The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1872-09-11


Oycrs Of poisoning. At the time ui the
first trial, he had no doubt Whichever that
Miss SunncCkC was lrluniUusy killed 10y
prussiC acid, the presence Of which in the
stomach Of the deceased he CmphalCully
asserted. Miss SlinncCkc's family, il M,
pears, never Tor II moment supposed that
she had died other than natural death,
until the examination Of her will revealed
the irritating TACT that she had lett
her money To DIR. SChTppc. Then
they were 1T once convinced that she hal
been poisoned, aud, moreover, that she had
been poisoned by the doctor. Prot. Aiken
is called in TO COnduCta post norton; he
was told to look for poison, and he found
what he looked ltr- Upon his testimony
poor DIR. SChwpc is convicted merely, il
appears 10 us, because u lady saw fiji To
make him her lcgatcc; and il is only by
accident that he was not executed months
ago. Now, upon the second trial, which
nothing but the most unCcaSing importr
nifty OF his friends secured him, comes
Prot. Gcnth, Of the University Of Penn.
sylvauiA, who swcars positively that DR..
Aikens testimony proved nothing at all;
that the analysis did not disclose the
presence Of prussiC acid in the stomach,
and that even the reagents employed hy
DR.. Aiken would Of themselves create the
poison snid 10 have been found. The tcs
lmony Of Prot. GCnth was 81 clear and
positive that the States Attorney did not
venture upon CrOsS-CXaminalinn at all
II WAS evident, after this, that the State
had no case, and those who rcprcsrntc,l
the State, TO their honor he il said, were
the first to acknowledge II. We confess
TINT We hardly remember any tria. like
this in the annals Of criminal iurispru.
dcncc. The first lesson which i, teaches
is the Un,fus;worthintSS oi wha, is usu.
| ally called scientific evidence. \, the
best il + the opinion. and it can have To
more weight than the character rand rcul-
tA'ion pnt standing Of the witness may
imptrt 10 il Where il happens, rs il
does not U!iTCQrcn'ly, that two syicn.
tic men positively contradict each
other, can anything be more cr.m,na'y
absurd than 10 call upon \ perfectly lynn,
rant jury 10 decide between them Dr.
\. says that what he found in certain
stomach was prGS>ic acid: Or. Z is,ri4l
y certain that II was moi; and the iary.
man, knowing noihin: whatever Of Vie
ma'ir", i required to determine. IN a
matter too @! lie aal death, which If
| these learned men IS right The old
/ question j., Who sAnl! decide when doc
TOYS disagree: Twelve men in u BOX.
says one theory OF !Aw-iwp.yg men who
know noiAinso! chemistry, Of polsons. or
even d the relative professional stanliD.
o! the contradictory WITNESSES, aud i,
Is after this loose fashion that We take
! away tie lives 81 human being. IN order
tia. We may make lie safe an! respected.
Il u. SchTppc had been .r.cntluss, as
So many men convicted or mUrdrrarc, Or,
even With all his friends, il he had been
convicted in State in which the cXccu-
| ton oi the law was summary, the iuu,cst
wrong which can be inflicted upon a
human being would have been his ntc.
| Why call law science when il can be
hc.! justly amcnGblr to such an uppro-
b:iUm OF uncertainty? Why boast olthc
precision Of science, when the b!unicrs
d its professors can thus doom Il
wretch 10 stTangulatiOl: "Who shall
decide when doctors dsarrcc?' is AN
old question never yet answered; and we
shall hardly cNtricate ourselves from the
dilemma By referring the matter 10 iuyics
Human iulirmity must be admitted and
allowed for in all legal processes, in
which bIunGcrs always have been made
and will be till the last court adiourns
StHG die. But We commit n crimiua!ly in.
cXCusablc and a shamciuly arrogant
bluntcr, when We put it ont OF our power
10 correct judicial blundcrs and 10 redress
grievances inflicted IN the name 0! the
law. Suppose that all those innocent pcr
sons who have been Capitally executed
by our own courts alone could rise IN to
shake their trembling fingers at misdircct
ing judges and at misguided Jurors, thus
being enabled, by the SPECIAL mercy Of
God, 10 vindcatc their own innocence,
and to demonstrate our judicial falliblity |,
Nothing about Hanging astOnishes us SO
much rs the nonChalanCc with which it
| is inflicted. Under certain circumstances
We put men out Of existence with uualms
as few and as feeble as those which the
necessary slaughter Of vcrmin occasion
However, this has nothing 10 do with the
present question, except as il should in.
tensIiy the caution with which We decide
upon guilt and innocence. II We must
hang, let US At least be sure that We hang
according 10 our own professions and
principles,