Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1867-08-07

u
human being. 1t Is not necessary, because
Il is one OF those things thst are presumed 70
be taken Judicial cogniZanee Of. It is not al.
legged in the present Indictment that Abraham
Lincoln was q reasonable creature, nor has
any proof been adduced to show 1t, and yet we
take judicial cognizance Of the fact. So we
may take judicial coEnlzance of the fact that
at the time Of his murder ne was the President
of the United States, because 1t is something
known to every man, woman and child IN the
country capable Of knowing anything; and
taking such judicial cognizance OF IL, II need
neither be alleged in the ictment nor proved
by witnesses.
1t is true. ss stated by the counsel for the
defense. that 1t has been laid down by Sir
Mathew hale, in his work entitled g Pleas OF
the Crown" that although treason is 80 heinous
in its character as to admit of no accessories
before the fact. but that It's heinous character
makes all principals who in any way con-
tribute to its commission, yet that murder and
other felonies not being so heinous in their
character, aiders and abettOrs are 10 be pro-
ceeded against only as accessories before the
facv. When. however, he comes TO treat Of
misdemeanors, lower grade of crime than
felonies, he tells Us that they will not admit OF
accessories before the fact because Of their
precise reason for which accessions are ad-
mitted in crimes amounting to felony. Later
writers have generally followed the law as
laid down by Lord Hale, and many decisions
have been rounded upon that authorlty-the
writer's and Judges seeming contented with
bis reasons, are indisposed to depart from the
principles laid down by him. but 1 confess the
reasons are not very satisfactory to my mind.
l have never been able yet to discover any
sound reason why he who originates the
plan of murder. but employs another
perpetrafe the crime, is not equally guilty
with the perpetrator Oft. If I, actuated by the
malice of depraved and wicked heart, con-
ceiyed the purpose OF numbering him whom
suppose to be my enemy, but. lacking the on
portunity or the courage to carry ms pnrpose
into execution, hire AT other person who wIltul-
~ executes my wicked design for me, common
sense and the common conscience of mankind,
which, after all, seldom fail to direct us to the
true principles OF the law (Which has been de-
fined to be the perfection OF reason or common
seDse) would seem 10 dictate that ! cannot be
less guilty than the agent whom l had en-
ployed. upon the well known principle Of law
that he who does an act by another does it by
hlmself-a principle which has been recos-
ntZed by the Supreme Court OF the United
STATES IN the case of Gooding VS.. the United
states, 18th Wheaton, page 460-as applicable
to criminal as well as civil cases-a principle
recognized in more ancient And higher au hor-
ity than even the Supreme Court OF the United
States, or than Lord Hale or any other writer
npon the law, to which we are accustomed to
look tor principle and precedent>.
There are Two cases which now occur to me,
probably Others mig ht be found.l reported in
that book of highest authority known among
Christian nations, decided by "A Judge from
whose decision there can be no appeal, and be.
fore whose solemn tribunal all judges and lu-
rors Will. IN the great day, have their yerdictS
and judgments passed in revIew. Man can
Lot make better la w than q cd. nor can he bet
ter tXponnd administer the law One OF
these cases is hat Of Naboth and Ahab, con-
tanned IN the 2ist chapter of the 1st Book of
hlIgs Nahoth, the JeZrulite. was the owner
OF n vineyard hard by the palace of Allah
King OF Samaria. which had excited the Gu
ploity OF the latter. who offered to purchase /.
with money or TO give in exchange forit au,th-
er vineyard. but ahoth was ua willing to part
with it because 1t was tRa Inheritance of his
faihers. Ih.s exei'ed the wrath and dis.
pleasure OF King Ahah and his = ueen JeZebel.
Who coDsplred together to effect the death of
Naboh. and they succeeded by having wit
nesses suborned to swear against him rs
hlasphemer that he mi ght be stoned
10 csath by the elders and the mobiles OF
his city. The plan was laid by Iezebe:
the motive TO The murder was Ahab's Gu Dud,ty
ard he lent his wife his sfgnet ring with winch
10 seal The letters which she sent to the elders
and mobiles whom she employed as the agents
u coDsumma'e The wicked plot. Two sons OF
Beilal, we are told, were the pe rjured witness
IS who proved the biasphemy on Naboth, and
thus effected his death. Ahab, profting by the
crime, took possession OF the VINEYARD of Ma
both: but the word Of the Lord came to Elisha
the Fishbite. saying, :'Arise. go down to Ahab
Is IN the vineyard OF Naboth. whittier he has
gone down to possess ii; and thou shall speak
unto hlm saying, 'Thus saith the Lord, Hast
thon killed and also taken possession p In
the place whore dogs licked the blood OF Ma.
both shall dogs lick thy blood. even there
and II came to pass that dogs licked up the
DlCOu 81 anaD according the ludkment
which God had decreed against him"
The other case to which have alluded Is
that of David ana uriah, recorded in the Ii til
chapter OF I'd Samuel Uriah, a subject OF
King David, was brave and gallant soldier
IN The army of Joab which was engaged IN
war with the Amorites. His wife, Eathsheba
was comely in person and very beautiful TO
look upon. and King David coveted her In
order TO effect his wicked purpose, he sent
letter 20 Joa0 his chief captain, even by the
hand OF Uriah himself saying, "Se, ye Uriah
In The tore front OF the hottest battle and re-
Turn ye from him that he may be smit,eu and
die" Joab obeyed the behest OF his king. and
Iriah the Hltute was slain. But the Lord
sent his prophet Nathan unto David, saying
"Ihou art the man W no did this evil tnIng
Thou hast killed Uriah the Hitute with thu
sword. and hast slain him with til. sword of
the children Of Ammon.' This Judgment OF
the Lord was not that David was accessory to
this murder. but was guilty as the princinaI
because he procured the murder TO be done
1t was judgment to the effect that he who
Goes an act by another does it himself whether
IL be civil o. criminal act.
TIE counsel Ior the prisoner at the bar IN
TINS case END that he was not in the city
OF washington or near enough TO the scene OF
the murder TO have taken par. i'll il by render
Ing material aid TO Booth. the actual as jas in
who fred the tatai shot: and that the evidence
aaGnctd on the part Of the Government, as
" ell as that Of the defense shows sucn IN ha ve
heen the tact. This is what il termed in the
law an olibi; the latin word for else where.
his Is line e. defense always held In little
AoN'i ny 'Ae coui'S ana JuTieS not only be.
cause II is one which common sense teaches us
may be most easily supported by perjury but
because II is one involving identity OF time as
10 which mistakes are verv easily made 90
that II Is ny no means djfiiC uit to supDDrt This
pea rec uentiy (and especially after the lapse
OF months or years. by the testimony OF onest
and faithful Witnesses, who on account OF
the great Liability OF the human mind pariicu-
larly when Influenced by the promptines of
pity Or sympathy, 10 be mistaken as the pre-
cise time in reference either to days or
hours. The past history OF crime teaches
us that in the days of notorious public
oepredalcns upon society IL was very
common device to gallop upon fleet horses
straight across the country, and by appearing
before credible Witnesses shortly after the COM
mission OF robbery OF other crime, 10 obtain
the testimony OF such Witnesses, and thus
secure an acquittal by an aliIi We have an
merry in respect to The identity OF time,
under the promptings of pity or friendship.
or sy mpathy, in the case OF the Common wealth
OF Massachusetts against Webster for the
killing OF Dr.. Parkman, some eighteen wears
ago, III which several witnesses OF res pecta-
hlt'y swore so positively, and yet so honestly,
t. facts, placing il beyond The pale OF possibility
that Doctor Webster could have been present
a. the scene OF the murder; that the general
81 nse Of the comm unity seemed in doubt as to
whether Lltleneld, an important witness for
the prosecution, was not in fact the real mur
deIer OF Parkman, and yet, af.er the verdict of
he jury had been rendered and the sentence OF
law pronounced against the prisoner, w ebster
who knew better than any other mortal made
full confession OF his guilt. II IL were true
that hard rulings across the country in
oden times furnished facilities for criminals
to establish the defense Of an alibi how
much greater facilities for that pnrposa