The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-01-26
la w INTELLIGENCE.
TRIAL OF PETER CORRIE
AT TOWSONTOWN,
FOR THE MURDER OF POLICE OFFICER
RIGDON
ELEVENTH DAY.

ELEVENTH DAY.
TOwsoNrOwN, January 25th 1859
CIRCUIT COURT BALTIMORE COUNTY Y-IIon, John
H. Price, Judge. Richard J. Gittings ESQ., States At
torney. prosecuting. Assisted by Arthur L. Machen Esq
William p. Preston, Esq, for the defence.
State Peter Corrie indicted for of police
the 9TH of November last
On the opening of the court this morning Price
asked Mr. Preston if he desired to upon the
thorides which submitted to him by Mr.. Machen
yesterday.
Mr. Preston replied that if the authorities were offered
in keeping with the rules of the would do So
The Court remarked that the proceeding was regular
Mr.. Preston then and again addressed the Jury
He said that he had commented upon the whole of the
authorities furnished by the State that he had reviewed
he proof and after having reviewed that he had earnest
y asked the calm and dpassonate deliberaton of the
Jury upon the facts and he therefore did think
he should be called upon again them thing
The counsel for the State however had announced
that they had other authorities which they wished him
comment upon preferred to have had them
before, that he could have commented upon them
the regular train of his argument he would refer to
them.
of the defence, the following passage found Whar
ton and Stille-Medcal Jursprudence-page ST. sec 81
There never could be conviction for homicide drunk
enness avoided responsibility. As it is of the pre-
medtated h0mcides committed under the stimuli:
of liquor The guilty purpose is at first conceived bu
there are Few men whose temperaments finely kni
as to enable them to enter of blood without
flying themselves for the task to be performed
breads the hearts cowardce and seeks to insure agans
by drink twill be found in fact that scarce
case of violent homicide in which it does appear
that the defendant strengthened his
ton of his guilty plan by drinking, in the way ha
he strengthened his hand by the fatal weapon If there
fore drunkenness imparts responsibility there
only but few convictions which heretofore taker
place which good but there will be convictions
all for the future If the assassin will liquor
strengthen his nerves he will to avoid conviction There
would be species of deliberate homicide under such
dspensaton, that would not old punishment II wouIG
be the ndeiberate only that would be made responsible
Mr. Preston argued that never in the whole of
his argument had he advanced such proposition this
lina1N on1vy
committed the murder The real murderer in this
the who fired the deadly weapon has already beer
convicted This authority he urged evidently supposed
the perpeator of the crime have gone the
mission of the deed with malice aorethought and was
therefore napplcabe to the the consider
alton OF the jury There is no roof in the thai
Corre having sedatey conceived the design to do the
deed had gone deliberately about its execution No
for moment, not even Mr.. Cuttings, would have the
hardhood to charge the actual perperaon of the
| of Rigdon on Corrie.
So much for that authority. The next case to which
the State called the attention of the defence found
Roscoe Criminal Evidence under the head of Insanity
page 953, McNaughtons case which reads as follows =
THAT the jury ought be told all cases that every mar
presumed to be and to possess sufficient degree
tray be proved to their satisfaction and that to establish
defence the ground of insanity it must be clearly
proved that at the time of committing the act the party
accused was aborng under such defect of from
useses OF te nhd as not TO know the nature and quail
y of the act he was doing orf he did know it, that he
did not know he was doing what was wrong"
Mr. Preston reminded the jury that we were in igno
rance of the factsthe particular crcumstances-whcF
surrounded McN aughtonS to call forth
from the lips of the learned judge who pronounced it
He admitted all that is said in the paragraph The only
difference between the learned States officer and himself
was that by insanity the former meant fixed ALTERATION
of mind They think there such thing temporary
ALTERATION of mind To make good the position the State
would occupy they must find in the books exactl,
similar to the before the jury. That heycanno
do so is sufficiently well manifested The difference ir
the characters of the principal and accessoryor in h
case the drunken dupe-and their different mental capac
ties must all be taken into consideration and well weighed
by the jury.
he tanll aSt auth
which they wished get in Stany on the omis
sion of the defence to advance the proof any particular
point, which omission is considered fair argument for
the guilt of the prisoner Mr. Preston said he
conscious of having omitted the proof anything
had proved everything necessary to take away the
prisoner any motive for committing the murder, well
proved the mildness of his character and brought
bear upon the case everything that could be procured
In conclusion, Mr. Preston said he thought the few
crude arguments he in the haste of the moment had laid
before the jury he would rely upon the justice
decision in bringing in verdict.
After the ncuson of Mr.. Presons remarks Mr.. Git
tings, the States Attorney, and commenced the
closing argument for the State.
He began by saying that who had heard the ar
gument for the defence could learned and
venerable friend had anything undone which would
bear favorably towards the prisoner his learning elo
quence and professional tact have all been exercised tc
the utmost in behalf of his Client and he deserves much
credit for his unwearied duties and attention to th
| prisoner.
There cases. said Mr.. Gittings which are t.
be argued from the evidence; others where
tocal the minds of the jury entirely from the ISSUE Th
learned counsel deserves credit for making the
certainly
that of 1t would suit every murder
which the counsel should happen to be employed
His speech however did not apply the facts in thi
case the murder committed in the house of Rgdon
the counsel never comes that house, Saturday
| we discover him within two squares of it, bu
| on Monday morning early find him at th
Holiday Street Theatre After this gets as far as Pear
street but to the active of the murder
Mr.. Cuttings said he would to spend an hour or tw
with the poets in company with the connse an,
to back to the history of olden times
tain characters spoken of there with the bold and darne
N ada That in n
days of old Rome there clubs which be kene
to the Plugs" and rip Raps' of day, and wou
cheerully admit that Corrie not of them Thes
references were not in point, and had nothing witt
the case now upon trial He wanted the jury to go t
the house of Rigdon, where he lay murdered-murdere
for going boldly into the Courts of justice and telling
the truth. He wanted them to look the and tn
evidence-the overwhelming evidence produced in thi
| case-which was uncontradicted and unmpeached. H
then referred to the fact which sustained by the
dence of Corre the prisoner at the bar being
in the act of committing the deed of his fight and arrest
and asked if the State had not fully shown his connection
| with the murder.
l Mr. Cuttings then referred to the Indictment and ex
planned the different counts therein. He said the ques
tion was not for this jury to enquire who fired the
whether it done Crops or Corrie but if the mur
der committed they enquire the connection
of the prisoner with that murder He then alluded t.
the proposition of the defence that Crops had been
ycted of firing the shot, and that therefore Corrie cou
not be convicted of the offence He said that
falacy on the part of the Defence the jury did nc
find that Crops had fired the shot, but that he wa
guilty under the Indictment and if there had been hun
dred men proved to have been in the position in whic
nave been equally guilty, no matter who fired the shot.
Mr. Cuttings then reviewed the authorities cited by tn
Tor the defence in the progress of his argument
He referred to the of the King Plummer Hey
lings Reports When the counsel brought that oil
hook, said Mr.. Cuttings, thought he going
us to the case of Cain. This similar to tn
one now under trial; IN that there no commo
design TO take life proven; the man killed of til
same party, and it held that the Others not KNOWN
the design of the killing guilty The State ha
shown by evidence that the prisoner had the guilty know
ledge his breast before the commission of the act Tn
.u Stapr t,rIt
this murder and if they should be of the opinion
prisoner was present at the scene asserting to the
he was in the Of the law equally guilty with Crop
Mr. Cuttings then referred to the argument advance
by the defence that the prisoner weak in intelec
and at the time was drunken dupe in the hands
Others, and said that no evidence had been adduced
sustain this assertion He said that the defence
good character and drunkenness, amounted in
defence at ALL if did thadefence should
out by the facts and the evidence which had not bee
done. The law said Mr. Cuttings, holds all respoI
sible for crimes which they commit except when it
cused by the law, as in of docy lunacy infanc
and selfdefence but there is no shown whei
man, who being a drunken dupe is excuse
from crime there such word to be found in the book
as dupe. If the plea of insanity be up b
the defence why did they not produce evidence to
tain it? there not word said about insanity unit
the counsel before the Juryno witnesses said any
thing about insanity. The counsel said Mr. Citing
has referred to the of Abner Rogers authort
in support of his proposition In that the
plea of finsanity. In McNaughton's the decision
the twelve Judges that the jury should be told thu
every sane until it was proven that he was il
sane. Drunkenness was advanced the plea in th
case; there was not word said about drunkenness
10 say that man was only Of weak mind is d.
fence; if he IDIOT that would he defence; bu
to say he was drunk and dupe is defence, the la
does not recognize it defence. Suppose it to be
legal Defence VIII the evidence sustain it. tn
defence muse it, There is evidence here that
was drunk dupe either. 1t is otherwise the evdenC
SHOWS that Corre in the possession OF his inteec
that II any one was dupe it was Crops Corrie in th
whole thing acts with cunning and discretion. and
goes to show that he in possession Of his ntelec
there has been witness to show that his mind was
ferior to any other mans mind Was he drunk That
lar from eXenuating crime aggravates crime it is Grim
TO get drunk and a crime to commit offence
Mr.. Cuttings then referred to the different grades
murder; said there distinction to be drawn betwee
murder in the first and murder in the second degree
sometimes it difficult to draw the line which woul
separate them. He would show that this was murder
!, the first degree; the line easily drawn here.
Mr.. Cuttings then read from the of 1909 deinn,
murder the first degree The says that murder
the second degree. He said he would review
mony and see il the prisoners mind not in a cond
ton to commit wilful deliberate murder lying
wait &c. He said that there witness who sal
that Corrie drunk, when he the yer
dict rendered in GambIills case and that KeI
nard who States witness; three others thought
drunk, but they had no conversation with him.
Mr. Cuttings then traced Corre from the court hous
point to point, where he seen in company wit
Cropps up the time of the killing of gdon and his
and said that all his actions and versaton forbat
the idea that he abor.ng under a tellect
of drunkenness advanced by the counsel for Il
defence.
He then referred to the remark of the counsel for Il
defence that the Stlte had not shown motive for tn
murder the part of Corrie. He said the State hs
rie took part in it; that all it necessary for Il
State do the law does not require it to show motv
but the State had shown a motive it has shown
citation with the gang of which Gambrill a membe
| shown