe said he knew that he did, as also
did Mr.. Walker. He hoped that this case was to
be conducted fairly and with kind understanding
between counsel.
Mr.. Carlisle said there was great difference be- |
tween parties who were summoned before the |
Grand Jury and those who went there voluntarily
for an object. His friend must have been taking |
some new lessons to intimate unkindness from him.
lie did know whether or not Woodbridge and
Walker were before the Grand Jury, but if thew
did 1t was incumbent for them to show how and in
what capacity they went there.
Mr.. Radcliffe said one could 90 before the |
Grand Jury without authority. These parties got
the necessary authority and were precisely in the
position OF the witnesses in the case of Ed
wards The case of Butterworth was the
most extraordinary in all his extensive practice
and without vanity he could say that it had
been or times great as that of any |
man at the bar. II might not be as lucrative as |
MS TRENDS but 1t was necessary tn go through it
TO obtain the requisite experiences He did not |
say this boastiully. Mr.. Butterworth was examined
at the lnqueswas present at the killing and yet had
not been summoned a witness This was certain
~ most extraordinary.