The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1871-04-19
GkeGtteli4enrer.
THE BLACK McKAIG HOMICIDE.
The Trial of Black at Frederick.
Sixth Day.
FREDERICK, MD., April II.

FREDERICK, BID., April II.
After some preliminaries touching the
admissability Of evidence, the Court pro.
ceeded with
THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE.
Hon. q. G. Darts suorn.-Am a Sena.
tor in Congress from West Virginia; reside
in Piedmont; have known Crawford Black
the prisoner, at Piedmont, eighteen months
10 two years-from the time he came there
Us Superintendent of the franklin Mining
Company; did not know him intimately,
but saw him almost daily; his character
l never heard questioned; Do not know
that ever heard his character discussed.
Hon. Jackson Or Stsorn.-Am member
of Congress from the State Of Iowa, Sixth
District; live at Montana; knew Craw.
ford Black; first became acquainted with
him in the latter part oil 1857, knew OIL
him until early part Of 1850; he was Of
work in general merchandise store there
q was q member Of the firn) for nearly O
year; his reputation for peace and quiet
IS good; never heard any allegations
against him.
At the conclusion Of this testimony,
Mr.. Whitney, referring to the opinion Of
the court, wished to know how far the
opening statement, (by Mr. Seyster) as a
fact, by the defence, should go before the
Jury, since the court had decided that the
fact OF the seduction could not be proved
by the State. He proceeded to say in his
argument, that the State was prepared to
prove that this woman, whom 1t was al.
legged was Seduced by the deceased, was a
prostitute before the war (SEHSdtioH,) and q
common prostitute after the war (SsnS1-
ti0H,) up 10 the time Of her conception,
and therefore unable 10 determine who
was the father OF her child. He wished
10 make IN application, based upon this:
The court having decided that the alleged
seduction Is not q fact at issue in this
cause, We ask that the statements made
by the counsel for the defence in the
opening argument, in regard TO the al
legged seduction, shall not 90 before the
jury, and the court shall so instruct them,
(the jury.)
BIr. Seyster, in reply, said: There has
been great deal said about the opening
statement as evidence before the jury. It
was no evidence before o Maryland court,
and it was folly to so consider it and talk
about 1t.
The court announced as its opinion en-
the question OF instruction, that 1t could
not be called upon 10 instruct the jury be-
yond any legal question presented.
Iaa tfI
Am lawyer; reside in Cumberland; I
married tho cousin Of the prisoner; | had
an interview with Crawford Black; Inever
mentioned his sisters name TO him until
the morning Of the day before the shoot.
ing; the prisoner came to my house that
morning, between nine and ten o'clock;
We then discussed the matter; l told him
what l knew about Il; l told him Of the
letter which was produced In court last
Saturday; ! also told him that his sister
would have 10 come on, and that NcKaig
was the seducer Of his sister; he remained
there sometime, and seemed much agi-
tated; from my house he went 10 Mr.. 10.
mans; l went up In few minutes after,
and there in my presence he read this
letter; he staid there sometime, very much
agitated, and then left Mr.. Romans;
next saw him that afternoon with his
mother; l went down and saw Mrs. Black
about the matter; he was In the room and
overheard the conversation; / asked her
where her daughter was; she burst into
tears, aud afterwards told me where she
was; l told her she must come home; !
asked her II her condition was such that
she could come; she told inc that she had
Ind o child, when 1t was born, and It's
name; the prisoner at the time was ner.
vous, restless and much agltated; he walk.
ed the floor; Mrs. Black was much agi.
tated; Then le(( the house with the pris.
oner and walked with him up 10 my gate,
when 1 lett him; did not see him any
more until the morning Of the shooting,
when l saw him walk up the hill; I walk.
ed after him. (The letter here shown
witness) That Is the letter ! told him
Of, and afterwards saw read to him. (lir.
Ssystsr.-"Read that letter.") The letter
was slowly read by Mr.. Lowndes; utmost
silence and attention In the court room
whilst he was reading Il.
Cro9-Eraminei BY Mr.. WRitney.-Q.
Is there any name TO the letter, Mr.,
LowndesP a. No, sir.
Cross Examination reSlnled-Iflrst saw
him on Sunday at my own house; he call.
ed there: we were speaking in reference
to his fathers case-in reference to pre-.
pairing it; l told him, from information
and opinion, who was the seducer Of his
sister; l told him about this paper, and
what his father had told me; my sources
Of information, upon which l based my
opinion, were from the father, the family,
and outside parties; gave him the names
Of Mr.. VIM McKaig and Judge PeaFre; ]
donot think that my name appears on the
docket as counsel at the October term;
was counsel for his father; It was between
eleven and twelve o'clock when he was
at Romans house; l saw him on the Fri
day morning before, when the jury came
down in the Franklin Coal Companys
case; Black, Mrs. Roman, my wife and
myself were OF Romans house on Sunday;
young Black was reading the letter in an
ante.room Joining the bedroom; then
afterwards read it IN his presence; ! had
never read the letter before, but had heard
of Il; did not call his attention to pencil
marks on It; alter read It I did not
change my opinion as to the seduction; I
do not know Of my own knowledge who
had handed 1t to him, or where It came
!rom-only hear.say; l knew Mr.. McKaig
for three or four years; ! don't know
whether he was man of good education
or not; when I expressed my opinion to
him Black l had not read the letter at all;
had only heard Of it.
William E. HeDSbGD-I live at Franklin
Mines; Black reached the mines either on
Friday evening or Saturday morning be-
fore tie shooting from Cumberland; to ar
rive at Piedmont on Friday evening he
would have 10 leave Cumberland at three
or five.and.a.half o'clock-it depended
uron which mad he ponld tat,e. 7 he'd n.