, 1870-05-12
THURSDAY, MAY e. 1870
STANDARDIZATION,

THURSDAY, NAY 1e7 1870
+ R1CHARDsoH-MFARLAND.
In the late trial Of Daniel cFarland for
the murder of A. D. Richardson, the de-
farnca had two theories - Ei1st1 Ei1st1 that Rich
ardson had seducsd McFaIlands. wife, and;
therefore, deserved death at the hands Of
the outraged husband and, second, that
Mcfarland WEE diiiiren to insanity by anxiety
and grief, caused by Richardson's S conduct,
aud, therefore was not legally responsible
for killing him. The one theoy:xas meant
to supplement the other fol-, i the sedue.:
ton were proved, it was assumed That TINT
would be enough to drive any mnn to
frenzy and 10 justify the killing; but, II
the seduction were not proved, then it
would be easy to fall back upon the. insani-
H, pure and simple, when the prisoner
could not be held responsible for IN act of
manslaughter: A jurymnn could aceept
either theory. If he .beieved. in
the. seduction, but doubted that
that was sufficient justification
of murder, be could accspt the testimony
of the experts rs 10 insanity and bring in
verdict accordingly; but, if he diabe1ieved
in the seduction, he could believe that s1c-
Farland believed it and, consequently, went
mad, and pronounce him, therefore, not
guilty OF murder. Ingenious as this theory
of the defencs was, it failed In one respect
It failed to provide for that class of minds
who might doubt that the seduction was
proven or that the insanity was proven, and
feel constrained, therefore, under their
oaths, to bring in verdict Of guilty But
there is limit to human capacity-eTen
the capacity Of = Too1nbs lawyer; and, be-
side, Mr., John Graham doubtless felt sure
that he had provided for every possible con-
hngency in the mind Of the average New
York jury1nan- The result has justified
his confidence His client Was acquitted
on the ground Of insanity, sone of the jury,
perhaps: persuaded by experts that he was
mad for the fifteen minutes that it took to
lie in wait for and du Mr. Richardson, and
others tl,:t he ought to have been, under
the provocations which they vere made to
believe by the counsel had existed.
But there is still another jury to whom
the case has now gone, and who, uninfu-
enced by the unscrupulous sophistries
and passionate and abusive advocacy of
counsel, and unt1am1nelled by the partial
rulings and charge Of the Court, have their
verdict to pronounce, which, though it
cannot punish the murderer, viii, at least,
do justice to the memory Of tho dead and
The characters Of the living. The public
viii consider both the theories of the de-
fence, and viii weigh all the evidence in
the case, ali that which was not, as well
as that which was, allowed to be given from
the witness-stand in the Recorders Court
And, first, of this Recorder himself, who
sat m judgment on the case, it is to be no
ticed that he showed the bias of that judg-
ment, five months ago, soon after
Mr.. Richardson's death, in suggest
ing, IN a charge to the grand iury,
that Messra Beecher and Frothingha1n had
1endere3, themselves Enb1e to Indictment
Tor officiating at the death-bed marriage be-
tween Nj. Richardson and Mrs. McFa1-
land !; that he refused to permit Judge Da-
Wis, who had, for the most part, so ably
conducted the prosecution as assistant
counsel to the District Attorney, to sum up
the evidence to the jury; and that, IN his
charge to the jury, hs permitted himse1 to
be instructed by Mr.. Graham, and accept
ed thirty of the fortJ-thzee points which
the counsel had laid down as the law by
which the jury were to be governed.
Among the thousands of Newspaper
comments which vera made at the time Of
Mr.. Richardson's death, Kansa1 journal
remarked that some weight should be given
to the fact that, during his long residence
IN that section Of country, IN state OF 30
ciety provelbially loose, and where incon-.
Thence in men, as well as In women, was held
tobe q very venial fault, if a fault atall, not
a shadow of suspicion rested upon his repu-
tation- Through this long trial Of nearly four
weeks, when the character OF the murdeF-
ed man has been subjected to the severest
ordeal. and when his aecusers certainly
,go11ld. if they could, have proved that he
WIS unscrupnlous in regard to women; thas,
somewhere in his long and ehequered ca
raer- un1estrnined By home ties, e rowing
newspaper correspondent in camps and
among border-ruffians, there had been
some tendency to Ibertinisn, not one
+;.+1a <f a.;dance haa been produced to aus-
tan any such charge. It is simply just to
-.srn,oe IN his case. such weight as belongs
~ n-erions GOOD character, and to accept
~. fsct IN the light Of all the evidence
that has been. or can be, brought to bear
.1,,o,, II TINT he xas q man of more than
ordinary purity Of character Nor was the
defence in the late trial, Notwithstanding
al The vituneratiiou and unscrnpulous and
frantic appeals Of counsel to popular preju-
dice. able to prove that, IN regard to Mrs.
n1cFaIla,,d. he had violated this uniform
-anrta,;on and nile of his life. It was
.ho1r,, tbst Mcfarland himself. had
declared his implicit belief in the
-;rtao Of his wife. Boarding house
keepers and servants were called upon the
.a 1,,,+ ,,pa that one ro1orad hov testi.