Year: 1871

on Monday, and has wholly engrossed public at
eight o'clock in the morning large crowd had
taken up position outside the doors of the Fif-
teenth District Court, waiting to procure admis-
sion, and long before the time for commencing
proceedings, the numbers had increased to
dozen times more than the Court would hold.
AS soon as the doors were opened a rush was
made into the room, and it was instantly
crammed almost to sufocaton. Owing to the
national notoriety that the case has obtained,
several of the leading Eastern journals sent rep
resentatives specially to report the trial. All of
Monday and the greater part of Tuesday was
spent in impannelling jury, and such decided
opinion existed as to the guilt of the prisoner,
that it was with the greatest difficulty the re-
quisite twelve could be obtained. Both sides
freely exercised the right OF challenge, the pros
ecution rejecting all those who had conscen-
tous scruples against capital punishment, and
the defense all those who had been on the
slightest terms of intimacy with the murdered
sional dealings with him.


THE CASE FOR THE PEOPLE.


The opening speech for the people was made
by II. H. Byrne, the District Attorney, and did
not take up more than half an hour. 1t had no
pretensions to oratory, being merely a concise
statement of what it was intended to prove
Witnesses were then called who testified to the
shooting, and when that had been established,
the Surveyor General of the State was examined
to determine the question of jurisdiction. He
defined the boundary lines between San Fran
cisco and Alameda counties, showed that at the
the waters of the former county, and as the de-
Tense admitted the fact, retired without cross
examination.


THE MURDER PREMEDITATED.


On Tuesday and Wednesday the evidence
ELECTED by the prosecution was terribly strong
against the prisoner, and proved almost conclu-
svely that the murder was deliberately premed-
itated. The first witness on this point was Mrs
L. P Sanchey a married daughter of the late Mr.
Crittenden. She testified that in November
1869 Mrs. Fair came to her fathers house be-
tween twelve and two o'clock at night and de-
manded to see Mr.. Crittenden, and that when he
refused an interview, Mrs. Fair threatened that
unless she was admitted there would be blood
shed. Her evidence was followed by that of an
upholster named Volburgh with whom the pris-
oner had had various business dealings. He
proved that month before the tragedy while
speaking to him of the anticipated return of Mrs.
Crittenden from the Eastern States, Mrs. Fair
oo;d Of !
ing by us three herself, Mrs. Crittenden and
Mr.. Crittenden. Next gunsmith proved that
the prisoner purchased pistol from him only
few days before the fatal Sd of November, and to
complete the link in the chain Showing malice
aforethought) the hack driver who took her
down to the Oakland boat on the night of the
assassination, testified that she engaged him on
the day previous-making altogether one of the
most remarkable instances of crime being
traced from its mental inception to the verge Of
its commission that the criminal annals of this
or any other State have yet furnished.


THE DEFENsE-A NEW KIND OF INSANITY.


The defense commenced yesterday afternoon
and of course was that of insanity. Insanity is
now the recognized plea when from the clear
ness of the evidence it is impossible to disprove
the fact of murder. Mrs. Fairs insanity ac-
cording to her counsel, is of a very peculiar
kind. Her lawyers call it menstrual insanity,
and are trying to make the jury believe that it
is an abnormal accompaniment of their clients
menstrual periods. Once month they say


"Ten thousand shapes of fury whirl through her brain


And reason is no morc,'


ap1 hot IN n
murdered Crittenden. Puerperal insanity has
long oeen admitted as a good defense-a legal
friend tells me that case of murder in which that
plea will be made is to be tried in our own
Courts next week, the prisoner being an Indian
woman who cut off her child head few days
after its brth-but the defense of menstrual in
sanity, although not quite new point in medi.
cal jurisprudence, is so uncommon, that the ev-
idence to sustain it will be read with the deep
est interest.


THE RELATIONS BETWEEN TUE VICTIM AND
HIS MURDEREss.


Whatever actuated the unhappy woman to
commit the terrible deed there is no doubt that
she loved Mr.. Crittenden with an almost idola.
trous devotion, and that he just as stongly re-
ciprocated her affection. mass of correspond.
ence will be introduced to prove this. Only a
few hours before Mr.. Crittenden crossed over to
Oakland he parted from Mrs. Fair on the best oi
terms, and it is said had even made arrange
ments to see her again on his return from across
the Bay. On the other hand it is we'll known
that he had made many efforts to break off the
intimacy. He was aware that it had become a
public scandal that duty to his wife and chill
dren demanded a separation, and it is believed
that he repeatedly tried to sever the connection
But be was unable to carry out his intentions
for Mrs. Fair clung to him with the madness Of
jealousy and love, and after vainly endeavorine
! To inducn her Eact ha -