The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1867-02-15


she only gave what she could take between her
thumb and finger! That perhaps may be fair
deduction from her testimony
How then do you find the fsct,-was II the
amount seen by Owen and Laura when COM
pairing with that held by Litscott, say seen
by Owen and Laura. for i do not understand
the prisoner denies that she did compare some
smount,) and in 6rorn paper, or was u an.
Other amount fixed rs she says between her
thumb and finger.
Sarah says Il was IN \ brorn paper IN her
dress pocket, then lying on the bed, anu that
was all poured into the bottle.
thinks in morning dress hanging up. She
does not say the color of the paper, nor does
rhe say whether or not she poured 1t all into
the bottle.
Were these witnesses equally dlsintercsted,
what conflict do you find in their testimony,
and which do you believe II there Is any sub:
s,antial conflict The prisoner says she liked
the amount between her thumb aud finger. IL
30, il 1t possible il was the same amount as seen
In the broun paper, She says she put the
brown paper into the clock for the purpose OF
carrying 1t back to the Dr.'s medicine chest.
Where did this amount fixed between her thumb
md finger come 'front.' When was 1t thus fxcdl
In the morning before Sarah brought the bottle
Ia her and eiore she had arisen for the day :!
Was II thus fixed Saturday night before she re-
tredl Docs she not say she did not entertain
the idea Of administering II until Sarah brought
the bottle to her! These are questions that
may be asked and answered In deter mining
where the truth lies. ..... o.,
These amounts stated by the witnesses are not
given by weight. Owen says there was near
teaspoonful In the brown paper. and the pris
oner says she gave nm amount fixed between
her thumb and finger. There has been weighed
Ia your presence two different amounts. One
was su amount taken up by the Foreman be.
tween his thumb and finger, which weighed one
grain, the other was ten grains weighed In one
parcel. From this you have standard by
which to estimate the several amounts stated by
the prisoner and the witnesses. The 10 grains
have been exhibited to you In teaspoon, and
you will judge from the appearance OF 1t there,
whether there Was or not at least 10 grains 10
the brown paper, II the testimony OF Owen u
Stevens is to Be credited q, to the amount.
II she nut into the hottie the amount Owen
SAYS she had In the paper, and the deceased
drank and retained II 10 his system, have you
aus reasonable doubt about what caused bis
death! II II was simply an amount that could
be taken between her thumb and finger. have
you any doubt about III You will therefore
1srceiyc the great Importance Of determining
which Of these two amounts we're taken. II either
VI them.
Upon the question Of : hat caused the death
OF Charles NJ. SWEET and bearing more or less
upon n, YOU have the testimony OF the physi.
clans and surgeons. II the surrounding facts
which we have been considering leave your
minds In doubt about the cause OF his death,
you can resort to the medical testimony for aid
II II will afford you any and " indeed these
surrounding facts nave satsneu you OF Tue
can Hs IN
opinions thus formed and raise IN your minus
reasonable doubt about the cause, for IL Is upon
ali the evidence in the case you must arrive ut
your conclusions.
II In propcr should make a passing remark
IN relation 10 the testimony Of the medical wit.
ncsses upon the hypothetical questions PROFOUND.
al They arc moi allowed TO give their opinions
unon the case being tried, for that would require
J.,n,m;n,,io of the question. what Is proved,
~b;ch 10 .oIeiy a question for YOU therefore il
l. ,h., cc,,ain supposcd or hypothe tical cases are
presented 20 them To answer, and sometimes
,hsy are found answering questions bearing very
i;,,}s similarity 70 the facts proved In the case
under consideration.
w, have heard the inquiries put in this case
I'd W ,hn ansre,s given with comments of coun.
.eI mon IL. The first two questions proceed up
&C. sppnn,oms Enumerated, and the presence Of
si.oSnI In the system without any mention Of
mo,nbine. The third question, In addition to
those symptoms, supposes the administration Of
The usual dose Of morphine, and the fourth a
nm,n,;," nnknown; whether more or less than
d. nsy,i quantity is not suggested. Upon
. .ns ",u,n,oms and statements The physicians
80" ,,;van ,he;r opinion, III these same syinp.
,",,s aJ hssn ACCOMPANIED with the statement
,ha, m Grains of morphine had been taken, |.
dos M, now apnear what their answer would
have been. The value OF opinions thus given,
you will percciye, must depend in a great meas.
ure upon the similarity Of the supposed case and
the case on trial.
j From the whole evidence In the case, when
carefully considered and weighed, " you are not
satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Charles
NJ. SWEET died from the ELECTS OF morphine, thar
Is an end to the case, and your verdict must DC
for the prisoner. II, however, you are so sa,is.
fed, il will be necessary for You to proceed far-
thcr and inquire II the morphine which did pro-
duce the death was administered by the prison
or. linen this point YOU will Judge II the con-
fict of evidence has not been rather upon the
amount given than by rhom given. Is II de-
The w6iskcy. and is there any evidence in the
csc ,bat any other person CAV any, or that the
deceased took any other! .yf
Was II a deadly poison Have you, from the
evidence In this case, any doubt upon thati Is
there any conflict OF opinion or evidence upon
that ms,icrt II 1t was a deadly poison, did the
prisoner know It's deadly and dangerous quail.
Ties, when administered in the quantity actually
given She says she did not. She asserts that
She did not know 1t would kill. II this be true,
it is all she can say about u. She cannot multi
ply words in themattcr. ehe can onlysay "ne am
CT she did or did not know us DANGEROUS 9uan.
ties. The government, on the o'hSr hand, say
she did. They say to you that !he e.i9ehce
shows she was wen ae9u,,"'e w. WIN rs,
that she was a physicians vile, and had been
for many years. and having, according 70 hsr
III, ~. an,;.!n,,ed i,s fatal results when she
. na. ~" ,.aI 4, mon The morninr of his death.
hsrseil TOOK u uPoh 49,, 'nv ;nuir;ss nm, he, a, IN
That her answers W .he in1uia r. -. n.
why she took II, must SATISFY you sue kne" ~
ordinary opcrations. They say she knew the
usual dose by the amount the deceased had pre-
pared for his daughter. That according to her
own testimony, when giving II before 10 the de-
ceased for whatever purpose, she only gave two
NJ Jap,a's powders; and that the amount she
u, 49,, she ,nyc on Sabbath morning indicates
NV saysa a. a, ,hc Lncw lis character, and
khoNNusv 10 ,hich Il Was moi safe 10 90.
Tue AMOUR. oe!um n,,~,mon She s,y. she aid not
Ne'ertheies,, Hr"ar"' ~ -, Von nu.t
know II would XIII. Da sue o' no. III ,Sa .r;'
determine. you must 10 " IIOm W.