The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1870-04-20
THE MCFARLAND TRIAL.
Further Testimony for the Defense
Opinion of the Prisoners Physicians
Letters from Mrs. Sinclair and Mrs.
Calhoun.

Letters from Mrs. Sinclair and Mrs.
Calhoun.
NEW YORK, April l2-The interest on
he seventh day of the Mcfarland case
was unabated 1t is noticeable that the !
number of ladies in the audience increases
laily.
The first, witness examined this fore
noon was Nicholas St. John Green, who |
testifes: He was member of the Boston |
bar; had been for sixteen years; remem- |
Dered having been retained in the proceed |
ings in hobeHS corpus brought by Daniel |
Mcfarland against Albert d. Richardson
the motion before court when he went in
to the case was to punish the father and
mother of Mcfarland for contempt in not
producing the children; remembered hay
ing an interview with Richardson.
The court stated that witness could not
be allowed to state what Richardson said
to him. Mr.. Gerry offered to prove by
witness that Richardsonhad supplied funds
for the litigation. The testimony was rul-
ed out as inadmissable, defence excepting.
Mr.. Gerry asked witness whether he had
received instructions from Richardson in
relation to the case. The testimony was
excepted to. Mr.. Graham argued that the
evidence shows that Mrs. Mcfarland act
ed under the influence eff Richardson, and
that he was the whole cause Of the aliena-
ton of Mrs Mcfarland from her husband,
and that in the prosecution of the suit for
the recovery of his children, Mcfarland
had to fight not his wife but Richardson.
1t was important to the prisoner to prove
the relations existing between his wife and
Richardson, and to show that she was act
ing entirely under his influence. Her
husband thought the recovery Of his chill
dren would be followed by the return of
his wife, whom he still loved, and Richard
son probably Of the same opinion, and
hence his efforts to keep the father from
obtaining possession of his children. This
woman was vibrating between the unholy
love Richardson had enkindled in her bo-
som, and her natural affection for her chill
dren; and were the purse of Richardson
ed to her husband.
The Recorder ruled that the evidence
proposed to be given as inadmissable
Judge Davis said as he understood the
habeaS corpus matter, stipulation was
entered into between the prisoner and his
wife, by which they agreed to separate
each retaining the custody of one child.
The witness, Green, further testified that
at the time he saw Mcfarland in Boston
the prisoner was in his judgement, if not
insane, at least in fair way to become
so.
D. X. Phillips, another member of Bos-
ton bar, was the next witness. He testi-
fed that he had been retained by Mrs.
Mcfarland IN the hdbedS corpus case; saw
the prisoner IN Court at that time; the
judgement of the Court was awarding the
custody of the youngest child to Mrs. Nc
Farland, the latter was dreadfully excited,
subsequently prisoner sought out witness
and insisted upon his hearing the sad story
of his life and his wrongs; Mcfarland was
very much excited, and appeared to be in
very irrational frame of mind; what
particularly seemed to oppress him was
that Richardson intended to marry his
wife; his face bore all the expression of a
manin extreme mental agony; subsequent
ly witness had another conversation with
prisoner of a similar character.
Judge Davis-Did you at any time sug-
gest to the Court during that investigation
| that the prisoner was unfit to have charge
of young children, being crazy man?
Witness stated that he never had, but
| IN reply to further question from counsel
stated that he had made such suggestion
to the senior counsel in the case.
John AWood testified: He was physi-
clan; knew the prisoner well; made his
acquaintance in 1862; knew the prisoners
wife very well saw the prisoner on the
night of the 26.h of November at his of
| fee; he remained about fifteen minutes
he was in a great state of agitation, his
eyes glaring; he said, "Dr., have been
brooming around; 1 have been looking fol-
Richardson; 1 must have my boy" he
said he had the same terrible impulse to
kill himself that he had often before; wit
ness told him he must control that; he
said he was afraid he could not; he gave
the prisoner two grains of morphine, equal
to 200 drops of laudanum; his pulse was
up to 125; prisoner said, Richardson is
going to take my wife away" witness
| formed the impression that Mcfarland S
mind was diseased, and that he was ira
| tional, knew Mcfarland from 1862; hus-
band and wife appeared to be very fond OF
| each other, knew of no difficulty between
| them before 1867; in the summer of 1865
they lived at Mrs. Sinclair's house; wit
ness was the medical attendent of Mrs Sim
! clair's family. Mrs. Mcfarland became
first acquainted with Richardson at re-
ceptlon at Mrs. Sinclair's house in 1865
subsequently saw them atotherreceptionsi at
prisoner was not present on any Of these
occasions saw Mcfarland in 1867 at his
| (witness's) Office; he was much agltated
and said his wife had left him, and there
was no occasion for it; his skin was hot
his pulse wild, and he was very restless
and agltated; his face was flushed on that
occasion; he thought he was under great
excitement, and seemed to be suffering
from congestion of the brain; witness pre-
scribed for him in 1869 he prescribed NOR
phine for him; the prisoner was suffering
from sleeplessness; upon every occasion h'
saw Mcfarland the latter's constant theme
was his wrenes and his family troubles
His pupil was contracted, and that, coupl
ed with his rapid pulse and sleeplessness
Enthusiastically indicated cerebral disease
he took walk with him on one occasion
prisoner threatened to commit suicide; h
said that in his dreams he saw his wife ant
children, and longed to have them; he saV
his wife in the embraces of Richardson; b
dreamed he had Richardson by the throat
witness would not have dared to give hin
a grain of morphine were it not for the alb
normal excitement under which prlsone
was laboring; only IN extreme cases l
morphine administered saw him frequent
ly in the spring of 1869 and November
1869, and during all that time his symp
toms were the same witness and his as
sociate, Dr. Winer, had consultation j
regard to Mcfarland, and formed the opin
ion that prisoner had congestion of tn
, brain, threatening to terminate in soften
ing of the brain and paralysis
To Judge Davis-Was distantly connect
. ed with the prisoner by marriage; whe
, he became acquainted with McFarlanC
, they lived at the corner of Laight an
. Varick streets afterwards lived at Croton
had no recollection of paying any profe'
2 sional visits to the house between 186
! and 1865; they spent the summer of l86
: at Croton subsequently they lived
: Twenty-sixth street, where he was calle
( to attend one of the children; did not a
: tend Mrs Mcfarland at the period of ht
a confinement; they next lived in Thirty
!. sixth street, where he attended Mrs. Mo
Farland; that was in the fall of 1866
McFarland's symptoms became more prt
nounced approaching November ma
could not in his judgment live two weel
n without sleep; McFarland's condition
o the time he was in the habit of calling
d his Office for professional advice clear
; showed his statements in regard to h
= condition were true; during the ent