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

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.

67/128 (page 59)

$not Dr Werister say I'.iis vheii thej were con- fronted at the College, gji the evening v\lien the remains were found. Mr Linlefif !<{ was at the door of ihe C^illej^e lA'iihin five minutes of the time when Dr Park- man vvenr. into the biiiidino After Dr Hnhnes' lecture Wcis over, at a qti trter past 2, he vveat downstairs; he was eecn by Or Bos worth at 3, in his working dress, luid down alierwards, was called by a niece to see iVir Pettee snbse- quentlj,and went to Mr Grant's dancing acade- my in the evening. Thu we account for Mr Littlefieid, but where was Dr Wtbster ou that af eriioonl The Counsel on the other side have made va- rious snagest;on.< as to the p obable course which Dr. Webster would have pursued, if he had committed the murder. The reason that he did not throw the body into the dissecting ' vault—may have been because he did not know where to tind the key. As to the question why he did nut destroy the tvjdw by certain chemical solutions, of whii^h he had an adequate know- ledge, it is enough to urge the ceirmoa obser- vation that men who commit crimes, do not always ac<, with the greatest wisdom in regard to their own safetj. The innocence of the defendant has been ar- gued from the fact that he spent the evening with Prof. Treadwell without exhibiting any marks of emotion. Is it temarkable that hi should have done so. when he has sat in limbo for two weeks, and yet not for one moment has he exhibited any emotion, even when the great- est solen.iiity prevailed, ana the Uiost affecting testimony has been offered. The only instance in which he has shown any feeling, uas when borne down by fear on the night of hid arrest. [The Attorney Genera! here commenced the argument thit the character, social position aud education of the defendant precluded the idea of his having committed such a crime, and argued that the fact of his having been cousida'-ed re-- spectable and moral was no evidence that he was 80. He also cited several instances in England aud in this cou.itry to show that men of as high standing is the defeadant had been left to com- mit as great crimes as that charged upon him.] I have already sbowu that Dr Parkman nev- er left that building, that he never could have been slain by a third person, and now propose to show the reasons for beli- ving that Dr Web- ster comiuiiied 'he me-.rder. But what were the relations between these parties'? 1 will adopt the language of the defence, that the relations between them we'C not of an ami- cable character, that Dr. Webster wva the debt- or of Dr Parkman; thafOr Parkman was pur- suing-him for the payment of thivt debt; and that the money received Tor lectures, which he promised to pay to him, was devoted to other purposes. We are told thst Dr Parkman wag following ilim up; he h'-id no mor.ey to meet the payment of the debt; his minerals had been disposed of; his furniture was all that was left hun; he was thus stripped of all that he had; and when we come to motive, I contend that no starving va- grant, prowling about the community, had great- er indu eraaRjis to commit sixh a ci iiiie than had the defendant. Dr Paikman ^'sd i-ad two moriijaie'-—nne f r $400, .And ih-«!».-ri,.r!52432 I April 1S49, the HCtufd H-d^btP'in'si ,.( Dr Webstf-r t p Dr Faikroan, was S-loti 27 tin- .- was on die oili- er note an inde'ite ness of $512 50 ■mp lo other par(i«^«. I a.'k you now, gerill nen, il yni sup- pose thai Or pKiKiiian w<id i r-rtncel ihe iiiort- gjge on dial r.otf on which bo much was i^ue to ouieig, even if he h-ifl rec- ived all his own due upon il. Hav-ng got ihetsf n ites into his po3- eesi-i in, hn had iwo tliintis to do; he had first to dispose of the lenrriinSof Dr'Priikman Th'S hp won!.-! be morti likfly to do by fi'*-, aa lea-t I kely to excite sutjocioi^ H^viiig rione lid* he sits do^n to fix upon the sum he says he paid to Dr Parkman. On his person was found the mo*t remark- able document ever found in the pocket of an innocent person. [Mr Clifford no'V proposed to show that Dr Webster did not owe Dr Parkman so much as he said he paid him, and read the aiemorandum of which he had spoken, and which has been published.] This «um he contended was a fiction; pot on- ly told to the friends of Dr Paikman, and the figures placed upon a small slip (dp.^per and put in his wallet, lest he should forget the amount. In his further relation of his interview with Dr Parkman, Dr Webster said Dr Parkman dash- ed his pen through the note, and rushed out of the building. Now it will be se^n by an inspection of the note that it woulil have been necessary to dash the pen through six sigmatnres. But. this was not done,and the means by which the dash was made had been proved u> be with an i strument of a different character from that of a pen. AFTERNOON SESSION. Mr. Clifford rrsumed his argument for the the Government, by saying he hoped he should soo'i get through with it. I proceed now to consider the conduct of Dr. Webster, in his declarations to Mr. Blake, Dr. Parkman and others, involving inconsis- tencies and contradictions. Dr. Parkman, as I have already said, never could have cancelled the mor'grtge, if he had said he would, so long as other persons had an interest in it. I now come to a serious matter, that of the declaration of Dr. Webster that he paid the money to Dr. Parkman Taking the aci-ount of Mr Pe tee and that of the Charles River Bank, there is no evidence to show that he had so much money. The prisoner and h's counsel have never for a moment been unmindt.il of tlie fact that they were unable to show how this money was ob- tained. He hiis had the whole treasury of the state at his command, to bring the witnesses to show this important fai:t, and yet he has failed to do so. Every student who atiended his lec- tures might have bt en snnimoiied here at the expense of the StHte, and testified vo their hav- ing paid this mop ey, if he lad been so paid. Takiig the statemeni of hi counsel) as furnish- ed by Dr. Webster, and you will see how trans- parent is the falsehood that is relied on to show$