Year: 1873

Conclusion OF the Trial OF Peter Terrell
for the Murder OF Gilbert III. Robin
son-ConAIcting Testtmony-The Case
Given TO the Jury-Waitfng for the
Verdict.


In the Court OF Oyer ana Termner at White
Plains, westchester county the trial OF Peter Ter
rel, charged with the murder OF Gilbert II. Robin
son. was resumed yesterday morning. The intense
interest manifested in the case during the two
preceding days was again noticeable in the
crowded court room. large number OF the specta-
tors, who were unable TO End seats, standing pa
tiently until the close OF the trial.


During the evening session Of Wednesday the
defence called large number OF witnesses to the
stand, many OF whom fatly con ntradcted the testi-
mony Of Mary Richardson in many respects Among
other things II was proved that the woman Rich
ardson told neighbor that Terrell did not commit
the murder; but as he had sworn away her charac-
ter, thereby enabling her husband to obtain a
divorce, she intended to have him arrested for the
killing OF Robinson. Her divorced husband testi-
fed that he hau had proof sufficient TO convince
him of the marital infdelity OF his wife with the
prisoner This conviction however, did not possess
his mind until after the murder. Nearly score OF
witnesses gave the prisoner good character as
being temperate, inonensive man, who had
never been arrested or accused or any crime be-
FORE The accused. Terrell who testified in his own
behalf, positively denied every circumstance set
forth in the testimony OF Mary Richardson relating



with the murder. lie emphaticay swore that he
never had soldiers OverC0at In his possession
and at no time wore one. Another witness swore
that he saw man having on soldiers overcoat
cross Mamaoneck Bridge at late hour on the
night oil the murder, but was certain that Terrell
was not the person he saw.


At the opening oil the Court yesterday counsel for
the defence commenced summing up, and In an
address OF about two hours duration thoroughly
sited the testimony, dwelling especially on that OF
the witness Mary Richardson, whose story ne pro-
nounced an Infamous fabrication, based solely upon





ing against her In the divorce suit.


He was followed by District Attorney Briggs
who, during the course OF his remarks presented,
in an able and forcible manner, such concatena-
tion OF damning circumstances against the accused
as TO warrant him in energetically pressing ior o
conviction.


Judge Tappen charged the jury lucldly and at
some length, reminding them that the weight OF
evidence against the prisoner was OF circumstan-
tial nature, and this, for the most part, CON-
posed OF statements made by the accused TO
another party In regard TO the latter the Court
charged that the jury should be careful In accept.
ing such proof of Acknowledgements every
instinct OF the perpetrator of such crime prompts
HIM to secrecy. The charge was regarded by many
In the court room as being decidedly favorable to
the prisoner.


The jury retired shortly after one O'clock and at
fve in the afternoon came into court the prisoner
having been previously brought from the jail, for
the purpose, as was thought by the expectant
auditory, OF hearing his tate Of life or death pro-
nounced. feeling OF relief, however, ensued,
when the foreman arose and informed the Court
that the jury were desrous OF ascertainlng
whether the testimony OF Mrs. Margaret Roselle,
one or the witnesses for the prosecution had been
corrObOrated, and also stated that the jury would
like to hear read the testimony OF Bridget Grogan
Having been satisfied on these points by the Court,
the jury again retired and up TO late hour last
night had not agreed upon verdict. 1t was cur.
rently reported that they stood for conviction
and two for acquittal.