Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1860-06-27
e then. No admissions made to me since
yer asked her any questions about the mat

never asked her any questions about the mat
ter.
X.-I think Stoughton said that the family
| had said it would be better for her to give her.
self up. The mother and sisters said they
were innocent. Stoughton is married to one
Of the sisters and lives in the house. The
mother, Stoughton and his wife, and an un-
married sister, constitute the family. She as
we'll as the whole family were much excited.
1t was said Mrs. B. had been ont the two nights
previous-nights cold. 1t wasn't quite day
| light when put her in Jail.
| DIR. NJ. Woods, ,sw.-I was called on to assist
| at the post mortem examination of the child
| found in the River in March saw it in the
River it was removed to the town Hall. Its
| general appearance was natural and well devel-
oped. The lungs, with the heart, were
moved by dissection. They were placed in
water and foated. This is said to be, by med
ical jurists, sign or test that the child had
| breathed. This test is called the hydrostatic
| test, and OF itself is not conclusive evidence,
but taking into consideration other circum-
stances pertaining to the condition of the
child, is positive evidence of the child having
| breathed. We may have this positive evil
dence OF the child having breathed, and yet
it is not evidence OF the child having been
born alive. There were no generated gases In
| the lungs which had healthy appearance. .and
filed the cavity of the chest. My opinion is
that the child breathed but that it was born
alive, cannot say.
| X.-The probability is that the breathing
had been tolerably perfect. There was moth
| ing that indicated to a certainty the manner of
| its death. The test of drowiug is water in the
stomach and mucus in the trachea. There
were marks on the right side other marks on
! the same same side of the body. My impress
| sion is that they were not the marks of finger
nails. The three marks on the neck were in
cluded in space of about of inch, on an
| elliptic line, and could scarcely have been
made by fingers. woman may be in such a
state of mental excitement in delivery that
| she may take the life of child and be-
unconscious of what she has done. Accidents,
resulting in the death of the child may occur
when properly attended-more frequent when
not properly attended. Cold might be one
cause OF death. Compression OF the umbili-
cal chord, causing death, produces congestion
in the blood vessels of the brain. 1t may be
| strangulated by compression of the chord it
self. | suppose the marks on this child were
produced by coming in contact with something
in the River-they all being on the right side,
on which it lay. A child might be suffocated
In the pool OF the natural discharges. There
| are instances in which women, Immediately
after labor, have walked about and performed
work but usually women are much debili-
tated as to cOnfine them to bed.
| Adjourned at II till L O'Clock.
| o'cLoCK.-Several witnesses were called to
show Mrs. BIS condition before the finding of
| the child. Mr.. johnson testified that Mrs. b.
told him, whilst she was in Jail, that she had
thrown the child into the river. She said The
child was born dead.
Defence recalled DIR. Wilson.-In my test-
mony on Saturday said something about mu
Gus being found in the lungs and trachea l
spoke of it as being an inference of the child
| being drowned. / do not wish to be under
| stood as saying that the circumstance, stand
! ing by itself, should be considered as conclu-
| Siye that the child had bepn drowned
John Guelich, sw.-Was at the inquest
the marks on the child. They were the
side which the child was lying in the river,
and thought they were produced by coming
into contact with something.
Testimony closed.
The Court, in charging the Jury, said the
prisoner was charged with three distinct
| counts in the indictment-1st, with strangling
| the child; I'd, drowning it in the River; and
Sd, with concealng its death. Conviction
| under the two first counts must be for murder
| in the first degree-tbe child being incapable
of resistance, or of giving any provocation,
there could be no circumstances surrounding
the case which could reduce the grade of the
| crime to lower degree. To convict her on
| either count, the Commonwealth must prove
| that the child was hers-that if born it would
have been illegitimate--that it was fully born
| alive-that it came to its death by violence,
and that she was the agent of that violence.
| The jury must be satisfied beyond reasona-
| Bile doubt that this was the cause.-the facts
| must be established to reasonable certainty.
| His Honor then referred to the fact of the
| finding OF the child-the pnblic excitement
| the flight of the prisoner to the woods--her
| return, her excited state of mind. the manner
| of her arrest, and her admissions. She said
| she was guilty. Guilty of what? Was it
that she was guilty of concealing the death Of
the child? Is it probable if she had known
| she was charged wi III murder, that she would
have confessed When taken before the
committing magistrate, ,she confessed what7
That she destroyed the child and threw it in
to the River. How did she destroy it (? When
| confessions are relied upon which are capable
of two constructions, the confession must not
| be strained, but that most favorable to
the prisoner must be adopted in capital
| crimes, unless the facts proven warrant the
| other construction and when assertions eX-
cuipating are made at the same time, they
| should have their weight. If the Common
| wealth takes her declaration one way, she
| must take them the other. She said she
threw the child into the River, but IL tcas born
dead Did she mean more by her confession
| than that she destroyed it accidentally in Civ
| ing it birth! The commonwealth must make
ont clear case and that the child was inten-
tionally, and not accidentally destroyed. The
Court then referred to the third count in the
Indictment. The Act of 1874, made it pc
nal offence to conceal the death of bastard
child. 1t is not absolutely necessary that it
should be born alive-if it is still-born and the
fact concealed, the party is guilty. Was this
child thrown into the River TO conceal its
death? Was this the object of throwing it
there And did she put it there, or procure
it to be done, with that object in view If SO
she Is guilty on the Sd count. After calling
attent ion to this point, the Court gave direc-
tons about the manner in which to render