New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-12-01
THE MURDER NINA.

The Richmond assassination is provoking a
wide discussion. All manner of issues are
brought in, and efforts are constantly made
to blacken the memory of the dead, and
exalt tho proves Of his destroyer. But
there can be no explanation, and no de-
Tense. 1t was literally an assassination.
Shooting at an enemy from window, like
lurking for him, stiletto in hand, around the
corner, has been common enough in past cen
tures and in other cOuntries-there is. unfor-
tunately, no lack Of such skulking homcides
in history-but killing Of this kind. in which
the victim Is not allowed the least chance of
his life, proves, however luxurantly cbiyalry
may once have hourished in Richmond, that it
bears but starved and stinted life in the
present state of Virginian civilization. Such
crime, it is well to remember, is totally dis
tinct one. About some other murders there
may be merely pretense of fair play,
but Mt any rate there is n pretense the laws
of the duel profess at least, to put the COM
batants upon an equal level of danger or of
safety; and when q foe is to be attacked upon
the public street warning is usually, in some
way, either direct or indirect, communicated
to him. In the case under consideration, Mr..
Grant aggrieved by paragraph relating to
his family affairs published by Mr.. Pollard in
his newspaper, posts himself at the upper
window of building, and shoots Mr.. Pollard
dead as he is passing upon his lawful occu-
pations. This is mere murder 1t would not
have been more purely such if Mr.. Grant had
sought Mr.. Pollard's chamber at midnight and
taken him off rs he slept. Firing from win
dow makes duel, by comparison, seem actu-
ally virtuous and street assault respectable.
Now, murders are committed everywhere, and
probably will be committed so long as human
nature remains in "a generally unregenerate
condition; but the popularity of this Richmond
felony is that the culprit, after his slaughterous
work is over makes no attempt either to con-
ceal himself or to abscond. He was afraid of
Mr.. Pollard, but not at all of the public, and
not Overmuch, as it would appear, of the police.
He probably has but slight apprehension that
any jury of the vicinage will be inexorably
severe. His greatest danger is that after he
has been duly indicted arraigned tried, and
acquitted some member of the Pollard family
may feel it TO be a sacred duty to shoot him.
There are, 10 doubt, hundreds of men in Rich
mond who viii not simply extenuate but plainly
justify this deed. How much better is the con-
dition of the public conscience, thus indicated
than that which existed in Corsica when it was
not unusual there for the avenger of family
wrong to tear out the heart of his victim and
to devour it rawf
The third murder of the past week occurred
in Philadelphia. and if we accept the verdict of
the coroners jury, and that of the public, the
vctim-an old lady named Hill-was brutally
killed by her son-in-law with the knowledge
of her daughter his wife. These people lived
in respectable part of the city; they were
wealthy, and George Twitchell, the supposed
murderer, was young man of good reputa-
ton. Mrs. Hill had money, aud her children
were tired of waiting for her death to get
possession of it, The evidence shows that the
old lady was beaten fearfully with poker,
(afterward found clotted with blood and hair),
and then thrown from the window into the
yard where her body was discovered, on Sun
day evening, by the servant girl, who had re-
turned from church. From till o'clock p. M,
the victim and the murderers were alone in the
house, and when Twitchell was asked to account
for the death, he could only say that he sup
posed Mrs. Hill had thrown herself out OF the
Windows theory insufficient to account for
her wounds, the blood in the room, aud that
which stained his clothes. Here is 0 crime