The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1895-03-06
CAN MURDEREgs IKaEBIrl
An Interesting Case Originates from JHni-
alta County Crime.

An Intsrest;ng Case Originates from Juni
alta County Crime.
| A curious and novel law case was ar
gued before an auditor at Mifliintown on
Saturday, being an echo of the famous
! Carpenter murder trial Of about 4 year
ago. II Will be remembered that James
| !. Carpenter, n blind man living at Port
Royal, Juniata county, was found brutal
| ly murdered and his body thrown into
! the Tuscarora creek, in December, 1873.
His son, James B. Carpenter, and his
wife, Hettie Carpenter, were suspected of
and arrested for the crime. \ blood
stained butcher knife aud heavy hickory
bludgeon, which now hang ON the walls
of the district attorneys Office, We're
found To have been the instruments used
in the horrible crime.
Within two months such n web of cir
/ cumstantial evidence was woven about
the wife and son that the conviction of
both seemed probable, but out of feel
ing of mercy, the wife was left OFF with a
plea of accessory after the fact" while
the son was convicted of murder in the
| first degree and has been hanged, the
mother at present undergoing imprison-
ment in the penitentiary.
For the purpose Of their defense the
woman and her son transferred the prop
| erty of their victim to their lawyers as
compensation for their services in defend
| ing them. In the distribution of the es-
tate, however, the point has been raised
for the first time in this commonwealth,
thSt the heir who commits murder can
not inherit from the murdered ancestor.
The question came up before George
Parker, member Of the Juniata county
bar, sitting as auditor, TO distribute the
estate among the claimants. EX-JGdge
Joseph c. Bucher, who was senior coun-
sci for the defense at the murder trial,
claimed tine estate for the attorneys, to
whom it had been transferred. and ex-
Attorney General w. L. Hensel appeared
on behalf of the collateral heirs, some Of
whom live in Lancaster county, and 9TH
ers are scattered throughout the west.
During the progress of the argument it
" - dAlllllAttiA 10 GtttAl~t=l INfsAfNttakitiE
the respective parties to the controversy
that tie question was one which had new
er arisen in Pennsylvania, and which
probably had never been anticipated by
its lawmakers. 1t was likewise agreed
that the law should be that the parricide
could not take the estate of the murdered
father and that the wife should not take
any portion of the estate of the husband
whom she helped TO murder. But it was
coutended 10y Judge Bucher that, in the
present state Of the law, its literal con-
struction demanded that the estate should
be distributed under the intestate laws,
without regard TO the circumstances Of
the death of the decedent.
For the other side Mr.. Hensel cited the
famous ease Of Mrs. MaybricA, in Eng
land, against whom the court Of Qleen's
bench decided that she was not entitled
to the insurance money on her husband,
because she had produced his death by
poisoning; also. the ease of Riggs against
Palmer, in New York. in which a major
ity of the court held that a person could
not take by inheritance the estate of the
person whom he murders for the purpose
of removing the life that stands between
him and the estate. This case has also
been followed originally by the Nebraska
supreme court in a case occurring in that
commonwealth. \ cr1r; in Ontario,
Canada, had likewise held the same.
on the other hand, Judge Bucher
I - 4.
it had been held thai the murder by a
wife OF her husband did not defeat her
right Of dover; in Ohio son was allowed
To take the estate OF his fltheT, whom he
murdered and in the Nebraska case the
supreme court heard 4 re argument and,
after three years, reversed its former
opinion and abandoned the doctrine laid
down in England and in the New York
court.
In reply Mr.. Henscl contended that the
first Nebraska decision was entitled To a.
much weight as the second: and that in
the Armstrong ease in the United States
supreme court, the doctrine or rational
Interpretation had prevailed to establish
the principle that, notwithstanding the
letter of contract or statute. an heir for
feited all rights when, To secGre the in
beritancc, he murdered the ancestor.
II j. expected that the auditor viii make
his report within few weeks and that,
if the parties 80 determine. the ease will
reach the supreme court in May. where
its argument and decision viii lie awaited
with much interest, Is involving a point
of Law which must be one Of first impress
sions in Pennsylvania, and upon which
the courts of other states and countries
have thus far been divided.