The Parkman murder : trial of Prof. John W. Webster, for the murder of Dr. George Parkman, November 23, 1849 : before the Supreme Judicial Court, in the City of Boston with numerious accurate illustrations.

  • John White Webster
Date:
1850
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The Parkman murder : trial of Prof. John W. Webster, for the murder of Dr. George Parkman, November 23, 1849 : before the Supreme Judicial Court, in the City of Boston with numerious accurate illustrations. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine, through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine, Harvard Medical School.

    45/128 (page 37)
    S7 XOn tlie second page:] give me his Watch but I was fraid to keep it and iJsrowd it In the water right side tiie road to the long bridge Boston.. Boston, Nov'r, 31 '49. Mr Tukey, Dear Sir: I have been oonsklerably interested in the recent affair of Dr Farkman, and I think 1 can recommend means, the adojjtion of which might result in bring- ing to light some of the mysteries connected with the disappearance of the afore mentioned genJle- man. In the .first place, with regard to the searching of houses, itc, I would recommend that particular at- tention be paid to the appearance of cellar floors^ do they present the appeai-ance of having been re- cently dug into and covered up again; cr might not the part of the cellar where he was buried have been covered by the piling of wood i Sec- ondly, have the out-houses and necessaries been caiefully examined ; have tJiey been raked eufli- ciently? Probably his body was cut up and placed in a .stout bag, containing heavy weights, & thrown off one of the bridges—perhaps Craigie's. And Iwould recommend the firing of cannon from seme of these •bridges, and from various parts of the harbor & river, in order to cause the parts of the body tc lise to the sm-faoe of the water. This, I think .will be the last resort, & it should be done effectu' ally. And I wouW recommend that the cellars of the houses in East Cambridge be examined. Yours respectfully, CIVIS. FISHER A. BOSWORTH called and sworn. I am a physician, a resident of Grafton, Worcester ■county. Inttended medical lectures in 1847-8; know Dr Webster, also Mr Littlefield. 1 had occasion to go to the Medical College on the 23d November (last, to see a student. It was between the hours of i and 2, nearer 2. [The witness here pointed out the way in which he went to the College, and up the steps.] I saw tihe door jar, and on going in, thinkiag the lecture was not yet out, I w«nt do\tTt the west stairs, to the dissecting room entry, and at the foot of the stairs met Dr Parkman-, I last saw him at the top of the stairs going into the College. I went away, and returned about three o'clock. On return- ing, I asked Mr Littlefield if Uiere was a student by the name of CofTran, in the College. He said lie did not know him; but as he was busy he said if I w'ould go down I should probably find him in the dissecting room. I went down and found Mr Cof- fran. I fix the time of this visit to the College by the fact, that on the 20th November I borrowed money to pay a note; on the following day I came to Bos- ton, and was too unwell to do any business. On the 23d I went to the College, after dining with a friend at 624 AVashington street. Immediately after dinner I went down to the College. On Saturday I v;ent to South Boston, to see my brother. Rev. Mr Bosworth. I first heard of the disapiiearance of Dr Parkman on Saturday afternoon. I went home that afternoon; heard of it at the depot, and saw the notice in the evening papers. I recollected at the time of havhig seen Dr Parkman on the day be- fore, and spoke of it in the depot. I was first ap- prized that my attendance would be required here, on yesterday at 11 o'clock. The Attorney General stated that all of the evi- dence for the government was now in, when the Court adjourned to 3 1-2 o'clock. opening for Defenoe. AFTERXOON* SESSION. The Court room was densely crowded at an early hour to hear the opening for the defence. The Court came in at twenty-five minutes to 4 o'clock. Mr SOHIER commenced his ai-gument by saying that it might be expected he should call tlie atten- tion of the Jury to the condition of ^he defendant at the bar; but he feared that if he did so, he should lose siglit of the case, and think only of the man. He must follow in the steps of the counsel for the Government and review the case, as presented. We were in the discharge of our various duties lo discuss and determine that great question which for months had occupied the community. Is the life of Professor Webster forfeited by the commission of the most atrocious crime on ths records of criminal practice.' It devolved upon the jury to say, wheth- er Professor Webster shall depart hence to his fam- ily, or to the scafibld, leaving to that family only a blasted name. This duty did devolve upon the jiu-y, under oath. If they err here, they must answer it to the prisoner and his friends, to an exact and scrutinizing God, and to their own consciences. It devolved upon them to assume no antagonist position, but endeavor to assist each other. It was their duty to assume the position of counsel to this prisoner, and to give him the advantage of every thing that would oper- ate in his favor. And here he wished to make some remarks on a subject that he would not do, except in such a case. He would then ask them to look into their own minds, and eradicate every thing like prejudice. He remembered they said they were not sensible of prejudice. Could they say so now.? Could they be sure at any timer' It was the very essence of preju- dice to conceal itself in the mind. He besought them to examine their own minds. If prejudice ex- isted in a single mind on the panel, there was no safety. Were they to forget the greatexcitement that ex- isted when it was first bruited abroad that Dr Geo. Parkman was missing.? Had they forgotten the indignation that existed against Professor Webster, and the College itself, when it wns announced that the body had been found in his apartments. He had thought that in opening the case, he might dii-ninish the labor of the closing counsel. Instead of informing them of the nature of the defence, he should call their attention to the rules of law, and the nature of the government's evidence. And thea he should state what the facts were which they in- tended to prove. 1. The rules of law which described the offence charged. The offence charged is the murder of George Parkman. Murder was a division of homi- cide, which was a general term for all killing. This is divided into two great divisions—that which was circumstantial, and that justifiable. Criminal homi- cide was divided into two parts—murder and man- slaughter. The indictment charged the defendant with murder. But as a man indicted for murder may be convicted of manslaughter, the prisoner stands twice indicted. The first qustiou was, %vhat was murder.? This was the killing of any person with malice afore- thought. Two things were necessary—1, the kill- ing; 2, the kilUng with malice albrethouglit. Mal- ice was of two kinds—express and imiilied. Express malice is malice in its common acccpta» tion—a wicked, rancorous disiiosition, which in- duced a man to kill another. Express malice was killing with a previous design, shown by circnni- Bnt we come next to what was called implied malice. It was a theory of law that it punished not so much the overt act, as the wicked mind from which it proceeded. But how was the law to ar- rive at this.? It could not, except by judging the mind by the acts.