Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

when quite young he was struck with a hoe near the crown of the head, producing an open wound, which after some time closed and healed up; when about twelve years old he fell from a cherry tree, striking upon his head. I moved with my family to Hartford in 1837 and soon after Charles fell from the balcony of a second story, and was brought home insensible; no immediate effect seemed to be produced upon his mind by this accident, but very soon after his conduct became strange. My own mother has been insane for eight years, and some time in an insane hospital; a brother of mother became insane and hung himself; two of her sisters were occasionally insane; my grandmother, on my mother's side, was also insane. Myself and wife have always known the mind of prisoner to be not as strong as the minds of our other children; after the fall from the bal

cony he was more carefully watched and kept in, and some painful indications were developed as at times a remarkable prominence of the eye, and a dullness, which appeared to increase, and a physician was consulted. We tried to educate him for college, but found it could not be done. Sometimes at home a shoe of some female member of the family would be missing, and when found would be wet and crumpled up; a girl, named Almira Godfrey, who was living in my family at the time, was at first suspected, but at length one of her shoes missing, and when found was also wet and crumpled like the others. We then suspected Charley, and soon found it was he who took away the shoes.

was

When a shoe was missing, it would be found sometimes under his pillow, sometimes between the straw and feather bed, sometimes in his trunk, and sometimes in his pocket, generally with clothes wound round the shoe, as if to conceal it. Charles, before his fall from the balcony, had been truthful, and of a frank and open demeanor, and willing to acknowledge the truth, though to his disadvantage, but when I spoke about the shoe, he would hang his head and say he did not know, but the shoe would be found somewhere secreted; when a shoe had been missed, and found under his pillow, his mother would say to him, "Charley, another shoe gone;" to which he would reply, "I'm sure I didn't do it;" his mother would say, "I found it under your pillow;" then he would admit it. He seemed not to remember the fact. I punished him for taking shoes, but I soon thought I could recognize the features of insanity in his conduct. Pains were taken to keep shoes out of his way, and they were put in drawers, and he would take them out of the drawers in the night. At times Charles had fullness of eyes, a vacancy of the eye was frequently apparent. We kept him in evenings, and away from exciting amusements. About the time of this assault he complained a good deal of headache. I sometimes sent Charles to the country. He was once away for about two years. His practice of taking and secreting shoes has continued down to the present time, although it has intermitted. I went to board with prisoner last May. His wife would miss her

shoes occasionally, and they would be found where the prisoner had secreted them.

Cross-examined. I myself saw the wound from the hoe; did not see the wound caused by the prisoner's fall from the cherry tree, which took place in Vermont; saw the wound occasioned by the fall from the balcony; soon after came the protruding and glassiness of the eye; he was then between twelve and fourteen years old, and went to school; his moral sense seemed to be somewhat blunted; he was not as truthful as before.

Thomas Sprague, of Michigan (a brother of prisoner), Mary E., his wife, Julia A. Hyde, a sister of prisoner's father, and Oliver Hyde, her husband, testified to the prisoner's habit, while living with them, to take ladies' shoes and secrete them. They also testified to the fact of the fall from the cherry tree in Vermont and to the insanity of the relations of the prisoner.

Charles H. Nichols, M. D. From May, 1847, to March, 1849, was physician at the State Insane Asylum at Utica, and in April, 1849, came to the asylum

at Bloomingdale, of which I have charge now. While at Utica there were about eight hundred patients in the asylum, and about one hundred and fifty at Bloomingdale. From the testimony in the case, I am clearly of opinion that the prisoner was laboring under derangement of mind; the act charged appears to me to be an insane act; it is not uncommon for monomaniacs to secrete, and to endeavor to escape; cases of strict monomania are very rare, but do exist, and in such cases all conduct not affected by the peculiar delusion, may be perfectly rational. Cases of insane impulse are more frequent than those of monomania; acts done under insane impulse are more likely to be remembered than those done under the influence of monomania.

Theodore L. Mason, M. D. Insanity is the genus, monomania a species, and the impulsive characteristic may be common to both general and partial insanity. Am of the opinion that the prisoner was partially insane, and that the act for which he is on trial, was done from an insane impulse.

The evidence being closed, the case was submitted without argument.

MORSE, J. (to the jury). There is no question made, that the prisoner had done the act alleged in the indictment, and the only question for you to decide is whether the prisoner at the time of the act done, was a responsible moral agent. If at the time he did the act the prisoner was of sound mind, and capable of judging between right and wrong, then he is guilty of the crime charged upon him, but if he was of unsound mind, and acting under an impulse which at the time overthrew or obscured his knowledge, or capacity to judge

of right and wrong, then he was not capable of committing a crime, and must be pronounced not guilty. It seems quite unnecessary to go into any consideration of the question of general insanity, as the whole defense has been put upon the ground that the prisoner was partially insane, and that the peculiarity of his insanity consisted in what appears to the sane mind an objectless desire to possess himself of the shoes of females, and to hide and spoil them. Insanity, as a defense, is an affirmative matter, and in order to be allowed, must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt. If you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the prisoner did the act charged in the indictment under an insane impulse, being at the time incapable of knowing right from wrong, it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty; but if you are not satisfied of the prisoner's insanity, it will be your duty to find a verdict of guilty.

After a short absence, the Jury returned with a verdict of Not Guilty.

6

6 MORSE, NATHAN BREWSTER. (1797-1886.) Born Canterbury, Conn. Studied law at Killingly, Conn. Admitted to Connecticut Bar. Moved to Brooklyn, N. Y., 1825. District Attorney Kings Co., 1830-1833, 1839-1847. County Judge, 1833-1838. Justice Supreme Court, 1847. Sat on Court of Appeals, 1853. Presiident Fulton Ferry Co., Brooklyn.

DIKEMAN, JOHN. (1795-1879.) Born Hempstead, L. I. Studied law (Brooklyn) under Judge Radcliffe. Principal of the first public school in Brooklyn. Clerk of Village, 1821. First Judge Court of Common Pleas, Kings Co., 1830. Member of Assembly, 1836. County Judge, Kings Co., 1863-1867.

THE TRIAL OF PROFESSOR JOHN W. WEBSTER, FOR THE MURDER OF DR. GEORGE PARKMAN, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS,

1850.

THE NARRATIVE.

On Friday, November 23, 1849, Dr. George Parkman, one of the most prominent physicians of the City of Boston, a man of wealth and the owner of much real estate in the city, mysteriously disappeared. He had left his home about noon, stating that he had an appointment to keep at half past two with a gentleman who had called at his house that morning, and about one o'clock he entered a grocery store near his residence, purchased some articles there, which he ordered to be sent home, and asked permission to leave for a few minutes a small paper bag containing a head of lettuce. A little while later he was seen entering the Medical Building of Harvard College. Being very methodical in his habits, when he did not return home that night his family suspected foul play, particularly as he was the owner of numerous tenement houses and was a rather hard landlord. Notices were published in the city papers, handbills were circulated and the police on Saturday began a systematic search. The river was dredged and the houses of his tenants were thoroughly examined, and the Medical College was given a rather cursory search.3

On Sunday afternoon, Dr. John W. Webster called at the house of Rev. Francis Parkman, a brother of the missing man, and told him that he was the person who had made the appointment with Dr. Parkman on the Friday morning; and that he had come to his office about two o'clock.*

1 Paul Holland, post, p. 122.

2 Fisher A. Bosworth, post, p. 178.

3 Charles M. Kingsley, post, p. 114; Francis Tukey, post, p. 119. Rev. Francis Parkman, post, p. 162.

Dr. Websteria was Professor of Chemistry in Harvard College, and delivered lectures and had his office and laboratory in the Medical Building. He stood high in the social and professional world, and his family and the Parkmans were on terms of considerable intimacy. But Professor Webster's salary was not large; he had a family of grown up daughters; his position rendered it necessary for him to keep up a rather expensive style of living and he was deeply in debt. In his needs he had applied to Dr. Parkman, who had loaned him a a good deal of money and had taken a mortgage not only upon his household goods, but upon a valuable collection of minerals which he owned.5

Professor Webster, being the last person who had seen Dr. Parkman alive, was of course asked to tell all he knew on the subject. He stated that Dr. Parkman called on him to collect a sum of money which he had borrowed from him and which he had told him in the morning he was ready to pay that day; that he paid him the money; that Dr. Parkman returned him his note, promised to cancel the mortgage and then left in a great hurry and that he had never seen him since. The money, he said, was the proceeds of the sale of tickets to his lectures which he had received that day. Professor Webster's standing in the community was so high that his account was implicitly received, and when as a matter of form the police decided to search all the rooms of the Medical College, an apology was made to him for the intrusion.

4a Dr. John White Webster was born in Boston, May 20, 1793. He was Professor of Chemistry at Harvard from 1824 to 1850, and author of several scientific and literary works. One reporter thus describes his appearance on the first day of the trial: "On taking his seat, Professor Webster smiled as he saluted several friends and acquaintances, to some of whom he nodded familiarly, and a stranger would have taken him for an ordinary spectator. He wore spectacles, and sat with ease and dignified composure in the dock, occasionally shaking hands with some of his friends. The countenance of the prisoner indicated to the physiognomist strong animal passion and animal temperament. The cheek bones are high, and the mouth, with compressed lips betray great resolution and firmness of character; the forehead is inclined to angular, rather low and partially retreating; standing below the medium height and by no means a man of great muscular strength."

5 Robt. G. Shaw, post, p. 117

• William Calhoun, post, p. 150; Geo. W. Trenholm, post, p. 151.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »