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.

68/128 (page 60)

$that he had funds eufficienl to meet this note, which he asserts he paid. If he had th«? money in the morning at 9 o'clock when he callrd at Dr. Pai kman's house, why did he not p^y it tLenl He could as well have [jaid it then as at half-past 1 o'clocli. And there is no evidence to stio i that he received the inuney dnrhi{j ihat fuennon. I am remind- ed, gentlemen, that on ihat morning, he did re- ceive $90 from Vlr. Pettee, hut the Bank ac- count snows that this am iint was deposited there on the next day Heie, gentlemen, we come to a serious point. If he did not pay the.-ie notes—and it is very evident he did noi—rhow came they in his pos- session, and what would become of the stories that Dr. Paikma 1 was nmclered elsewherel I propose now to (^jusider the condition of things ill the labii at ry where the remains were found. With* the remains were found towels nearly new. Dr. Wt-bster was not in the habit of throwing such ihinjjs needlessly away. On the very Friday morning in question, one of these towels was seen i'l f)r. Webster's room. Take the case nls > of ihe knife. The govern- ment overlook the fact that the knife was at Dr. Websier's own house on the 17th of Novemlier. This knife, they say, was put into the tea chest to excite snspicii.n iowards Dr. Webster. It is enough for me to say in relation o the knife and the hammer, that here were the instruments by which death might be produced; and in re- lation to the bag of tan, why was it left in the entry by Vlr. Sawin at the request of Dr. Web- ster; when, as he te^tifi'd, he had been there two hundred times, and no such request was ever made to him before^ Wliat was the conduct of Dr Webster during t'e week of the murder 1 W« hnd the extra- ordinary occurrence o( his having been locked in his rooms, wiien he 'ad no occasion to pre- pare for lectures, and that fires were bu.ning in his rooms, and the water ^as left running. It is not alone by Mr Litllefield that we show that his doors were locked. Even the daugh- ters of Dr Webs er confirm Mr Littlefield's ac- count of his absence. What evidence is there to show tliat lie did not cortie into the city on Saturday morning after his daughters left him up at home. Mr Littlefield tells us he did not want any fires made in his rooms, and oa Sat- urday, when he propo.-^ed to go do*n through the laboratory, he was told to go out the other way. In coming into the ci*y on Sunday lie had only two facts to communicate to the Rev. Dr. Parkman, the lactthat he paid his brother some money, this ^as very iinporiant to himself— and tnat after he riceived the money he rushed out of th«> room with the money in his hand, in a state of great excitement. The counsel for the defence have stated that the complaint has I.een made that his inter- view with Rev Dr Parkman was too formal, whilf! in that with Mr BUke he was too warm. There was another interview with S. Parkman Blake, on Monday, when Dr Webster appeared to brace himself to reply to the questions put to him. In this interview he told Mr Blake that Dr Parkman on going away Siid he would go and see the mo-tgage cancelled; and yet the mortgage had been found m his possession. On Tuesday, Dr Webster tells Mr Littlefield that the articles for his lecture would not bear a fire. If this was so, it w; uld have been easy for his counsel to have shown it. On the same day, Mr Kingsley noticed the tea-chest, the tan, and a fire in the furnace. On th'- next day the heat of the fire in this fun ace was felt through the wall; he had built the fire, covered up the furnace with minerals, and then left it to smotil- d^-, while he weirii home to make his a!ib^ In relation t8 the tin box—his daughter has testified thai he had b'en in the habit of sending plants in air i'xuht boxe.«, jet she adnJis she did not know of any such plants then in a state of prepaiation to be s(-nt away. We ha'.e it from Mr Waterman that he never b'lbre made sucn a box for him, and tl at he spoke of putting books in it. While at Mr Waterman's he told the story of a mesmerii'.ivrg woin.^n who in a mesmeric state saw soma one carried oft in a cab, and when the cab was iotnid, it proved to be all bloody. Wha- a story this is for a Pro- fessor ill a college to be telling to a mechanic! Then in relation to the anonyraons letters, we have it on the authority of ilie experts that the Civis letter hns a rese;ublance to the hand- writing of Dr Webster. Whr.ever the writer was, he evidently was a man of edncation. Can it be deemed consistent with the initorence of a man to be writing such anonynf \ig letters to the city authorities. The testimony in relation to the other letters was not quite so positive, yet it is v ry evident, that (the Sancript [E. Cam- bridge] letter is written on paper that an ignor- ant man would not have been bkely to have had in his possession. I have already spoken of the interview of Dr Webster with Littlefield at the College,and will now speak of the conversation of Starkweather at the jail office, which was of an extraordinary character. I will first remark upon a sentence in the Civis letter about cutting up the body and the'necessity of searching in necessarits and cellars On the supposition that this was the letter of Dr. Webster, we have an explanation of his conduct after his arrest. iVow look at the conduct of Dr. Webster on his way from his home to the College. Here was a man who knew that his rooms had been twice examined, gcjng in a carriage with three police officers. Mr. Clapp gets out at the jail office, 'and invites them into the office. Here was a Professor of Harvard University going into the jail office with three police officers and no objection ir inquiry was made until he was taken into the inner office. Now let me v-aH your attentian to the conversation with Mr Clapp and Mr. Starkweather. Mr. Clapp did not say that the body had been found—he only said, we have done searching for Dr. Paikraan, and have arrested^you as his murderer. Then when with Mr.^Starkweather, I'r. Webster atked several questio^is. Have they found the lA-^j'/e of-the body'! Why should be^iave asked this ques- tion, unless he k.new s- melhing of the ina.iner in which the remains were disposed of? Subse- quently he said to the officer who attended him, 1 expected this. Here OMt~poke the guilty man. It is represented that at the time he was not in aratimial state of mi id. Yet he knew enough to attempt to iniplicite L'ttlefieid. When Mr. Ptarkweather asked if any body had access to his apartments but himself, he replied, no one but tiie porter who builds the fires. After wait-$