Year: 1872




the Prosecution-The Charge or the
Judge.


Yesterday was the twentieth, and, unless the
jury should be unusually long out, evidently the
last day Of this, in many respects, extraordinary
trial. Mr.. Tremain one Of the counsel for the de-
fence, in speech of great length, developed fully
the claims OF the Defence which were In substance
that the prisoners mind had been somewhat un-
hinged by the persistent attacks and pursuit OF Mr.
Fisk; that the meeting of Fisk and Stokes was en-
tirely unprecedented; that the shots were fired
under the impression at least that Fisk was on the
point ofshooting; that at worst there intent
to kill and the death the day 1t occurred was the
result of Drs. Trpler and Fishers ignorant admins
tration Of excessive amounts OF morphia


EXPLANATION OF COUNSEL.


When Judge Ingraham took his seat on the bench
Mr.. Tremaln rose and said that Dr. Sayre had
visited him and explained that he (Dr. Sayre) had
not attended the caucus Of doctors and had not
expressed approval of the course OF treatment but
had, at eleven O'Clock, ordered it to be dscon-
tinued He believed that was the evidence, and he
desired to do no wrong to DR.. Sayre


DISTRICT ATTORNEY GARvIN's ADDRESS TO THE JURY.
District Attorney Garvin, resuming his summary
Of the previous day. proceeded to address the Jury.
He was listened to with the deepest attention by
all in that crowded court room, and his denuncia-
tions, his admission Of points in the defence and
his able presentation Of the strong points In the
prosecution, went home to the hearts Of ALL most OF
whom, from daily attendance, were as familiar
with all the strong and weak points of the as
he cou Id possibly be.


District Attorney Garvtn, in opening, again called
the attention OF the jury to the responsibility
der which they there acted-they represented the
whole people of the city and State of New York
to the impossibility of arriving, with our present
aono af nh truth tha ifv of
lying on the evidence. On that the jury must de-
eide. The wisdom of humanity had decreed that
when wilfully kills another his blood should
pay fer 1t. II man intended to kill that was the
premeditaton meant by law. They must Judge by
the acts done what the intent was. Take the case
cases did not know their victims The murderer OF
Mr.. Parks josted against him, passed and turned
no yet the law held Il mSrer So
when Mr.. Rogers was killed on the street without
provocatlon by stranger with sheath knife. There
was the premedtatiOn the law requires There
was clearly murder So with Reynolds, who stabbed
a man simply because he would not let him stay
old Mr. Nathan murders When man died by f the he
hand of another. without provocation and without
any Justification, it was for the prisoner to show it,
The prisoner has


WASHED HIS HANDS IN THE BLOOD OF HIS FELLOW


MAN.


What did it matter what the character Of the man
killed wasa He remembered when, under the intense
u
desired the death Of Abraham Lincoln. 1t would not
do to excuse q killing for mere excitement
President Lincoln in his lifetime. He never
Dreamed that any one would be SO base as to take
tenance OF law. II was for the prisoner to show
any Justification. What was its


He should say nothing ASlrf ON that. second-He said
ne meant to shoot him; he did shoot him and
Fisk died, but had 1t not been for the malpractice
of his doctors he would have lived. Suppose the
Of feeble shot and laying out in the storm
and rain and unable to get home, dropping his life
morning too late to save him, would the murderer
be permitted to say, "Had he been found and
treated skilfny at once he would not have died ?"
Here was stronger case, man shot so that not
one in ten would have recovered with the most
skilfu surgery. Yet because


PARTICULAR SYSTEM


was not adopted they claimed the author OF the
% crime should not be punished for it. Dr. Garyin
cold rsunT 'ne
suit Of the woundtng, rather than from the wound
ITSELF and yet 1t was held murder Life was so
Mr.. Tremain here stated that he had not been fur
nished with these authorities, and he thought he
Mr. carvn had given en- 't the Jury t the
law The application was simple. He hunted q
ns 90 tn What Wnv a the ns s why SS
q position that no skin Could @ ''e cure e. himY n
What was the proof Of death from any other
There was no morphia given after eleven O'Clock.
Was there any dispute that from two TO two and
Was there any dispute that in cases Of this Kind
not one In ten recovered Seventy -four per cent
of wounds in the abdomen were fatal; but this was
more than that-a wound In the small and great
intestines and in the great sympathetic nerve. He
recalled to them the use of prussic acc, of arsenic,
OF brandy In excess under certain conditions. SO
when they found the patient in the condition of Mr..
Fisk what were they to doS There was


TALK ABOUT PROBING


but all agreed 1t safe to probe as far az the WIS.,
cera Didn't Dr. Hammond say the approved remedy
was opium DR.. Buck, sort OF apostle in medf-
s,o.lx IIA
from authorities to the same effect and claimed
that the treatment was perfectly proper and justi
earth who gave any weight to this he bid him long
farewell. There was neither sense nor reason in 1t.
AS to the other defence, that Mr.. Fisk


HAD PISTOL IN HIS HAND.


II 1t were not true then his defence was gone. The
only testimony to that effect was by the prisoner
nected with these two men, one OF whom she had
brought to DEATH. the other to this peril. This
whted sepulchre, full OF rottenness and dead mems
bones what should be said OF herr Counsel for
the defence had quoted Knox on the gambler. A
greater than Knox had said. "Delver pe from the
strange woman


HER FEET GO DOWN TO DEATH,


her steps take hold on hell"


based their case, and on that Of her sister of the
same kind. II there was anything corrupt any
= thing 70 tSe @ Of ss and
her sister Who showed that FISK carried
she lived, and when tired Of him took up with
Stokes and now came on the stand to testify In his
favor.


COUNSEL APPEALED TO THE JURY.
he called on them az religious men, as honest
OF her testimony: to believe none OF It, Who proved
that men followed this MANI No one proves that
Fisk sent them. He called on counsel to say who
proved that Fisk sent them.


THE INSANITY DODGE
and the selfdefence theory failed. They were to
Judge on the evidence; give more weight to the
evidence of the prisoner than to any other witness
Weigh 1t by the evidence OF others. They must not
evade their duty any more than the soldiers who |
marched through Baltimore. They must walk the |
thorny path Of duty throughout and exclam "Duty |
before all though, like the soldiers Of the Union,
death was in their path.
Did the deceased


HAVE A PISTOL,
as the prisoner swears he did They had called all
the people up stairs, and they didn't the pistol.