The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1870-04-08
NEW YORK.
The Fourth Day OF the Mcfarland
Trial - Examination of Witnesses
for the Prosecution,

THU - ExanIuuISu OIL "hucsscs
for the Prosecution,
New YORK, April THE real work OF
the Mcfarland trial commenced this
morning, and it was evident from the
deep attention with which the audience
listened to the proceedings the fact was
duly appreciated. The prisoner, how
ever, preserved the same calm composure
that has marked his deneanor since the
beginning of the trial.
AS soon as the jury roll was called,
District Attorney Garvin proceeded to
open the case on the part of the people,
and charged the jury that unless the
prisoner can show he was justified in
his act he was guilty Of murder in the
first degree and such should be the YER
dict.
At the suggestion of the defense, the
District Attorney ordered all the wit
nesses for the prosecution to retire ex'
cept the first one to be called.
The first witness, George NJ. King,
was called for the prosecution. The
examination was began by the District
Attorney.
Witness (King) was employed in the
Tribune counting room; knew Richard
son and Mcfarland. His testimony re-
counted substantially the facts relating
to the shooting of Richardson as have
frequently been given to the public.
Mr. Graham conducted the cross-ex-
animation. A diagram of the publica-
tion office of the Tribune was exhibited
to the witness and he indicated the po-
sitions occupied respectively by him
self and the deceased and the prisoner
at the time the shooting occurred;
could not remember having seen Rich
ardson make any motion that indicated
an intention 10 use a weapon; Richard
sons pistol was afterwards ut the Astor
House; never heard Richardson boast of
his skill with pistol.
The next witness, Daniel Frohman,
recounted the circumstances of the
shooting substantially as known. He
Knew that Richardson was armed; saw
a revolver at the Astor House, after
which Richardson had on his person.;
did not see q pistol in Richardson's
hand at the time of the shooting.
Edwin j. Gamer was the third witness
for the prosecution. He was one of the
Tribune mail clerks, and his evidence
in the main was corroborative of that of
the two previous witnessed.
A recess was then taken.
Upon reassembling, Daniel Watson,
mail clerk of the Tribune office, testified
to hearing a pistol shot, and seeing two
men leave the office; did not see Rich
ardson or Mcfarland.
Capt. Allaire testified to arresting
the prisoner, and to Richardson's iden-
LITIGATION of him as the maa who shot
him.
DR.. Swan gave evidence as to the
character of the wound, its treatment,
and to the death of Richardson.
The question being asked by the de-
tense if the witness was present at the
marriage ceremony, objection was made
by the prosecution. Mr.. Graham, for
the defense, claimed that he had right
to show what excitements the deceased
was subjected TO that necessitated his
death and with which his client had
nothing to do. He would show they
called blasphemous ceremony to their
aid, not for marriage, but that they
might sscnre the property of the dying
man; that desecrating proceeding was
but a elimination of the con-
spiracy organized by the infa-
nous gang who first sowed the
painful seeds that resulted in such a
fearful occurrence. They could show
that Beecher had in his possession a
copy of an intercepted letter which
should have put him on his guard
against acting the part he did. The
prosecution must prove that Richardson
was sent before his Maker by the act of
Mcfarland alone. If Drs. Beecher and
rockingham had done their duty, that
blasphemous marriage ceremony would
never have taken place. Richardson
was unable to determine about taking
that woman for his wife, and they took
advantage of his weakness.
The question was excluded.
DR.. Sayre was called by the prosecu'
ton, but not being in the Court, the
District Attorney said his side rested
the case.
Mr.. Graham argued that the proseeu'
ton had failed to show that the death OF
Richardson was solely caused by the
wound he received at the hands Of the
prisoner. That the Court instructed
the jury that if the prosecution failed
to establish the ayerments in the In
dictment they had failed in an import
emit branch of the case, and that there
fore his client was entitled to acquittal
The Recorder stated that in his opin-
ion there was enough to 90 to the jury.
Mr.. Spencer said he did not anticipate
that the prosecution would close so alb.
ruptly, and had not prepared for open.
ing the case for the defense. The Court
granted him until tomorrow and ad
journed.