Delaware tribune. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1867-1877, 1874-11-26
mistook nghs clothes for = man


mot Taylor. Aacksy got up on that wing '
and belng drunk and lame, and the Wing '
bsing In bad condition 1t was . natural lni
encs that he fell into the creek. Nathan q
20 heard splash. Do NOT think II II n
drowning Of dog and IL was but . cas-,
thought He has failed 70 put the splash In
right place. l think he saw the man on the v,
wall before he heard the splash. The State Y
ssa yon that Taylor "a OF ths wing val. By
be could stand and look into the fsoe Of drow
ing man. He would have been AFRAID Of q
upturned face. II would have made him 90
ard.
Mrs.. Taylor said he watched her. Thsn
would not have had the daring to stand the
and throw Mackcy into the stream. Ii It pos
bic to suppose that In the face Of all this ,,
can entertain such an opinion The State %
b. looked 1t her and that 10 why I say that II
lor did not throw this man over. Night was .
preaching, he could afford to wait. :
Taylor drove on without Mackey says q
state; but u be therefore murderer H. th
man had tho cowardce to leave luis friend, q
you convict him Of murder He drove OF b.
cause b. was full Of rum. Would hs not ha,
stayed II he had been sober ? DRUM enness
worse than insanity.
Would guilty man remain IN the vicinity {
the crime for days after, trading horses an
pitching quoits2 Gould he have done o. th
State supposes, he would have been the wor,
villain in the world. II Taylor had ssnss OF tn
memory Of the death Of Mackey he drank /
drown that memory. Now II he had been smu,
derer, would hU have stayed around the seen
OF the murder? Had he been q murderer b
would have sold the team aud lied.
Again, Taylor always gives his right name
II that tho conduct Of murderer But they 90
no had OH Mackey's GOAT. What In more natur
a Mackeys cost is in the wagon; Taylor is Ii
his shirt sleeves drunk. putting OH the first Goa
nc got In the wagon, would he not have throw
that coat away II he had been murderer Nov
BY what means does the State infer that Tavlo
y murderer because he wore Mackey's coat
The strongest proof would be of his guilt Of hi,
not wearing It. Look at tho similarity Of thes.
costa with false pockets, see how easy 1t woulc
be Tor Taylor, being drunk to get the wronf
Referring to the flight of Taylor to Ohio, Mr.
Whiteley attributed this TO lack Of courage Il
give the alarm, and argued from tho prisoner
Willingness to give him elf up TO his innocence
A. for Hemmilrs statement Of the confession
he thought that Mr. H. was influenced more by
the reward than the interest in the dead man.
VI the Coroners inquest he spoke In strong
terms, criticisng the removal Of the scalp II
ascertain whether the man was dro sned, saying
they should have examined the lungs and stom-
acli. IL the State proves that ssAiackey came to
hls death in any other way than by drowning
man thu ows . dead body in the creek.
Mr.. Whitley concluded by reference TO the
lack Of motive for MURDER there bainR no en-
mites. no debts, Ard asserting that drunken
ness had great deal tn do with the case.
the legal facts Of the case and especially ss to
the fact that the corpus deficit was not proved,
and then proceeded to read the testimony Of the
coroner and Of tho doctors who made the exam
inAtOn. :.
He then read the Indictment, alleging the
murder to be by drowning, aud argued that 1t
was necessary to prove tho alleg stion conclu-
sively. He claimed that an examination OF the
lungs and stomach should have been made, N
then It might have appeared how Mackey died,
but that no examination OF the scalp or skull
could ss by any manner OF means in.
drowned. The State could not
presume man was drowned simply because he
was found in the water. lie might have died Of
apoplexy he might have died OF heart disease
he might have been murdered and thrown into
that stream. We have no proof when, where,
and how that body was first found. 1t is said
by stage driver. but no one knows his name
no one can tell who he is. He WAS not called BY
the State. II that man died in any other way
than is alleged in the indictment, this man Tay-
Tor must be acquitted ask this Court to charge
the jury that the o'pus deiscti liz not sufficiently
proved to warrant conviction.
MI. BayArd then argued at some length the
failure OF the State to make out the proof Of
guilt, the onus being upon them, and ked the
must BIO proven by consistent facts lIe then
read from Wharton on confessions and argued
That confession in = capital case is y very
doubtful species OF evidence, to be received
with great caution, citing cases to prove his po-
sition. A hasty confession made to persons not
authorized to receive them il the weakest kind
d proof. The court WAS therefore, asked to in
struct the jury that every accused man ia 10 be
presumed innocent until found guilty, and that
the benefit OF every reasonable doubt should be
given to the prisoner.
Mr.. Bayard then began to address the Jury,
ienying the presence OF direct evidence Of the
of the murder as charged, and a.
'erting TINT wherever chain Of testimony il
sought To be wrought OF facts, remotely connect
I'd. with the fact they are intended when 30
United to prove, the strength Of that chain is
'quAl only to the strength Of its weakest part. II
'ou forge facts strong in themselves with weak
act that chains strength Of that weak fact. II
me gives away they all give away. When the
state allege cruel murder Of Robert A. Mackey
hey are bound to prove murder. You have
Nothing before you but the presumption. You
ave no means OF knowing the manner in which
dackey died. He may have died Of apoplexy or
'een poisoned. Nobody knows how or when he
,ot into the creek. There is just az much proof
70 took the path the jury did and walked to
where he WAS found ~ that he WAS thown In.
Mr.. Bsyard then analysed the testimony Of
he Farrslls, stating his belief in their honesty
mt claiming the impossblity Of their being wit
less to the facts sworn to. He also asserted tue
mpossibility OF distinguishing the clothing Of
he men at the distance they were OF.
The confessions" were then referred to, and |
heir irrreconcilabllity with the circumstances |
. assured by the defence sought to be shown, |
tanning the unnaturalness OF the hypothe- |
is Of the case NJ made out by the State that
murderer would add witnesses against himself. |
Ar. Hammill he pronounces the blood hound in
he case, aud asserted the impossibility Of TGy-
Or making confession to him, neither SHEER
ns Rowe or Armstrong heard snch statement.
The plea OF drunkenness was enforced by the
Mistake III the selection OF the Goats, and the
onclusion sought to be established that there.
ore the prisoner WAS ignorant Of Mackeys
eath When he came to his senses he found
e was guilty OF something, and what was it
breach Of trust. He should respond In dam
yes and there his liabilities end.
The flight to Ohio was construed into ali effort |
o get work to obtain al honest livelihood, and
he demeanor OF the prisoner out there was not |
hat Of . guilty man. He did not know or care
that was the cause Of his arrest. He could
ave escaped arrest easily II he would.
Mr.. Bayard concluded II there il error in
our verdict you take life you cannot restore.
hat is why the law throws round the accused
very shield. have felt it my duty not to leave
his case, while any dc" BIT rested, in your minds.
think you feel what feel on this subject. II
GU do not feel this mans innocense now as we'll
u do, no words Of mino now can make You
eel it.
The closing speech was made by Attorney
ieneral Pennington, who first stated the manner
q which the prisoner stands indicted and con-
lnued 1t is proper for me to ray that under
his indictment he may be convicted of murder
4 the first degree, or he may be acquitted AZ he
lands indicted aud convicted Of murder Of the
econd degree, or he may not be convicted Of
murder of either degree, but Of man slaughter.
,ut il you should be satisfied, after . careful
nd fnll consideration Of all the evidence and
pplying it to the law ~ shall give 1t to you,
hat 1t liz not proven sufficiently and beyond .
easonable doubt that lie is guilty Of murder OF
ither degreee or Of man slaughter. your verdict
hould be one Of acquital these being the only
fences for which lie can be convicted under
his Indictment
The case, gentlemen, is of great importance,
y we'll to the community NJ to the prisoner Ut
lie bar. The object of the criminal law il not
merely to punish those who violate it, but for the
Of society. Its pains and penalties are
therefore, held out to others, Is beaeons Of warn
ng to deter them from the commission OF like |
,fenses. 1t is Of course important to the pris-
'ner 81 the bar because his life ia involved in
md hangs upon its issue. You hear the evil |
lenoe ~ given to you by the witnesses, and l |
hall endeavor to give you the law applicable to |
he case, clearly and ~ briefly ~ / am able, |
md it will then be your duty to apply it to the
violence, and upon the law as you will hear it
rom the Court and evidence a. given to |
'ou by the witnesses, and otherwise.
md thus determine the guilt or innocence OF the
prisoner ut the bar without considering what |
nay be the consequence to him. your duty being |
simply to find the fact Of guilt or innocence.
The Attorney General then re stated the evil
ience, tracing the journey Of the two men from
heir meeting vt Newark to the arrest of the |
prisoner In Ohio and continued Gentleman, |
nave not repeated all the evidence, and If