Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-04-07

up is as follows:
T. Rein Arnold, farmer-county. '
,. James L. Davis, farmer-county
g. John F.. Neale, mechanically.
4. VIM. M. Hopkins, gents furnishing-city.
5. William Bond, sboemaker-city.
6. James Kelly, tinner-city.
!. VIM. c. Harper, grocer--city
=. Henry Nj. knight, grocer-city
9. Jesse b. Wilson. grocer-city
10. John McDermott, coach-maker-city.
IL. WIN. NJ. Moore, grocer-city.
L. AlPheus >. Wight, SYSTEMATICALLY.
THE CASE OPENED
The charge against the prisoner was then read
to the jury by the clerk, Mr.. SicklCs Standing up
in the box the while.
The Indictment was then handed tn the district
Attorney; and
Mr.. Ould, for United States, arose 10 address the
jury. The Indictment. he said, charged the pris-
oner with the murderof p. Barton Key. He should
state briefly what the United States expected to
prove in the case. He, (the prisoner as all pres
ent knew, was Representative of the great COM
mercial emporium Of the United States in Con-
gress. Mr.. q. went on in eloquent terms TO de-
scribe the manner Of the killing of Mr. Kew upon
that beautiful Sabbath evening, when the prisoner
had, with full preparation. come to that carnival
OF blood. He was walking magazine. Had
come prepared with all the varieties of the dread
instruments of death, every one of which had its
peculiar murderous capabilities.
Those instruments had been concealed from
view IN convenient Overcoat, on an inconve-
niently hot day. The deceased interposed moth
ing, and had nothing to interposc but n physical
power which when exercised In a moment Of
GOODNESS, was but futile-and even the piteous ex-
ciaInatlon he uttered fell all unheeded from his
lips. The evidence will show that not only was
the deceased unarmed but that the prisoner at the
bar knew he was unarmed. He must have known
1t when firing the first shot, at the corner again
In firing the fatal shots, and again when he stood
Dfaveiy over his victim, striving to scatter the
brains of him on whom he had inflicted three
vital wounds, and over whose eyes the film Of
death was already Spreading.
n.,lI al
on homicide, page 1911. TO show what had to be
considered by the jury in making their verdict
The evidence would show that no matter how
reveDgeful the feeling might have been towards
the deceased, sufficient time elapsed for that
feeling Ia have materially abated He knew not
how So bloody purpose could have been enter
talned under such circumstances unless sustained
by remorseless revenge. Frantic entreaties such
as q man would make for his life. such as would
have been made for an opportunity for explana-
ton, such perhaps as the recollection Of the little
ones he had left behind hin. were made by the
deceased, yet the prisoner at the bar did not de-
was attempting to add mutilation to murder,
when he was arrested by the parties whose feet
subsequently bore his victim away
Mr.. %. then proceeded to describe to the jury tue
crime of MURDER and cited the general princifl
which governed this court in such cases Here
Mr.. Ould read from Wharton ON Homicide page
b, In which the law of homicide is clearly laid
down Also from the same, page l6, in relation
III. |
most instances, is TO be drawn from the weapon
used. Also from page IL, TO show that when 4
man finds man in adultery with his wife and
kills him, his crime is only manslaughter, but if
he kill him subsequently, and deliberately from
revenge il is murder.
Also FROM page 1s2, to show that when, after
the discovery of the adultery. the man enters into
any discourse OF undertakes any other description
OF business SO TO allow time for his passion to
abate, and then kills the adulerer he is guilty of
murder Also, from page 1877, to show that after
he has got the party in his power the repetition of
u subsequent blow makes the crime nurder and
from page l99 to show that il one has formed a
purpose to kill a man. and duly armed meets him
and kills him suddenly. the presumption is that
the crime was committed on the previous deter
minatiOn.
The speaker went on to describe the rules Inv
which the crime of murder is tested They were
not the rules Of to-day, but had come down to us
from source which gave them immutability
while other portions of the fabric Of human prac-
tice had been changed These rules had become
stronger by the pressure of centuries These prin-
ciPles owed their strength and their veracity to
God-fearins and nian-loving humanity. Whenever
they were perverted or warped, a blow was struck
at both humanity and Justice
These rules had been so well proven. that inno-
walton in its widest moments had never vet al
lowed revenge Justification or pal liaton for
crime. They gave to-day to Daniel f.. Sickles
not only an upright judge, but they also clothed
him in spotlesS innocence until he be proven guilty
How soon ere the presumption ofinnoccnce be sup
IA
the jury To judge. How soon the evidence would
show express malice on the part Of the prisoner
was for them alone to judge. They had been
pnrged by the court, and they were sworn to do
justice by the prisoner; to find the fact and not
amend the law; nor had they anything to do with
the punishment which the law provided for crime
That rested alone with the Executive who alone
could sheath the sword of Justice or let it fall
The only issue they had 10 try was that Of the
guilt of this party. The consequences Of that
finding were for the law. IL it be legal for them
to set the prisoner free. he said let him 90 free
free as the wind If the contrary, he called upon
them to smite red handed violence wherever found
and show to the four quarters Of listening world
that there is still virtue left in jury.
Here Mr. Ould closed mis- opening address To the
jury, having spoken about IS minutes, commence
ing at y minutes to II, a. IN.
Judge Crawford here stated that il had been the
practice III this Court for the defence to follow
the prosecution in opening prior to entering upon
the testimony. IL the defence, however preferred
to reserve their opening, they were entitled so to
do.
Mr.. Brady, for defence. stated that they pre-
the United States should be given.
CALLING OF THE WITNESSES
The witnesses for the prosecution Were then
called by the Clerk. when the following answered
Richard y. Downer, Francis Doyle, Thomas H.
Martin, Z. V. II. Van Wick. Joseph Dutlrow
Abel UPshur, Edw. NJ. Tidball, Cyrus McCor-
mick, John NJ. Seely, Jr., Jonah ID. Hoover, Robt
J. Dillon, Of y. Y, Thomas Woodward Reuben
WOrthngtOn, James n. Reed, Henry Hepburn
The following witnesses for the United Statesl
failed TO answer to their names Eugene b. PEN
dletOn. Hon. Richard BrOdhead Of Pa, Hon
George Eustis, Daniel DOugherty, of Pa Barry
Hayes, Of Pa, Ed. c. West, of y ", Hon. Hiram
W albridge, OF y. Y, T.. w. Cone. of n Y.
Welcome Beebe, Of " Y, c. X. Alburtis of "
y, Hon. J. Il. Haskin. of n. V. Ambrose c.
hingsland. Of Y. Y, and James Humphrey of
Washington city.
TESTIMONY or JAMES II. REED
James VI. Reed (wOod merchant.) was the first
witness sworn WAS near by at the death of Mr.
Key. Was passing up on the 22d of February
Inst. As he got up near Madison Place walking
leSurely. heard loud talking. and saw two gentle
men on Gunnells corner. They were from four
Ia six feet apart. and soon Of the men raised
his arm gradually and steadily, and witness saw
pistol AT trSt il appeared TO have direct aim at
the corner of the house, but in instant witness
saw il was aimed at the other man, who was try
ing Ia avoid the aim. lie fired, and the parties
moved forward some twenty feet w hen they got
twenty feet from the first position the man shot at
retreatcd, the other following him. and the former
running round a tree crying murder I" murder -
murder and don't shoot me- The man
with the pistol then snapped his pistol and IL did
not go off When in the middle Of the street the
man tircd the second time.
Just before the second nre. witness saw the man
shot ut throw something at the man with the pis-
tol, which passed through the air slowly and hit
"a, E,Il IL