Year: 1859

him the Wednesday before he was shot; saw him go


into the house on Fifteenth street.


Mr.. Carlisle objected to testimony as to this


house until the Court ruled on that point; they


were sliding along from one thing to another, but


yet the prosecution could not be blind as to what


1nferences were intended by the other side to be


conveyed to the minds of the jury. He wanted to


know whether the Court would admit on this trial


the introduction of evidence going to show the


previous adultery of the deceased with the prison


ers wife. He desired to have this question settled


IN order that he might know what testimony to


introduce in reference to the same matter, which


now might not be admissible.


Mr.. Brady said Mr.. Sickles was represented by


many counsel and friends this occasion; he for


one would not complain because there were two on
the other side; he would like it better if there were
SIX; he should insist that Mr.. Key was killed in an
act of adultery within the meaning of the law and
that this had been proved by the prosecution. He
offered this testimony first to prove an aduterous
connection carried on between Mr.. Key and Mrs.


Slckles by an agreement between their dating
further back than the hiring of the house, and
hired for that prrpose. Whenever a house was
hired for the express purpose of aduterous inter-
course the man was living in adultery all the time
and 1t was not necessary that the husband should
happen in at the moment of the act to Justify him
IN Staying the aduterer. They had proved the
waving of the handkerchief as signal to lure the
wife from the path of duty, and that at the very
time OF heys death he had on his person the hand
kerchief the banner of adultery and the key of the
house.


In addition they sought to introduce this testi
mony under the head of insanity. If such testimo-
n.y. in the case of Jarboe, could be admitted to ex-
cuse the brother for Staying the seducer of his sis
ter. could not such testimony be admitted to ex-
cuse the husband for Staying the seducer of his wife?
They were prepared to prove by overwhelming
testimony the following facts LIST, that just before
Sickles left his house and home the 9th of Feb
ruary, and shortly before he met Mr. Kew tho
latter had used his handkerchief in front of said


house as signal to Mrs. Sickles, to lure her to


a ~ glIh h.n11g


house before referred to on Fifteenth street for the
purpose OF there having adulterous intercourse:
and that Sickles saw Key use said handkerchief
and knew what was its object; as above stated


"a. !hat hey had hired house on Fifteenth
street. in the City of Washington for the exclusive
purpose of committing adultry therein with Mrs
Sickles, and that the key of said house was fonnd
on the person of the deceased after his death and
trial. '' WHO


3D. That Philip Barton Key, Oh Wednesday the
23d OF February, committed adultery with the wife
OF Mr. Sckles, and at the time he came to his death
he had been and was unawfully and wickedly engag-
ed in causing and procuring the wife of Mr. Sickles
to leave her husbands house and home, in order
that the said Phillip Barton Key might commit
adultery with and upon her in the house on Fif-
teenth streeth rented and occupied by said Key for
that sole purpose. At the time SickIes met Kev
on the 9th Of February, in Madison avenue. and
Just before any shot fired, Key was on his way
to the home and house of Mrs. Sickles with the nm
Iawiql law, and wicked design of causing her to leave
said house and proceed with him t0 tba houso in
Fifteenth street, Koy having the front door kew or
said house IN his possession to be used in procuring
admittance


Then, again, about the use and meaning of the
signals, Keys hiring the house for the 6nrnose
named, Mrs Sickles being in the habit of Going to
the house, and the particular intent of Key on the
DAY In question, of renewing that adultery-tbey
would prove that Sickles, just before leaving that
house On that Sunday had full knowledge of these
IA "a in In h,,l,E &c


using his handkerchief before Sickes' bouse and
home as signal, on perceiving which Mrs Sickles
was to leave said house and join him. and 90 with
MIN to the house in 18th street, and there have
adulterous intercourse with Key, and she had fire.
quently done So which facts had shortly before the
meeting on the 9th of February come to the
knowledge OF Sickes; and Immediately before the
kllilng, Slckles had seen Key his handkerchief
for that purpose.


The jury were allowed to take recess for a few
minutes at this stage in the proceedings


Mr. Carlisle regarded this question as one of ex
ceedlng Importance in the administration of Justice
generally, ana the consequences of this decision
would reach far beyond the present case. The
Court was now asked to inaugurate a new era in
the trlal OF cases OF homicide, and instead of follow
ing the antiques bias the counsel now seek to have
tne Court pursue devious and untrodden paths
lie had already had occasion to express the views
OF the law which were maintained by the nrosacu
cutlon, and he wished to hear the ARGUMENTS nv
which the learned counsel would undertake to
satlsiy the Court that the plain rule laid down
IN all the old law books is not the ruIa in tbis
case. 1t was elementary proposition that to
reduce the offence of homicide from murder To
manslaughter, because of an act of adultery bv the
deceased with the prisoners wife, that the adulter
er must be an actual and not an imagined adulterer
NOT one believed or proved, but one seen by the
husband In the act, and that the killing must he
and that the killing even under that
provocaton, ii done afterwards and not ON the in
slant, is revenge and is murder


Mr.. c. again turned to the case in Iredall which
was quoted yesterday State Johns and read the
decision OF Justice Battle on that case The same
principle is laid down in all English and American
authorities, and he quoted a passage from Wharton
on nomlcde, page l19, where it is said that how
ever great the provocation may have BEEN if there
is time for the passion to subsde and for reason 70
lnterpose, twill be murder. He also quoted the
case OF the Queen Fisher in Sth Darlington and
Payne, 1S2. This was a case where an nnnotnroi
crime had been committed, and it was so shocking
that he would not comment on it, unless he shonld
De compelled to do so by the course pursued on the
other side. " VIZ


Mr. Graham, observation-disclosures was only .
verdict OF manslaughter in that case"


Mr. Carlise.-l have read the case and whom 7
read case, hope am able to discover the resnlt
OF that case lie proceeded to give the reasons whv
the Verdlct was rendered of manslaurhter and
malice than that. s'"'0h


The facts of that case showed that there was y
Scuine, ana the witnesses did not the beginning
VI
case and in that Of Jarboe would stand on tntoe IN
ma reasonable doubt of the prisoners guilt NV
friends on the other side are mistaken as to the de-
cison In the case of Jarboe, and if they rely on
Lhat case i0r Jury IN this court to set free viola
tor OF the law and open the gates of society to yio
lence, they are again, think, mistaken. The case
was yet to come, for sworn jury here denyinp the
Obligations of the law and of their oaths Welding
10 impulses however good, or however bad in releas
ing prisoner upon whom the law has set the seal of
death. As an humble member of this community.
one whose bones might rest here and whose child
ren's children might rest beside him-he would de-
piore the day when such doctrine should be pro-
claimed with all the authority that BELONGS to the
Jury box In the case that he had read thourh the
verdict was mans!aughter, the charge of the iudpe
was that the circumstances did not reduce the
crime to manslaughter and he read it for that pur-
pose. Besides that, there was a scuffie and no
1ne witnessed the beginning of it. In the case of
Jarboe, it appeared that the sister, Young and
innocent girl, of scarcely sixteen, was seduced
months, was preyed on by the Circumstance.
He fancied while at his work that he saw persons
in the AIR grinning scOrnfully at him. When
walking IN the street with his sister, then far ad.
Vanced IN pregnancy, he met the seducer who on
being asked what he intended to do, returned an
answer insulting to the sisters condition In amo-
nent OF fury he slew the seducer, who it further
appeared, at the moment of falling dropped pistol
rom his hand, with which he had armed himself
IN expectation of an attack. There was also reason
TO believe that the seducer designed making the |
attack, and the jury properly gave the prisoner the
benefit OF the doubt. In the case of Johns already
although the belief was in the prisoners
mind that adultery with his wife was actually |
going on at the time he rushed into the house and
KILLED the man, the ruling was against the prisoner
No answer has been given to the authority in that
case except one to which he would not reply.


Mr.. Carlisle next referred to the case of the
Queen Us. Kelley, in I'd Darlington and Kirwan,
page Sl4 in which it is held that it is no iustiica
ton to take away the life of wife, even upon the
strongest suspicion of adultery.


Mr.. Graham.-"Thats the case of soldier who |
killed bis mistress on a mere Suspicion -


Mr.. Carlisle.-1 know it is The facts are not |
parallel only read it to show the law on the |
SUBJECT That was modern case, long after the
ue OF the benefit of the clergy. Now, the gentlemen
IN the other side say that there was no reason in
his thing IN requiring the husband to see the dis
susting act ITSELF and they ask, must man be de-
Ned all favor because he has acted without behold
ng the very act of shame? We say that this
s question of law and not of feeling, and vary
wise and upright judges have sustained our view
Painful and disgusting as the law may be- unhap-
oily it must be submitted to. The counsel for the
leence propose to show that this adultery was 90
ng on, and that although the eve o. the husband
vas saved the spectacle, his minds eve saw it. and
hat proof was forced on him till he could not doubt
IS correctness. He had watched the course OF
,uilt with a curious and cautious eve, and with A
elaboration inconsistent with mind inlamed bv
ealousy. In his opinion this did not come within !
he meaning of the law, which requires that the
'arties shall be caught in the criminal act If it
lid, man who knew his wife to be living in a