I 
 
J-fARRY pRAWFORD |3l,ack.. 
 
1 
 
 
 
 George Washington Flowers 
 
 
 Memorial Collection 
 
 
 DUKE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 
 ESTABLISHED BY THE 
 
 
 FAMILY OF 
 
 
 COLONEL FLOWERS 
 
 
 
 
TRIA I, 
 
 OF 
 
 HARRYCRAWFORD BLACK, 
 
 FOR THE KILLING OF 
 
 COL. W. W. McKAIG, Jr., 
 
 CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF MARYLAND, SITTING 
 AT FREDERICK CITY, APRIL 11, 1871, 
 
 BEFORE 
 
 Hon. W. P. MAULSBT, Chief Justice. 
 Hon. JOHN A. LYNCH, Associate Justice. 
 Hon. J. VEIRS BOWIC, Associate Justice. 
 
 V£ 
 
 COUNSEL FOR THE PROSECUTION : 
 
 MILTON "WHITNEY, Esq., of Baltimore; ISAAC D. JONES, 
 
 Attorney General of Maryland ; FRANCIS BRENG-LE, 
 
 State's Attorney of Frederick County. ' 
 
 COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENSE I 
 
 Hon. D. W. VOORHEES, of Indiana; A. K. SYSTER, Esq., of Hagers- 
 
 town, Maryland ; FRED. J. NELSON, Esq., of Frederick, 
 
 Maryland ; LLOYD LOWNDES, of Cumberland, 
 
 Maryland; WILLIAM M. PRICE, of 
 
 Cumberland, Maryland. 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. : 
 
 1871. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 Duke University Libraries 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/trialofharrycrawOOblac 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Generally around criminal prosecution gather all the degrading 
 influences of human life. Within the prisoner's box you look for 
 those upon whose countenance is stamped with heavy impress the 
 evidences of crime and degredation. You listen to the case to be 
 tried with the expectation of hearing details that sicken the heart, 
 and tend to demoralize social law. Especially is this true of the 
 trial of capital cases. In these, the evidence is usually of the most 
 revolting character, marking step by step the decline of the 
 wretched prisoner from the paths of virtue and well doing, where, 
 perhaps, his feet had first been placed by a kind father and loving 
 mother, into the pools of vice and wickedness until completely 
 enveloped in their slimey depths. 
 
 But there has been within the history of criminal jurisprudence 
 some few exceptions to the general rule ; some few cases tried 
 where the court proceedings and the surroundings of the case have 
 been in a great measure softened by the extenuating circumstances 
 that induced the commission of the crime and the social and moral 
 standing of the prisoner on trial. But none within the whole 
 range of judicial investigation where such has been the case in as 
 great a degree as in the trial that forms the subject-matter of 
 these pages. 
 
 The cases referred to are within the knowledge of all who have 
 watched the progress of events in our land, and are doubtless 
 familiar to nearly all who will peruse this work, and the differ, 
 ence between this and those can be easily marked by following a 
 recitation of the facts in the remarkable and interesting trial here 
 spread before them. 
 
 II arwy Crawford Black, who occupied the prisoner's place, and 
 was on trial for his life in this case, was born in the city of Cum- 
 berland, Alleghany county, Maryland, in May, 1^46, and is conse- 
 quently twenty-four years of age, but the weight of years have 
 rested lightly on his brow, and he does not look as though he had 
 yet crossed the threshold from youth into manhood. In his early 
 days he seems to havereceived the foundation of an education, both 
 moral and intellectual, that gave him the respect and won for him 
 
VI TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 the admiration <»f all who knew bim, and that followed him through 
 
 all the varied changes of his eventful life, and fianally in the hour 
 of his dreadful peril loomed up as the brightest phase that sur- 
 rounded the investigation of the case in which lie had srn^h fear- 
 ful interests involved. Indeed it may be said with emphasis that 
 never within the pale of legal inquiry has such a character been 
 produced upon a case of this kind. Those who had played with 
 him in childhood, and knew him in advancing years, were called, 
 and told of his early spotless character and amiable disposition. 
 Those who knew him amidst carnage, and saw him surrounded 
 with all the evil influences of prison life, come and told with what 
 unerring aim he pursued the guiding star set for him by his 
 early teachers, and how among those influences he was still the 
 same good and virtuous boy he had been in childhood. Those 
 who had seen him in the far off fields of lMexico, and the western 
 praries, were there to testify to his spotless reputation and gentle- 
 manly conduct while there. In fact all who were called from the four 
 quarters of the country testified to his untarnished reputation and 
 spotless character. In personal appearance he is what the world 
 would call handsome, about medium height, of slender frame, 
 with a clear, frank, manly expression of countenance, a searching 
 black eye, and with all a most pleasing address. During the pro- 
 gress of the trial his manly bearing was the subject of much flat- 
 tering comment. His youthful appearance and prepossessing man- 
 ners won him many friends among those who had never seen him 
 before he appeared before them as a prisoner on trial for his life. 
 His family connections are among the most respectable in West- 
 em Maryland, and although straightened in circumstances, they 
 hold an honored place in the estimation of the people among whom 
 they live. He is a relative of the late Hon. J. Dixon Roman and 
 Hon. J. Philip Roman, both of whom, when living, were recog- 
 nized as leading men in the political and financial affairs of the 
 State. 
 
 Colonel William W. McKaig, Jr., who fell by his hand, is a de- 
 scendant from a long line of wealthy and highly respectable ances- 
 tors. He was the second son of the Hon. W. W. McKaig, and 
 nephew of General Thomas J. McKaig, both of whom are known 
 as among the leading men of the State of Maryland as representa- 
 tives of her material interests. He was born April 5, 1842, in the 
 city of Cumberland, and was consequently twenty-eight years of 
 age, He served in the southern i>ebellion, and was, when the war 
 closed, a cavalry captain. When killed he w r as largely engaged in 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. VII 
 
 manufacturing in Cumberland, and largely enjoyed the respect of 
 the community in which he lived. Tn personal appearance he was 
 remarkably fine-looking, large in statue, but well proportioned, 
 and was possessed of all those attractions of mind and heart that 
 make a man a genial companion. His death was much lamented 
 where he was known. He was killed on Baltimore street, the 
 principal thoroughfare of the city of Cumberland, on the morn- 
 ing of the 17th of October, 1870; and the reader will find in the 
 foregoing pages a full and uncolored recitation of the facts, as 
 sworn to by the witnesses, of that killing and the circumstances 
 attending it. 
 
 The indictment upon which this case was tried was found by 
 the grand jury of Allegahany county, Maryland, at the October 
 term of Court, 1870, which was in session when the tragedy took 
 place. The trial was posponed from that term to the January 
 term following. At the January term it was called and proceeded 
 with, so far as to draw eight jurors, wheu, upon the affidavit of 
 the State's attorney, it was removed to Frederick county for trial. 
 
 The case was called upon the morning of the 11th of April, 
 1871, at Frederick, with the most absorbing interest being felt in 
 the proceedings, and probably no case was ever tried where all 
 the elements of a fair and impartial trial were drawn together 
 in a more eminent degree than in this case. 
 
 The Court was composed of three judges, each of whom have 
 always enjoyed the respect of all who knew them for their ability 
 in the practice of the profession of the law, of which they are 
 now the exponents. The jury was composed of the most substan- 
 tial and respectable citizens of Frederick county, most of them, 
 indeed all of them, but two, were thrifty farmers, living distant 
 from Frederick several miles, and none of them resided in the 
 city. They were nearly all men of families and possessed of con- 
 siderable means, and for intelligence would compare more than 
 favorably with any jury that was ever irnpanneled for the trial of 
 a criminal cause in a court of justice in this country. Every man 
 upon the panncl was regarded as a, reliable, worthy, and highly 
 respectable citizen and beyond reproach in every sense of the word. 
 Below we print brief biographical sketches of each of the judges 
 and counsel. 
 
 William Finckney Maulsby, Chief Justice of the sixth 
 judicial district of Maryland, and one of the judges of the court 
 of appeals of that State was born in Harford county, Maryland, 
 in the year 1S15, and is therefore now in the prime of a ripe, expe- 
 
VIII TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD CLACK 
 
 rienced manhood ; he is a son of General Isreal Maulsby, who was 
 for many years a distinguished lawyer of Harford county. Judge 
 Maulsby received the benefits of a collegiate education, after 
 which he studied law with his father; soon after lie had com- 
 menced the practice he was elected to the State senate, and served 
 with much ability in that body; he was afterwards, for several 
 years, States attorney of Carroll county, Maryland, from whence 
 he removed to Frederick, where he now resides. At the break- 
 ing out of the late war he took strong grounds against secession, 
 and entered and served with distinction in the Union army 
 throughout the war :is colonel of the first regiment of the Poto- 
 mac Home Brigade, infantry. In 1866 he was the Democratic 
 nominee for Congress from the fourth congressional district of 
 Maryland and was defeated by a very small majority by Hon. 
 Francis Thomas, the Republican nominee. In 1867 he was elected 
 a member of the constitutional convention , from Frederick county, 
 that framed the present constitution of Maryland. He was ap- 
 pointed to his present position early in 1870, to fill the vacancy 
 caused by the death of the late Judge Melson, whose brother-in- 
 law he was. He is the father-in-law of Hon. John Ritchie, the 
 present member of Congress from the fourth congressional district 
 of Maryland. Judge Maulsby has always been regarded as among 
 the leading legal minds in the State, and brought to the bench a 
 knowledge of the law, and its practice gained by a long and emi- 
 nently successful career as an attorney. 
 
 John A. Lynch, one of the associate justices of the Circuit 
 Court, of the sixth judicial district of Maryland, is the son of 
 Hon. William Lynch, who was at one time one of the most promi- 
 nent politicians of Western Maryland. The subject of our sketch 
 was born in 1825, in Frederick county, Maryland, was educated 
 at Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. After 
 graduating, he began the study of the law with M. B. Luckett, a 
 prominent lawyer of the Frederick bar, now deceased. He was 
 admitted to the bar in 1851, and immediately began the practice 
 of his profession at Frederick, where he has since resided. In 
 1855 he was elected States Attorney of Frederick county, which 
 position he held four years. In 1867, he was elected to the posi- 
 tion he now fills with much ability. 
 
 William Veirs Bowie, associate justice of the Circuit Court 
 of the sixth judicial district of Mayland, was born in 1819, in 
 Montgomery county, Maryland. His father was a native of 
 Rouen, France, his mother a daughter of Colonel William Yeirs, 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W". M KAIG, JR. IX 
 
 of Rockville, Maryland. At an early age Mr. Bowie gave promise 
 of more than ordinary ability, perseverance, and. firmness of pur- 
 pose, promises fulfilled in his later years. He studied law with 
 the late John Brewer, Esq., a member of note of the Montgomery 
 county bar. In 1849, being only 80 years of age, he was elected 
 States Attorney, appointed assistant attorney general of the 
 State, and afterward was State's Attorney of Montgomery county, 
 which position he held by successive elections until 18G7, when he 
 was chosen to the associate judgeship. Apart from discharging 
 the duties of various offices of public trust and the laborious pur- 
 suit of professional studies, he was for many years a leading poli- 
 tician of Western Maryland. In the discharge of his duties he 
 has a pleasing, yet forcible manner, and states his opinions with 
 emphasis and without elaboration. 
 
 Mixtox Whitney was born in the village of Ashburnham, 
 Worcester county, Massachusetts, in the year 1S23. His parents 
 not having the means of educating him, his life's earlist lesson 
 was one of sternest self-reliance and unremitting toil. He was 
 thus made the architect of his own fortune and fame, and is essen- 
 tially a self-educated, self-made man. For several years he was 
 employed in a store in his native village. Having a strong desire 
 for the profession of the law, he finally entered the office of Hon. 
 Nathaniel Wood, of Fitchburg, Massachusetts, and the inspira- 
 tions of ardent genius, the longing of the noble ambition that 
 sustained him in the days of adversity, together with natural tal- 
 ents of high order, soon placed him among the leading men of the 
 bar of his native State. Mr. Whitney pursued his legal studies 
 under Mr. Wood for three years, and at the age of twenty-three 
 was admitted to the Worcester county bar. From the beginning 
 of his professional life Mr. Whitney was a marked man, and give 
 evidence of those great talents which have gained for him his high 
 position in Maryland. Soon after his admission to the Massachu- 
 setts bar Mr. Whitney married Miss Annie Weston, one of Balti. 
 more's most accomplished ladies, and a direct descendent of John 
 Alden, immortalized by Longfellow in his "Courtship of Miles 
 Standish." In 1850 he removed to Baltimore, and although almost 
 a stranger there, in a comparatively brief period he attained a 
 high distinction. During his practice in Massachusetts he was 
 engaged as leading counsel in the celebrated murder trial of Cook, 
 charged with having poisoned his wife fourteen years before his 
 arraignment. In this case the notorious Dr. Webster, who was 
 afterwards executed for the murder of Dr. Parkman, figured 
 
X TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 conspicuously as a witness for the State, testifying that he had 
 discovered traces of poison in the remains after the lapse of four- 
 teen years. The trial resulted in the acquittal of Cook. The 
 success attending Mr. "Whitney in the State of his birth was 
 speedily increased in Baltimore. His rise was rapid and sub- 
 stantial. In 1853, after a residence in Baltimore of only three 
 years, he was selected by the American party as their candidate 
 for the position of State's attorney of that city ; being elected 
 he entered upon the duties of his office, holding it for six years, 
 when he resigned and commenced actively the general practice of 
 his profession. "While State's attorney of Baltimore the turbulent 
 spirit which manifested itself at that time in political partisanship, 
 required of him, as an officer of justice, unflinching courage and 
 the most laborious prosecution of lawlessness and crime. His 
 course during this trying period of his professional life has given 
 him a distinction that will be honorably perpetuated in the history 
 of Maryland. 
 
 Among the most notable trials in which he was engaged as 
 State's attorney, was that of Henry Gambrill, who, with three 
 others, was convicted and executed in Baltimore for the murder 
 of a policeman. The trial and execution of these men created in- 
 tense excitement throughout Maryland, and so open and desper- 
 ate was the lawlessness which had inaugurated a reign of terror 
 in Baltimore that Mr. Whitney was met by repeated attempts 
 upon his life; once, while making his argument for" the prosecu- 
 tion of Gambrill, and afterward on his way home from the court- 
 room in his carriage, fortunately escaping unhurt; but a strict 
 guard of his house by the police force was absolutely necessary 
 until the return of peace and quiet. In 1864 Mr. W. was engaged 
 for the defense in the well-remembered trial of Colonel Paca for 
 the killing of his two nephews, which attracted the- greatest in- 
 terest throughout the State and resulted in the acquittal of the 
 prisoner. The last great trial in Maryland in which Mr. W. bore 
 a leading part, previous to the recent trial in Frederick, was that 
 of John Clare, who, having been convicted and sentenced to exe- 
 cution in Baltimore county, obtained a new trial in Baltimore 
 city, resulting in his acquittal. Since his retirement from the 
 office of State's attorney, Mr. W. has been engaged in most of 
 the great criminal trials in Maryland, those named being but a 
 few of the most prominent in which he has distinguished himself 
 and established his reputation as the first criminal lawyer of Mary- 
 land. It is said by competent judges that Mr. Whitney has been 
 engaged in more murder trials than any other lawyer in America. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. XI 
 
 The most important civil case tried by liim was that of Carwicfc & 
 Ramsay, vs. The United States. It grew out of a contract for 
 carrying mails in New Mexico and involved the immense amount 
 of $3,000,000, Mr. Whitney was retained by Postmaster Genera] 
 Blair, and the suit was decided in favor of the Government. In 
 politics Mr. W. was reared a Massachusetts Democrat; after his 
 removal to Baltimore he became an earnest supporter of the prin- 
 ciples of the American party; but since retiring from office he has 
 steadily declined taking active part in political life, though re- 
 peatedly urged to become a candidate for Congress. A firm Union 
 man during the late war, his course was characterized by such 
 liberality of opinion and such consistency of action that he did not 
 render himself offensive to any who differed from him in their 
 views of that contest. Since the war he has never given his adhe- 
 sion to the radical measures of the party in power. In person, 
 Mr. W. is delicate, features regular, showing great power, facial 
 expression; bright, steady eye that sees everything and holds 
 everybody tinder its spell; well-shaped, mobile mouth; his voice 
 clear and sonorous. In style, his elocution is finished— often im- 
 passioned, his language chaste and forcible, with manner and 
 gesture graceful and appropriate. He has a special talent in 
 cross-examination. He reads witnesses, and while always courte- 
 ous and forbearing, makes the most of all the knowledge within 
 his reach. It requires more of the art of concealment than most 
 men possess and more fencing than many lawyers can avail them- 
 selves of to keep from him what he desires to be brought out in 
 cross-examination, and from the beginning to the end of a case he 
 is ever on the alert, always vigilant and tireless, employing every 
 honorable means to insure success. Mr. Whitney's legal know- 
 ledge is profound; trained from early boyhood to habits of close 
 mental application, and disciplined by necessity in methodical 
 ways of business life, he has mastered the intellectual difficulties 
 of his profession with a zealous and comprehensive ability, and is 
 justly considered the ornament of that profession which Edmund 
 Burke characterized as "the pride of the human intellect and the 
 collected wisdom of ages, combining the principles of original 
 justice with the boundless variety of human concerns." 
 
 Isaac D. Jones was born in Somerset county, Maryland, on 
 the 1st day of November, 1806. He was educated at the Wash- 
 ington Academy, in that county. He studied law in that county, 
 and was admitted to the bar in 1832. He was a delegate from that 
 county to the General Assembly of Maryland, at the December 
 
XIE TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLAOK 
 
 session, 1832-'33, and again in 1835 and in 1840-'41, He was elected 
 in May, 1841, to represent the first congressional district of Mary- 
 land, in the Congress of the United States, which assembled in 
 extra session, in May, 1841, and served during the three sessions 
 of that Congress. After this service, he was for many years en- 
 gaged in the practice of law, and in agricultural pursuits at Prin- 
 cess Anne, in Somerset county, Maryland. In April, 1SG4, he 
 was elected a delegate from that county to the Constitutional 
 Convention which met at Annapolis in April 1864, and framed 
 the Maryland constitution of 1864. In November 18G6. he was 
 elected a delegate from Somerset county, to the General Assem- 
 bly of Maryland, which met in January 1867, and passed the act, 
 which was adopted by a vote of the people, calling the constitu- 
 tional convention which assembled at Annapolis, in May 1867, 
 and framed the present constitution of Maryland. Mr. Jones 
 was also a member of that convention from his native county. 
 After the adoption of the constitution of 1867, at the November 
 election in that year, he was elected to the office of attorney gen- 
 eral of Maryland, Shortly after entering upon the duties of that 
 office, in January 1868, he removed to the city of Baltimore, where 
 he now resides, engaged in the practice of law, and in the dis- 
 charge of his official duties, as attorney general of Maryland. 
 
 Daniel W. Voouiiees, whose fame as an advocate is as broad 
 as the limits of our common country, was born in Fountain 
 county, Indiana, on the 26th day of September, 1828. His mother 
 was a native of Maryland, having been born in Baltimore county, 
 near Towsentown. He was educated at the Indiana Asbury Uni- 
 versity, and graduated therefrom in 1849; immediately began the 
 study of the law and was admitted to practice in 1851. In 1858 
 he was appointed United State's District Attorney for Indiana, 
 which position he filled with marked ability until 1861. In the 
 latter part of 1859 became prominently into notice in the East by 
 his wonderful effort in behalf of Cook, one of John Brown's men, 
 and, despite the terribly bitter state of public sentiment in Vir- 
 ginia against Cook, his argument in behalf of this unfortunate 
 man elicited the warmest commendation of all who listened to it. 
 In the West there is scarcely a criminal trial involving life that 
 his presence is not sought, and his reputation as an advocate 
 stands preeminently high. His effort in the Mary Harris case 
 was one of the most brilliant on record in the history of criminal 
 X>rosecution, and the one we have the pleasure to present in these 
 pages is another evidence of his remarkable power as a speaker 
 and logical thinker. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. TV. M KAIG, JR. XIII 
 
 He has served about ten years in the Congress of the United 
 States, and is still a member of that body. He is possessed of a 
 kind, genial disposition, and an address that wins to him all with 
 whom he comes in contact. He is universally admired and re- 
 spected by all who know him of whatever politics or creed. 
 
 Andrew K. Syester, whose leading connection with this case 
 marks him as a man of great ability, was born in Berkeley county. 
 Virginia, March 11, 1829. "While yet a mere youth he entered Mar- 
 shall College, at Mercersburg, Pennsylvania, graduating therefrom 
 in 1850, in the fall of that year he began the study of law with 
 Jervis Spencer, Esq., of Hagerstown, Maryland; was admitted to 
 the bar in January, 1853, and soon after began the practice of his 
 profession in Hagerstown, where he has since pursued it with 
 great success. Even at the outset of his career he met with very 
 remarkable favor from the people of his county, and in the fall of 
 1853 lne was elected to the legislature of Maryland from Wash- 
 ington county. Although but 24 years of age, his parliamentary 
 talent was very apparent, and he soon ranked with the foremost 
 of his compeers; he served with marked ability upon the import- 
 ant committees of "Ways and Means and the Judiciary. After 
 two years service in the legislature, he was elected in 1855 State's 
 attorney of Washington county, which position he held until 
 1859, performing with distinction the duties of his position. 
 Soon after the expiration of his term of office as State's attorney 
 the war broke out, and for several years the unsettled condition 
 of the country surrounding Mr. Syester 's home prevented any 
 advancement in political life, and, until 1S67, he did not again 
 come conspicuously into notice, save in the practice of his pro- 
 fession, in which, during these years of battle and blood, he was 
 rapidly gaining a leading role and gathering experience and wis- 
 dom from the events transpiring about him. In 1867, elected a 
 member of the Constitutional Convention, he served upon some 
 of the most important committees in that body which framed the 
 present constitution of Maryland. Ile-elected to the legislature 
 in 1S68, he served as chairman of the Committee of Ways and 
 Means. In legislative, as well as in legal life, Mr. Syester has 
 been eminently successfnl, and in private association his winning 
 amiability and genial nature make him a popular favorite. In 
 18(58 he was engaged to defend Mrs. Rowland, indicted for the 
 murder of her husband; popular feeling was exceedingly strong 
 against the prisoner, yet he obtained her acquittal, his masterly 
 management of that case marking him as the possessor of legal talent 
 
XTV TRIAL OF IIARRY CRAWIDRD CLACK 
 
 far above the average. He has an immense practice in the differ- 
 ent courts of his State, a practice second to none, perhaps, in the 
 Stale ami in the trial recorded in these pages, in which he was 
 
 engaged, he has fnlly sustained his high reputation as an able 
 advocate and profound thinner. As a high toned gentleman, 
 thorough scholar, upright attorney, true friend, and an ornament 
 to his profession Mr. Syester has no superior. 
 
 Frederick J. Nelsox, Esq.. on*} of the leading counsel in the 
 defense of Harry C. Black, and the acknowledged head of the 
 Frederick, Maryland, bar, is 88 years of age, of most pleasing, 
 polished address and intellectual appearance. He is a native of 
 Frederick. Maryland, the son of the late Judge Nelson, chief 
 justice of the sixth judicial district, and one of the judges of the 
 court of appeals, with whom he studied law; for three years was 
 a law partner of his uncle, the present Chief Justice Maulsby; at 
 the end of this time he went to the West, practicing law in Chi- 
 cago and Missouri. He returned to his native place in 1S62, and 
 was warmly welcomed by his legal compeers, among whom he was 
 soon recognized as a master spirit. He was elected a member of 
 the State Constitutional Convention in 1SG7. As a lawyer he lias 
 a large and constantly increasing practice, in which he is emi- 
 nently successful. 
 
 Lloyd Loustdes. Jr., a relative of young Blacks and the advi- 
 sary counsel for the defense, is one of the rising and most prom- 
 ising young members of the western Maryland bar. He was born 
 in Clarksburg, "West Virginia, and is 27 years of age; of agreeable 
 presence, bright, vivacious in conversation, keen and sagacious 
 in argument. He graduated at Alleghany college, Meadeville, 
 Pennsylvania ; read law with K. L. Ashhurst, Esq., of Philadel- 
 phia, Pennsylvania, and attended law lectures at the University 
 of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia, where he graduated in 1867; he 
 at once began the practice of law in the city of Cumberland, Ma- 
 ryland, and in the ardent and successful pursuit of professional 
 duties exhibits ample evidence of natural talent; and a thorough 
 legal and clasic training. 
 
 William M. Price, the junior counsel in this case, is now 
 2S years old, having been born in August 17, 1842, in Marshall 
 county, West Virginia. He lived with his father, William T. 
 Price, engaging in agricultural pursuits until he attained his 
 majority, when he began the study of law with Hon. Thomas 
 Perry, of Cumberland, Maryland, and was admitted to the Alle- 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. XV 
 
 ghany county bar in 1S66. Mr. Price is known among the legal 
 brotherhood of his State as a young man of decided parts; thor- 
 oughly up in office work, a hard student, with the faculty, some- 
 what rare with young practitioners, of knowing how to make out 
 a strong case in favor of his client, putting his points well, con- 
 cisely, and clearly. 
 
THE TRIAL. 
 
 FIRST DAY. 
 
 Opening of the Court — Preliminary Arrangements for the Trial—Ap- 
 pearance of Distinguished Counsel — Thr Prisoner — Impanelling the 
 Jury— The Remits of the First Day's Proceedings. 
 
 At 10 o'clock on Wednesday, April 11th, 1871, the circuit court of 
 Frederick county, Maryland, convened at Frederick City, in special 
 term, Cor the trial of Harry Crawford Black, indicted for shooting Col. 
 W. W. McKaig, Jr., for the reason and in the manner set forth in pre- 
 ceding pages. 
 
 Before the hour designated for the opening of the court, tin; Hall of 
 Justice was literally jammed with people, drawn from all parts of the 
 surrounding country by the great legal importance of the contest 
 about lo commence. Intense interest and much feeling, increasing 
 daily during the trial, was exhibited by the living sea that surged 
 about the aisles and li led every available place for sitting or standing 
 within the structure. Within the bar "were gathered a large number 
 of the legal fraternity, among whom were some of the leadiug legal 
 men in the State, and in the crowd were very many whose names are 
 familiar words in political current history. 
 
 At precisely 10 o'clock A. M., the three judges of the court entered, 
 and, upon their taking their seats, the sheriff, in due form of law, 
 opened the court for the trial of the cause. 
 
 The counsel for the prosecution and tor the prisoner came in imme- 
 diately after the Opening of the court, and took seats at the tables 
 provided for them. Immediately thereafter tin- prisoner, attended by 
 bis father and Mr. Hiram Bartgis, sheriff of Frederick county, ap- 
 i" ired, and seated himself witli his counsel. 
 
 At 10 o'clock and five minute-. Chief Justice Maulsby inquired it' 
 both side- were ready to proceed with the ease- 
 Mr. Francis Brengle, for the prosecution, stated that they were pre- 
 pared, and Mr. Frederick J. Xelson, on the part of the defense, ex- 
 pressed their readiness to proceed. 
 
2 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD CLACK 
 
 "Mr. Francis Brengle, State's attorney for Frederick county, moved 
 the admission to the bar of Hon. Isaac D. Jones, attorney general of 
 Maryland, and Hon. Milton Whitney, of Baltimore, counsel for the 
 prosecution. 
 
 Mr. Frederick J. Nelson, for the defense, asked the admission of 
 Hon. D. W. Voorhees, of Indiana; Hon. A. K. Syester, of Hagerstown, 
 3L1.; Lloyd Lowdnes, Esq., and Mr. Win. M. Price, of Cumberland, 
 counsel for the defense, and all went forward and took the oath pre- 
 scribed by law. 
 
 Mr. Francis Brengle stated to the court that Mr. Whitney had been 
 appointed by the circuit court of Alleghany county to prosecute this 
 ca3e in the name of the State; but that, in the transfer of the record, 
 the fad had been omitted, and lie desired to ask the court what would 
 be its action in relation thereto. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby replied that, as it was a matter of record, as 
 well as well-known fact, Mr. Whitney would be recognized as the rep- 
 resentative of the State. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby said that the trial would now be proceeded 
 with, and directed Mr. Charles Mantz, the clerk of the court, to call 
 the jury. He immediately called from the panel twelve jurors, who 
 took their places as called in the jury box. He then turned to the 
 prisoner, and in a deep, solemn voice, said : "Harry Crawford Black, 
 these men that are last called are to pass between the State of Mary- 
 laud and yourself on your trial for murder ; if, therefore, you would 
 challenge them, or either of them, you will do so when they come to 
 the book to be sworn, and you shall be heard/' 
 
 Hon. Isaac D. Jones, attorney general of Maryland, for the prose- 
 cution, stated that when the case was called at Cumberland, the prose- 
 cution framed the following questions, to be propounded to the jurors 
 when called, and submitted them to the defense, who accepted them 
 at that time, but he understood that their friends for the defense now 
 objected to them. Ee would, he said, therefore, submit them to the 
 court for whatever action they might deem proper : 
 
 1st. Have you formed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the 
 prisoner at the bar? 
 
 2d. Upon what was that opinion formed — common reports, news- 
 paper statements, or from what other information? 
 
 3d Have you heard anything in regard to this case from any person 
 interested in the trial ; if so, under what circumstance.-? 
 
 lib. Have you any bias or prejudice in your mind for or against the 
 prisoner? 
 
 5th. Would anything that you may have heard in regard to this 
 case have any influence on your mind to prevent you from finding a 
 verdict, according to the law or the evidence, as it may be given in on 
 the trial ? 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. 3 
 
 fill), Have you any conscientious scruples upon the subject of capi- 
 tal punishment; if so, of what nature? 
 
 Frederick J. Nelson, on the part of the prisoner, said that it had 
 always been the practice of this court to inquire no further than — had 
 the juror any conscientious scruples in regard to capital punishment, 
 or had he formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence 
 of the prisoner at the bar? He saw no reason why, in this case, a. de- 
 parture from the old rule should be made. In Alleghany county the 
 circumstances were different ; there the act was committed, and the 
 people were enlisted either on one side or the other, and it was neces- 
 sary thus to inquire, in order to obtain a jury, which was not the ne- 
 cessity here, lie contended that the regular practice of the court was 
 sufficient to meet the cuds of justice. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby said that the proper time to make the objec- 
 tion would be when the juror is interrogated as the State wishes, and 
 that it would render no decision until then ; but there was no evident 
 reason why more than the usual questions should be propounded to 
 the jurors, and the court would pursue the accustomed coarse. 
 
 David Arnold was the first name called. 
 
 The court propounded the usual interrogatories; "Have you any 
 conscientious scruples about capital punishment?" "Have you 
 formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the 
 prisoner at the. bar?" To which he. promptly replied, "No." Mr. 
 Voorhees looked into the face of the juror with a steady gaze for sev- 
 eral minutes, as did Black, the prisoner, as if endeavoring to divine his 
 thoughts. A short consultation was held among counsel, when Arnold 
 was challenged by Mr. Nelson, for defense. 
 
 Wm. II. Boetler was next called, whereupon, Judge Lynch re- 
 marked that Mr. Boeder's brother, Dr. Boetler, of MicldletOwn, was 
 married to a cousin of Col. McXaig's widow. The counsel for the 
 prisoner then asked that Mr. Boetler be excused from serving on the 
 jury, to which the State interposed objections. The court decided 
 that the objections must be sustained, ami propounded the same inter- 
 rogatories made to Mr. Arnold, to which the same reply was given. 
 Again Mi-. Voorhees tried to read the juror, and another consultation 
 was held, when, on its conclusion, Mr. Nelson caustically said, "Chal- 
 lenged." 
 
 John A. Kramer was next called ; challenged by Mr. Nelson. Wm. 
 M. Feaga was the fourth man called. He was accepted and sworn as 
 (!; ■ foreman ol the jury. The clerk called the names of I b i remaining 
 jurors drawn, eacu being interrogated as above ; and oul of the whole 
 ilar panel nine were accepted arid swornasjuroi . eighf were chal- 
 lenged peremptorily bj the d four were excused on accounl 
 
4 TRIAL OP HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 of sickness, and three declared incompetenl on accout of having 
 
 formed and expressed opinions regarding the guilt or innocence of the 
 prisoner. 
 
 Mr. Francis Brengle staled that, as the regular panel was ex- 
 hausted, he would ask the Court to draw from the box the names 
 necessary to complete the panel, instead of directing the sheriff to 
 summon talesmen from the city, as usual. Tie said that he believed 
 the purposes of justice would be better served were such a course to be 
 pursued. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby stated that they would draw from the box the 
 names necessary to complete the panel ; eighteen names were then 
 drawn out. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby asked the counsel if the sheriff could not 
 summon and bring into court those drawn who lived in the city, and 
 if they failed to obtain a jury from them, then to summon those drawn 
 from the country. 
 
 Mr. Nelson, for the defense, said that they should require all drawn 
 to be brought into court before proceeding. 
 
 The court then, at 1 o'clock and 15 minutes, adjourned until 
 Wednesday, at 9 o'clock A. M. 
 
 SECOND DAY. 
 
 The Jury Completed — Beading of the Indictment — Opening Statement 
 by Attorney Genercd Jones for the Prosecution — Witnesses for the 
 Prosecution Sworn — Interesting Testimony as to the Killing. 
 
 Promptly at 9 o'clock a. m., April 12th, the court assembled for 
 the second day's proceedings in the caseof Harry Crawford Black, 
 indicted for killing Col. W. W. McKaig, Jr. Immediately upon 
 the assembling of the court Cliief Justice Maulsby stated that the 
 sheriff informed him that seventeen out of the eighteen gentlemen 
 whose names were drawn from the box yesterday had been sum- 
 moned, and were present in the court-room, and he desired to ask 
 the defense if they were willing to proceed before the one absent 
 could be brought in. 
 
 Mr. Nelson, for the defense, replied that they would go on. 
 
 The clerk then called to the boxtwelveof the jurors drawn ; out 
 of these, seven were challenged by the defense, two were declared 
 incompetent, three being accepted and sworn. At fifteen minutes 
 after 10 o'clock the jury was declared complete, and the following 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. 5 
 
 are the names of the panel, and the order in which they were 
 sworn : 
 
 William M. Feaga, Joseph TV. Etzler, Ephraim Stoner, George 
 TV. Foreman, Henry T. Denver, Robert Lease, Potti'nger Dorsey, 
 Benjamin P. Crampton, Jonathan Biser, George II. Fox, Micheal 
 Zimmerman, and Daniel T. Whip. 
 
 After the jury was announced complete, the clerk arose, amid 
 profound silence, and said : "Harry Crawford Black, hold up your 
 hand." lie then proceeded to read the indictment found against 
 him by the grand jury of Alleghany county for the murder of TV. 
 W. McKaig, Jr., on the 17th day of October last, in the city of 
 Cumberland, closing with the question, "What say yon, guilty or 
 not guilty ? " To which Black made answer, "Not guilty." 
 
 During the reading of the indictment the prisoner listened with 
 marked attention, hardly taking his eyes off the clerk during the 
 entire period. There were three counts in the indictment, charg- 
 ing murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, and 
 manslaughter. The clerk completed the reading of the charge at 
 half-past 10 o'clock, and immediately the names of the witnesses 
 for the prosecution, one hundred and forty in number, were called. 
 
 Attorney General Jones, for the prosecution, arose and made a 
 lengthy statement to the jury of the points relied upon by the 
 prosecution to make their case, explaining why he appeared be- 
 fore them as counsel in this case. He stated that by a recent law 
 it had become his duty, as attorney general of the State, to assist 
 the State's attorney of any county in the prosecution or defense 
 of cases where the interests of the State were involved, whenever 
 application be made, to him ; and as he had been requested by the 
 attorneys of both Alleghany and Frederick counties to assist in 
 this case he had no alternative but to appear. He then referred 
 to the indictment, read and explained the meaning of the different 
 ((Hints, and cited to the jury the law which was to govern this case. 
 
 Hon. A. K. Syester, for the defense, stated that they would re- 
 serve their opening statement until the prosecution had closed 
 their testimony. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby, at forty-five minutes after It o'clock, 
 directed the prosecution to call its witnesses. 
 
 Dr. P. A. Healey was the first witness placed upon the stand, 
 Mr. Whitney conducting the examination for the prosecution. 
 He test ifled as follows : f reside in Cumberland, Alleghany county, 
 Maryland, aud am a practicing physician there; myotflceis on 
 
 Baltimore street, opposite where the murder was committed ; 
 Baltimore street runs east and west ; I was acquainted with both 
 
6 HAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 McKaig (deceased) and Black, (the prisoner.) Mr. McKaig re- 
 sided on (lie west side of the creek running through Cumberland, 
 and cutting Baltimore si reel at right angles : he had to come east 
 to his place of business; had a foundry, which is situated on the. 
 easl side of the creek, several sq\iares distant from his dwelling, 
 and to get 1 > his foundry from his home was compelled to cross r 
 bridge over t he creek ; my office is on the south side of the si reet. 
 and the place where the tragedy occurred was on the north gideof 
 the same street, directly opposite ; I was near the window -if my 
 residence adjoining my office door, and I saw Mr. McKaig cross 
 the bridge, which is only a short distance from where I was stand- 
 ing, about 8 o'clock on the morning of the 17th of October last; 
 just as he crossed the bridge he passed from the nor! h side to the 
 south side of Baltimore street, and passed my office; I saw Mr 
 Black at the same time at the drug store corner of Mechanics and 
 Baltimore streets, and opposite from where T stood, coming up ; 
 Black and McKaig met near the comer; thestreet is about thirty 
 feet wide: I saw the shooting; when they were about to meet Black 
 shot McKaig; lie threw up both hands, and staggered into 
 and across the street; Black followed, shooting four times; 
 after McKaig got into the street lie was shot ; then, as he stag- 
 gered to a sign-post on the opposite side of thestreet, was shol 
 again ; lie then reeled into the middle of the street, and as he was 
 falling Black shot him again ; Black then walked past the body 
 across the street to the sidewalk ; could not tell whether he saw a 
 pistol or not, he was alarmed; Dr. Smith and others brought 
 McKaig into the office of witness; he was dead; witness went 
 away, and never saw deceased afterwards. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Syestei;, for the defense: 
 
 McKaig crossed the. street at the end of the bridge to the side 
 upon which Black was ; there are at that place no regular stepping- 
 stones ; I saw Black at the drug store ; Black was advancing ; the 
 foundry is in Centre street, and Mr. McKaig must cross Liberty 
 street to reach it ; the gentlemen were about ten feet apart when 
 the lirst shot was tired ; saw no pistol excepting in the otlice after 
 the murder ; the discharges were not in rapid succession. 
 
 Mr. Syester. Did you hear them say anything at any time dur- 
 ing or after the shooting ? 
 
 Mr. Whitney objected to the question, saying that the question 
 was in the nature of a question in chief, and not in the nature of 
 cross-examination, and was not introduced at the proper stage; 
 the legal point he made being that the cross-examiners had no 
 right to question beyond where they (the prosecution) left off; 
 that when he inquired as to the tiring of the last shot his exami- 
 nation closed. The question the defense asked was asking as to 
 an independent fact. 
 
 Mr. Syester denied wishing to go outside of the examination in 
 chief, but simply wanted to tiud out all that had occurred, and be 
 wished to find out whether the witness had omitted anything that 
 had occurred on that occasion. , 
 
 Mr. Whitney replied that the subject-matter of the inquiry was 
 the killing, not the speaking, aud as the lips of one were sealed 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. 7 
 
 in death, it was what Black said after the killing that was desired 
 by the defense. 
 
 By Chief Justice Maulsby : 
 
 How long after the first shot was fired did yon hear anything 
 said ? 
 
 Dr. ITealy. Tt was after Black had crossed over to the pave- 
 ment, perhaps five or six steps. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby. Was he walking rapidly? 
 
 Dr. Hkaly. Not very. 
 
 The Chief Justice decided that as the words were used imme- 
 diately alter the shooting, they could be taken as part of the cir- 
 cumstances attendant upon that act, and, as such, are subject for 
 cross-examination. 
 
 Judge Lynch dissented, giving his opinion that the speaking 
 formed a distinct act from tlio shooting, and, as such, not allow- 
 able in cross-examination. 
 
 By Mr. Syester : 
 
 Will you state now, Doctor, what Black said when he reached 
 1 he pavement. 
 
 Dr. IIealy. ITe stood onthe pavement shaking his pistol toward 
 thebod) ; Dr. Smith., who was bending over it, said : "Don't shoot!" 
 Black said : l ' That is w hat you get for ruining my sister, and try- 
 ing to put my father in the penitentiary, and I have still got a 
 shot for any d — -d scoundrel who says I did wrong." 
 
 Mr. George H. Gross was next called, (a witness for the prose- 
 cution.) he testified as follows : 1 live in Cumberland ; my place of 
 business isabout sixty feel from where the tragedy took place ; fam 
 a tinner in the house of Mr. Moorehead, on Baltimore street ; I 
 was at the store the morning of the occurrence; was at the win- 
 dow. and looked in the d'roction others were looking ; thefirst thing 
 l saw wa i t he flash of Black's pistol, and then saw McKaig throw 
 up his hands and run towards the middle of the street ; could not 
 tell the relative positions of Black and McKaig; saw McKaig when 
 killed ; did not go to the body ; saw the pistol in the hands of Black 
 aft er t he first shut. 
 
 .Mr. Whitney showed a pistol, and asked if the witness could 
 identity it. Witness could not. [The pistol was a Remington, 
 Six-barrelled, army size, self-cocking. One load was still in it.] 
 
 ( Iross-examined for the defense by Mr. Syester : 
 
 Was looking out the window; saw people below excited; saw 
 the flash Of the pistol, and then saw McKaig ; wlien McKaig was 
 in the middle Of the street the second shot was fired; they were 
 about four feet apart at the tirst fire; did not recognize either 
 Clack or McKaig before the shot was fired ; did not see any wea- 
 pon in McKaig's band. 
 
 By Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution : 
 
 Q. Did you see anything in McKaig'-s hand? — A. Nothing. 
 fir. Whitney. Q. How long after the iirst Hash did you see 
 McKaig throw up his hand? — A. About a second. 
 
8 TRIAL Or HARRY CRAWFORD ELACK 
 
 Mr. W. W. McKaig, Sr n was sworn. 
 
 By Mr. "Whitney : 
 
 Q. Ave you the father of the deceased? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Give us the date of his death. —A. The 17th of October last. 
 
 Q. Look at these clothes, and see if they are those worn liy him 
 on the day of his death. — A. They are. [The clothes were a dark 
 bluish-looking coat and a white shirt, both having the bullet holes 
 in them.] 
 
 Dr. Edward P. Duval was next called for the prosecution, and 
 testified: I live in Cumberland, Maryland ; am a practicing phy- 
 sician there; made an examination of the body of W, \v. McKaig 
 after he wa e killed; probed the three wounds; found the first was in 
 the left side, between the seventh and eighth ribs, the second 
 wound w: 'S about an inch and a half above tlie lower angle of the 
 shoulder hlade, the third ball entered the left side near the bark- 
 bone, and penetrated forward ; extracted the ball of thefirst wound, 
 its direction was downward, inward, and forward; the deceased 
 must have had his side to the person who shot him ; extracted the 
 ball in front of the lower part of the breast bone; its direction was 
 forward, and slightly downward and inward ; the direction of the 
 third ball was slightly upward. [The witness exhibited the two 
 balls extracted by him, and they were shown to the jury.l The 
 effect of a shot is to create depression and exhaustion : a ball pene- 
 trating the chest or diaphragm may occasion spasmodic action ; a 
 ball entering the side wouid give a shock both to the mind and 
 body; either one of the shots received would rave caused the death 
 o! McKaig; lie examined the body at the residence of the father 
 of the decease d ; be only made a casual examination at the ollice. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Nelson, for the defense : 
 
 Witness made no examination of the clothing ; does not pretend 
 to he an expeit ; might tell by the impingement of a ball upon the 
 clothing, if there were successive layers what direction it came 
 from ; there was no difficulty in discovering the course of the balls 
 in McKaig's body; thinks one of the balls struck the edge of a 
 rib, from its jagged appearance; theball fired into the back lodged 
 in the spinal ma. row ; felt satistied of that ; he examined the body 
 about tluee-quarters of an hour alter the body was taken into the 
 ollice ; only probed the wounds; made no post mortem examination ; 
 had been summoned by tue coroner, and the jury rendered their 
 verdict without a minute examination. 
 
 James Orrick, Jr.. was next called for the prosecution, and tes- 
 tified as. follows : I reside in Cumberland; I live between Balti- 
 more street and the foundry of W. W. McKaig, .Jr. ; I recollect 
 the morning of the killing of McKaig ; I saw Black the morning 
 of the shooting ; I had my watch in my hand 15 minutes before 8 
 O'clock, and it, was about that time I saw Black; he was looking 
 in at the ollice windows of the foundry of McKaig, slowly walking 
 upon the opposite side of the street and looking in; he walked 
 faster after passing the foundry ; I got into Baltimore street lirst ; 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 9 
 
 I went up the street toward the railroad ; T saw nothing of the 
 shooting ; it was a warm morning; he (Black) had a large brown 
 overcoat on and both bands in his pockets. 
 The cross-examination did not change the tenor of the evidence. 
 
 John 8. Craigen, for the prosecution, was called, and testified as 
 follows : I reside in Cumberland ; I am a druggistat southeast cor- 
 ner of Baltimore and Mechanics streets ; I remember the morning 
 of the killing of McKaig; I saw Black before the shooting; it was 
 a mild morning; I saw Black on the opposite side of the street 
 from my store; lie seemed to be looking over the creek at West 
 Baltimore street ; he had on a dark overcoat; he had his hands, I 
 think, in his pockets; it was at least half an hour before the shoot- 
 in?. 
 
 The cross-examination did not develope any new facts. 
 
 Cornelius Conner was called for the prosecution, and testified as 
 follows : I am a drayman and live in Cumberland ; I knew the de- 
 ceased. Col. W. \Y. McKaig, Jr. ; I saw him the morning of the 
 occurrence; he spoke to me and I replied ; I went into a store to 
 get a drink of water, and when I came out he was laying in the 
 street on his lace; I met him at 1 lie endof the bridge when I spoke 
 to him ; the shooting was all over when J came our ; 1 don't think 
 I could describe the pistol ; I did not jro to the body, but went im- 
 mediately to the foundry with the news. 
 
 The cross-examination did not alter the effect of the state- 
 ments. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby stated that the Court desired to admon- 
 ish the jury not to read any newspaper accounts of the trial, or to 
 allow any one to talk to them, or in their presence, of the trial. 
 
 At 2 o'clock and SO minutes the court adjourned until Thursday 
 morning at 9 o'clock. 
 
 TIITRD DAY. 
 
 The Prosecution Close their Case — Opening Statement for the Defense 
 by Mr. Syester — Witnesses for the Treiverser upon the Stand — 
 Their Version of the Tragedy. 
 
 Even before the hour appointed for opening court, the knots of 
 people gathered about hotel porticos and street corners, began to 
 breakup; individuals and parties wended their way toward the 
 court-house. 
 
 At precisely 9 o'clock on Thursday, April 13, the court assem- 
 bled for the t bird day's proceedings in the case. The apartment 
 presented the same animated appearance as on each of the pre- 
 ceding days; in fact, the interest was very palpably increasing. ' 
 
10 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Judges Maulsby, Lynch, and Bowie were present. Soon after 
 the opening of the court the prisoner entered, accompanied by his 
 mother. Mrs. Black was dressed in deep mourning, ;md all the 
 time while in court seemed to be greatly agitated. 
 
 Cool; Ekgkey, for the prosecution, was called and testified as 
 follows: I reside in Cumberland, Alleghany county, Maryland; I 
 have resided there live years, and was there in October last; am 
 an attorn ey-at-law; 1 was acquainted with both the prisoner at 
 the bar and W. W. McKaig, Jr.; I have known the prisoner two 
 or three years: i remember the day McKaig was killed; I saw 
 Black (in thai day as I was passing to my office about half-past 
 7 o'clock in the morning, before the shooting lie was standing 
 within the door of the drug store of C. C. Shriver; L passed by a 
 short distance, then returned and shook hands with him at the 
 door, bidding him good morning, and informed him that I was 
 under many obligations to him for escorting my mother from 
 Cumberland to Baltimore; Black replied that he was glad to have 
 done me the favor; as 1 bade him good morning Black stepped 
 back further into the recess of Shriver's store; he had an over- 
 coat on and wore a slouch hat, and had both hands in his overcoat 
 pockets, when I first approached him; he offered me his left hand 
 and did not disengage his right hand whilst I was talking with 
 him; his right pocket seemed to be pushed out; I thought there 
 was something more than his hand alone in it, and thought it so 
 strange that he should give me his left hand, not being very inti- 
 mate with him; after I bade him good morning I passed over to 
 my office; 1 reside, on Bedford street, on east side of Willis creek, 
 about tour squares from Baltimore street; Shriver's store is on 
 Baltimore street, not quite hall-way between Willis creek and the 
 Baltimore depot, and east of Mechanics street. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Syester: 
 
 I had passed Black standing in the drug store, and, not clearly 
 recognizing him, i asked Mr. Wickerd, whom I met a few steps 
 below, '" [snot that young Black?" and on his replying "Yes," 
 f went hack and met Black just as he stepped from .Shriver's store 
 door to the pavement, and I said "Good morning, Mr. Black;" 
 my eyesight is good ; I supposed there was something in his pocket, 
 because he extended me his left hand and brokeawayin an abrupt 
 manner; ] know Black was agent for a coal company; but do not 
 know his business at Cumberland on that day. 
 
 Attorney General Jones stated that the (State would here rest 
 its case and would offer no further evidence, except for the pur- 
 pose of rebutting the testimony offered by the defense. 
 
 [At this juncture.the interest become intense, people began to 
 crowd into the court room in large numbers, and many were 
 unable to gain admittance. All the facts of the killing, as proved 
 by the prosecution, had been spread before the public in the news- 
 papers, and nothing new had yet been heard; but what would be 
 the evidence of the defense was a mystery to all, and it was 
 
FOB KILLING COLONEL W. \V. M'KAIG, JR. 11 
 
 expected the opening statemenl would develope the facts upon 
 which they would rely for an acquittal of the prisoner, and in the 
 hands of Mr. Syester, all knew that they would be eloquently and 
 forcibly staled.] 
 
 At 10 o'clock and 8 minutes Mr. Syester arose and made the fol- 
 lowing 
 
 OPENING STATEMENT FOR THE DEFENSE. 
 
 The transaction out of which the indictment in this case grew 
 occurred in Alleghany county, Maryland, more than one hundred 
 miles distant from here. And yet we find ourselves confronted 
 by you, as those to pass between the state and the life of the 
 prisoner — strangers to him and to his witnesses. 
 
 " That the trial of tacts where they arise is one of the greatest 
 securities to the lives, liberties, and estates of the people," isa 
 great truth that was declared, centuries ago, in the faoeof that 
 tremendous engine of power and oppression, the star Chamber 
 of England, and it is deeply embedded in the hearts and affections 
 Of all who value the rights and liberties of the people. 
 
 It stands incorporated to-day in the present constitution of 
 our State, as it has stood for near a century in all its several 
 constitutions, unmoved amid the fluctuations of power, unchanged 
 amid the changes and revolutions of sentiment that have marked 
 the history of this State from its earliest foundation. 
 
 The prisoner has been dragged away from the face of the com- 
 munity before which he has gone in and out from his earliest 
 boyhood without reproach, lie has been torn from those who 
 understood and appreciated the high character he so early won 
 among them, and u it h his witnesses, all strangers to you, is before 
 you, at the mere suggestion of the state attorney. And you are 
 called on by the prosecution, which has dragged him here, to 
 declare by your verdict that he shall not live, but must die. 
 
 Gentlemen, be your verdict what it may, whether it shall shut 
 up and conclude that young life, while the dews of the morning 
 are yet fresh upon his brow, in the solemn silence of the grave, or 
 shall again re stoic him to the life of usefulness, honor, and 
 respectability upon which he had just entered, and return him 
 once more to the arms and affections of his wretched father and 
 heart-broken mother— whatever may be the end of this business, 
 let it ever be remembered that Harry Crawford Black never 
 shunned the face of his people, never shrank from an investiga- 
 tion of this transact ion at the place where it arose, but that, he 
 has been brought here by this prosecution to take his chances for 
 justice and for his life before strangers. 
 
 The circumstances that led to the occurrence for which the 
 prisoner is here to answer with his life are the most distressing 
 and the very saddest that can be imagined, in order fully to un- 
 derstand them it will be necessary to go back a few years prior to 
 the particular matter we are inquiring into. 
 
 [n 1863 the prisoner, then a mere boy, not seventeen years of 
 age, left his home and became a soldier in the ranks of the South- 
 ern army. 
 
12 TRIAL OF HARRY C&AWFORD BLACK 
 
 His family consisted only of his father and mother and one 
 sister, Myra II. Black, not then over twenty years of age. 
 
 The deceased, William W. McKaig, Jr., wasalso a soldier in the 
 same service; and upon the close of the war, in 1865. these two, with 
 others, returned to their bomes in Cumberland, Maryland. But 
 the fortunes and worldly i xpectations of these two, to which they 
 returned, were as widely different as the poles. McKaig returned 
 to the bosom of an opulent and powerful family, and Black to 
 the arms of one straitened in fortune and almost wholly without 
 means. 
 
 Findin.se all the avenues of trade already filled in his native 
 town, and being obliged to do something for a iivelihood, he 
 accordingly took service a few weeks after he returned home in a 
 corps of engineers for service under Maximillian, then Emneror 
 of Mexico. Here he remained until the death of Maximillian, 
 which put an end to that employment, and he returned to Cum- 
 berland in June. 18G6. 
 
 He remained but a very short time and went West, where he 
 obtained employment; but, by the misfortunes of his employers, 
 lost his situation, and returned to Cumberland sometime in the 
 early part of 1867. Again he left Cumberland for the West, and 
 again returned in September, 1S69. At this time, through the 
 influence of friends, he obtained employment in the Franklin 
 Coal Company, engaged in mining, where he remained in the per- 
 sonal supervision of the business entrusted to him until October, 
 1870. when the occurrences that form the subject of your inquiry 
 happened, and he surrendered himself to the sheriff of Alleghany 
 county. He has been in confinement from that day to this. 
 
 I should here state tint during the whole period of his confine- 
 ment his relations with the company he served were in no resoect 
 changed, except so far as his personal attention to the affairs 
 committed to his hands was concerned. He still continues to 
 sign and endorse all the necessary papers, statements and rolls 
 connected with the department under his supervision in prison. 
 
 lu the spring and summer of 1866, as I have stated, Black was 
 in Mexico. 
 
 William McKaig was in Cumberland— a gentleman of powerful 
 person, of uncommon appearance, and elegant accomplishments. 
 He knew Myra Black, the sister of the prisoner, from her child- 
 hood, lie left her for the war a mere child; lie returned to find 
 her just on the verge of womanhood, with all its fair visions and 
 bright prospects before her. lie found her in the very " morn 
 and liquid deus of life, when contagious blandishments are most 
 imminent," and seeing this young and confiding girl, remarkable 
 for her sprightly temper and distinguished for the strength and 
 polish of her intellect, with no stain upon her character, no blemish 
 upon her name, no spot upon her honor, the pride and solace of 
 her parents, he then conceived the sinful, hideous, and unholy 
 passion which terminated in her ruin, and the indescribable and 
 unuterable wretchedness of her parents and brother. 
 
 It will be proven to you that McKaig was constant and assidu- 
 ous in his attentions to this lady, frequently with her in public, 
 and at all times was With her, an acceded and accredited gentle- 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'KAIG, JR. 13 
 
 man. These attentions were never once supposed by the parents 
 or any other relative of the family to have been dishonorable, and 
 he was, therefore, received at all times upon terms of unhesitating 
 confidence. But he abused, the confidence and hospitalities of 
 these parents to their indescribable misery and wretchedness, and 
 lie betrayed the love of this unhappy girl, to her absolute and 
 fearful ruin. lie seduced her, and from that time forth, she was 
 but the mere creature and very slave of his passions and lusts. 
 lie was complete master of her movements, and Iter fears of expo- 
 sure and the dread of revelations enabled him to hold that power 
 and exercise it with remorseless cruelty. 
 
 He determined that she should remain his, to gratify his pas- 
 sion and minister to his depraved lust. He held her fast in his 
 remorseless grasp^ determined that nothing should withdraw her 
 from his power until satiated with this unholy indulgence; in his 
 own good time he saw proper to throw her back on the bosom of 
 her family, to be scorned by herself and society and shunned by 
 the world. 
 
 So inordinate had become his passion and so determined was he 
 in holding on to the absolute power he knew he held over her that, 
 when a gentleman of high character offered her his hand in hon- 
 orable marriage, McKaig, with the knowledge that it was his 
 purpose to remove to the far West with his intended bride, dis- 
 closed to him the dreadful and stunuing fact that he had seduced 
 and ruined her in the face of the world. 
 
 In October, 1866, McKaig married a Miss Hughes, of Jefferson 
 county. Virginia. But his criminal intercourse with this unhappy 
 girl continued. His marriage had no power to check or bridle ins 
 licentiousness. He still lived with the wretched and undone 
 victim of his lust until the spring of 1870, when there was born 
 to her body, the child which this day bears his image on its infant 
 face, so plain and unmistakable that there is no room for doubt. 
 Up to that time McKaig on all public occasions and before the 
 face of the community held this trembling, ruined girl forth as 
 virtuous, and accredited her as one worthy the society of the pure 
 and blameless in life. On the occasion of his return home from 
 his bridal trip with his young wife, a brilliant ami fashionable 
 reception and costly entertainment was given at his father's 
 house. And there this wretched lady was an invited and honored 
 guest. On that very occasion McKaig, before the whole company, 
 gave her his arm and escorted her to the refreshment room, and 
 in other ways paid her marked attention. 
 
 During all this time Crawford Black remained in utter and pro- 
 found ignorance of the rum of his sister, and the shame that had 
 fallen on his name. His employments and engagements were 
 miles away, and he reached his home only once in two or three 
 weeks and then only for a brief interval, when he came to share 
 with his mother, whom be ever loved with unexampled tender- 
 ness, part of his scanty earnings and savings. Indeed it was not 
 until the vigilant eye of the mother discovered the situation of 
 her daughter that one thought or shade of suspicion ever crossed 
 her mind. Then, for the first time, did these stunned and stricken 
 parents even imagine the possibility ot the shame of their only, 
 
14 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 their darling daughter. And into i heir bleeding hearts alone did 
 that agonized and wretched girl pour little by little the story of 
 her wrongs and ruin. Every precaution was taken by the parents 
 to conceal the dishonor of their humble name from the world, and 
 to save and shield their erring and ruined child from the scorn 
 and contempt of the community. The effect of tins dreadful dis- 
 closure or discovery upon the mother is beyond all description. 
 She is a lady of superior and finished education, of refinement and 
 unblemished character, keenly and painfully alive to the honor 
 and respectability of her little family. Indeed, like a woman ©f 
 fine understanding and strong sense, as she is, she cared for little 
 else. She was utterly prostrate and helpless in the presence of 
 the overwhelming calamity that dashed every cup of life with 
 bitterness from her lips and shrouded all its scenes with unalter- 
 able gloom and irredeemable wretchedness. Day after day she 
 tank under the heavy burden and gave way under the unendur- 
 able misery of her situation. 
 
 The no less wretched father was summoned to the contempla- 
 tion of scenes of anguish and misery which reduced him to a state 
 of absolute distraction and frenzy. Everything around him' 
 bespoke utter and irretrievable ruin. His jiame and his honor, 
 the only things that remained to him, were gone, while everything 
 around him was a memorial of shame. Ilis wife sinking and 
 failing before him, his daughter dishonored, scorned, and driven 
 from the face of the world; his home shunned by the pure and 
 blameless in life; his very name but the byword of the depraved 
 and licentious, to be pronounced with scorn and contempt in all 
 the high places and all the low places of the land, the standing 
 stock of the ribald jest and the low-born sneer. 
 
 It was while laboring under influences such as I have attempted 
 to give you but a, faint outline, and goaded to madness and dis- 
 traction by the contemplation of miseries which no time, do con- 
 solation could heal, and of which he was a daily and hourly 
 spectator; it was under such influences and impulses that he 
 resolved to visit the author of all this ruin and woe with that 
 vengeance, which, I take occasion to say here, he most richly 
 deserved, and which the common and universal sense of all man- 
 kind most justly and righteously approve. 
 
 lie had a difficulty with McKaig in the month of June, 1S70, but 
 McKaigwas not severely injured. He was soon on the streets again 
 receiving the congratulations and honeyed commendations which 
 wealth and great family influence can always command, no matter 
 to what extent the character maybe depraved; while the, poor,, 
 scorned, ruined victim of his passion and lust sat down, clol hed 
 with the garment, of wretchedness, and her bereaved and help 
 parents mingled their tears and sorrows unseen, uncared, unpitied 
 and uncomtorted by those who, but lately, delighted to accept their 
 hospitalities. 
 
 After the occurrence in June, McKaig's whole manner and 
 relations to the family he had so fearfully wronged changed, lie 
 then came forward and openly denied having seduced the girl, 
 declared that she had been long before, from her earliest girlhood, 
 a prostitute. We have reason to know that those who have in 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. \V. M'kAIG, JR. 15 
 
 charge his name are here in this prosecution to attempt to show 
 her character for depravity, guilt, and shame, which but lately 
 they, as well as he, held forth to the world as a til associate for 
 the virtuous and the pureof heart. Nor did the vengeance of 
 McKaig stop with simply branding the girl he had ruined as an 
 outcast from all decency; he went further. Conscious of his own 
 superior physical prowess, and glorying in the belief and convic- 
 tion that his steady hand, his quick eye, his dauntless courage, 
 and unerring aim would supply him with large advantages in any 
 description of encounter he might provoke, he determined to force 
 a bloody and deadly issue upon both the father and son of this 
 unfortunate girl. ITe immediately began to browbeat and insult, 
 this boy upon all occasions when opportunity offered. We will 
 show you, gent lemen, that he armed himself and went armed with 
 tlic express purpose of killing Black at the first opportunity; that 
 when he was killed he had on bis person no less than two six-barrel 
 revolvers, all loaded, and we expect, gentlemen of the jury, to show 
 you that it was McKaig's intention to provoke an attack that he 
 might kill Harry Crawford Black. On several occasions, gentle- 
 men, we will prove to you that McKaig would go out of his way 
 to offer an insult to this prisoner, and we expect to show you that, 
 on the morning of the shooting when Black met McKaig and crossed 
 over the street to the side where he was, he made up his mind that 
 the time had come when McKaig was going to force him to defend 
 his life, and I tell you, gentlemen, that, if he had not been suit- 
 plied with a self-cocking pistol, Black would himself have been a 
 bloody corpse from the effects of that meeting. AYe expect to be 
 able to show that McKaig was the first to make the attack. And 
 little did that proud man think that the frail boy he was pursuing 
 for his life would prove the winner of the stake that he himself 
 had laid. That boy had stood unmoved amid the shock of battle, 
 and been calm and composed amid the roar of artillery and the 
 clash of musketry, and to a great harvest of death he had also 
 been a spectator. Driven to a defense of his own life, he was too 
 brave a man to shirk the responsibility, and in the fight he had 
 not provoked he proved the better man. 
 
 Gentlemen, our friends on the other side have said much about 
 the degrees of murder; with those distinctions you have nothing 
 to do. This young man is either guiltv or not guilty. You must 
 say either that his life shall be taken or that he shall be restored 
 to Ins family and friends fully purged of the crime whereof he 
 stands charged. They have, gentlemen, cited several passages 
 
 from the law books. There is an unwritten law, as unalterable 
 as that of the Modes and Persians, that is legibly traced upon 
 your hearts and upon mine, and is as essential to the conduct of 
 tyas that t rac< d \\ it bin the legal commentaries. Such a law, 
 gentlemen, has a great bearing upon this case, as you will see 
 when we offer our testimony. 
 
 KVJ1>:: -■ E FOB THE DEFENSE. 
 
 Mr. Lair,-, tux Wilson was then called for the defense, and inter- 
 rogated as to seeiug McKaig insult Black a l'< w days before the 
 shooting, evidently for the purpose of bringing on a tight. 
 
16 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution, objected, and quite a lengthy 
 argument took place between counsel as to its admissibility. The 
 conrt held, however, that it was admissible, but Mr. Voorhees, 
 for the defense, withdrew the witness, stating that they would 
 offer the testimony at another time. 
 
 1/;-. Charles Medorc, for t be defense, was called, and testified : I 
 reside in Cumberland; I know Mr. McKaig by sight; I knew 
 Black personally; I went to school with him; I saw a good part 
 of the transaction that: resulted in the killing of McKaig on the 
 17th of October last ; 1 was at work opposite where the shooting 
 occurred; r saw McKaig approach Black, saw Black shoot him, 
 and a pistol fall from McKaig'S hands at the first lire that Black 
 discharged ; this was followed up until four shots had been fired; 
 Dr. Smith. Mr. Morehead, and I carried the body of McKaig into 
 the office ; r saw hut one pistol, and ir fill about the middle of the 
 i i reet, about ten feet from the curb ; I unbuckled the belt around 
 McKaig in the office, and it contained an empty pistol-holster; I 
 saw no pistol in the ofiice. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney : 
 
 It was between 71 and S o'clock that the shooting took place; I 
 am a shoemaker by trade; I looked out the window when I beard 
 the first shot; it was a pretty good-sized window, the panes of 
 class, perhaps, 12x16; I had not taken my seat to work, having 
 jusl entered the shop, and had been engaged in arranging things 
 about the shop, as was my custom on Monday morning; whibt 
 attending to this Charley Clark, a young lad about thirteen or 
 fourteen years of age, and a relative of mine, had come in to have 
 a measure for a pair of shoes taken ; I was behind the counter,and 
 was just taking out my book to enter the measure, and my hack 
 was to the door ; the counter is between the door and the window; 
 what I saw was through the window, except the third shot, which 1 
 saw through the door; when I looked out at the door McKaig u as 
 down on all-fours near my door on the sidewalk; the first shot 1 
 did not see, the second I turned and saw through the window; 
 when I first saw McKaig he was crossing the street toward me in 
 a kind of a trot; I don't think he (McKaig) could have been more 
 than a step or two from the pavement when I first saw him, ami 
 was in a kind of a stooping condition, with revolver in hand ; it 
 was hanging down ; I do not recollect seeing hands up ; there, were 
 four shots fired ; he (McKaig) was crossing the street when Black 
 fired the second shot; the pistol had dropped about ten or fifteen 
 feet from where the body lay after the first shot ; Black followed 
 him up, firing until four shots had been discharged; McKaig was 
 down on all-tours near the curb at my door ; he raised and went 
 back toward where the shooting commenced, and received the 
 fourth shot in the middle of the street ; I was about twenty-five 
 feet from bim, being at the door; he was erect at the time of the 
 fourth shot; Black was very close in frontof him ; Mr. Morehead, 
 Dr. Smith, and I took up the body; 1 do not know whether the 
 revolver fell from the holster ; they were about eight or ten feet 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. flfKAIG, JR. 17 
 
 apart when the first shot was fired ; T only saw where one. ball hit 
 hiru ; I told several parties T saw the pistol ; one J remember was 
 Mr. McCullough; I do not remember seeing anything else in 
 McKaig's hands; the pistol was ratheralong one; they are gener- 
 ally alike, except the size of them; I think it was longer than 
 usually used ; the pistol was in his hands a very short time, not a 
 minute; I think Ale Kaig walked ten or twelve feet, carrying the 
 pistol in his hands ; I don't think any one else assisted in carrying 
 the body except the ones already named ; I opened the shirt and 
 saw but one wound ; 1 think 1 »r. Smith, Mr. Price, and a number 
 of others were in the office whilst the body lay there: I unbuckled 
 the belt from McKaig's body, and found on it an empty pistol- 
 holster. 
 
 Ehos Davis, for the defense, was the next witness called, and 
 testified as follows : I live on Centre street, in Cumberland; have 
 been there three years, and follow carting; I knew Mr. McKaig ; 
 used to do a good deal of hauling for him ; I also knew Mr. Black; 
 on the morning referred to I was at the corner of the bridge ; Mr. 
 McKaig passed me, and we spoke to each other; he was carrying 
 a little cane, and changed it from his right to his left hand soon 
 after passing me; I then saw him put his hand behind him, and 
 saw something shine as he did so ; he soon met Black, and a shot 
 was tired, but'l did not see who did it ; I saw McKaig drop his 
 cane and throw up his hands as soon as the first shot was fired ; I 
 was on the lower corner of the bridge; Black was coming up street, 
 and met him face to face. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney : 
 
 It was about 1)4 or 8 o'clock when the shooting occurred, and I 
 was hauling coal to Mr. Lowndes' law office ; I left my horse and 
 cart, and walked down the street to see about getting some hauling 
 from Mr. Hughes; I left my cart about thirty or forty feet from 
 the other end of the bridge from where the shooting took place ; I 
 was hauling coal from the car; I keep my cart on Court street, 
 three or four squares from Baltimore street; I took my horse out 
 of the stable, and went to the car and took a load of coal to Mr. 
 Lowndes' office, but could not get into his yard; there was another 
 colored man with me, by the name of Garner ; I know Cornelius 
 Conner, but do not remember seeing him that morning; I was 
 standing at Ryan's corner; Mr. McKaig crossed the Street, and 
 changed his cane from one hand to the other: I saw him draw 
 something like a pistol ; 1 did not see aim speak or shake hands 
 With anybody until he met Black; 1 saw something shine; the. 
 sun was shining, and made this thing glisten; I did not see any- 
 thing drawn ; i told a good many person- of this matter down at 
 tiie wharf; i can't remember belling anyone except a colored man 
 that L saw McKaig put his hand behind him ; I saw nothing in 
 his hands when he threw them up ; the hands went up as S< ion as 
 the first shot was fired: 1 did not see the first fire; when the 
 second shot was fired McKaig was in the middle of the street; 
 Black followed him; the third was lired as he attempted to raise 
 on the pavement at the post; the fourth fire was across the street. 
 2k 
 
18 TRIAL OP HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 WiUicm Waif, for the defense, was called, and testi fie d: T 
 reside in Cumberland; have live there all my life: i knew W". W. 
 McKaig, Jr., by sight, and know Harry Black welj ; on the morn- 
 ing of the shooting T was standing on I litesideof the 
 street from where it took place ; I was talking to Dr. P. A. Healy; 
 I saw Black coming by Dietz's corner toward the bridge; McKaig 
 was coining down the street; Dri. Healy called myatteafcton to 
 them, and said, "see thosetwo men meet;'- 5 as they met the firing 
 commenced ; after the first shot McKaig dropped a pistol from his 
 hand just outside : the curbstone into the street^ Mr. McKaig ran 
 over to the post on the opposite side of the street, and then back 
 to the middle of the street ; when McKaig ? s hands went up after 
 the first shot, the pistol mentioned dropped from them; I saw 
 McKaig when he crossed over the bridge, and he had a cane swing- 
 ing in his left hand. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney : 
 
 I was standing talking to Dr. Healy, and he called my attention 
 to McKaig and Black; I talked it over with Dr. Healy different 
 times since as to the occurrence; I don't know of saying to Dr. 
 Healy that I saw a pistol in McKaig's hand, I can't say that I 
 ever told Dr. Healy that there was no pistol in McKaig's hand ; I 
 never saw the pistol until it fell into the street outside the curb- 
 stone; I told a number around there that day alter Mr. Turney 
 picked it up; be picked it up immediately after the Bhooting; I 
 think it was after the body was carried rfito Dr. Smith's o 
 Dr. Healy's and Dr. Smith's office is the same ; Mr. McKaig met 
 Mr. Conner near the corner of Canal street; I know Mr. Conner 
 very well ; I know Mr. Langgold, of Cumberland, but am not cer- 
 tain of having had a conversation with him about it ; I have no 
 recollection of telling Mr. Langgold in my shop, during the last 
 three weeks, that there was no such thing as Mr. McKaig having 
 a pistol in his hands. 
 
 After the examination of this witness the Court stated that the 
 hour for adjournment (3 p. m.) had arrived, and the court would 
 now adjourn until Friday morning at 9 o'clock. 
 
 FOURTH DAY. 
 
 Continuation of Testimony on the Part of the Defense — Witnesses 
 Called to Prove the Character of the Prisoner — Interesting Evidence 
 in Relation to the Killing. 
 
 Promptly at 9 o'clock the court met for the fourth day's proceed- 
 ings. All the judges and other officers of the court were in attendance, 
 as were all the counsel for both prosecution and defense. As usual, 
 the prisoner was looking well and, apparently, perfectly self-possessed 
 and calm. Around the counsel for the prosecution sat, as during the 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. Wl jflCAIG, JR. 19 
 
 entire proceedings, a large number of the relatives and frie ids of the 
 deceased ; most, of them— if, indeed, not all of them — being lawyers of 
 more than ordinary natural and legal ability. Immediately after the 
 
 opening of the court — 
 
 John Hipp was called for the defense and testified as follow-; ■ I 
 reside in Cumberland and am a brick-layer ; I knew Mr. McKaig, and 
 I know the prisoner ; I saw i hem on the morning of the shooting; I was 
 on the opposite side of the street, at Dieftz's store* at the time^ and I 
 first saw them after the second shot was fired; my attention Was called 
 to them by the first shot ; I turned around to Mr. Dietz and said. k ' My 
 God, they are killing each other." MoKaigran across the Btreel after 
 the first lire and Black followed; 1 saw McKaigwhen he fell, and I saw 
 a revolver in the baud of each of them ; they ran across the street 
 toward Reed's store ; after the first fire Loth sprang off the curb-stone 
 toward the middle of the street ; McKaig fell about twenty feel from 
 me, about the middle of the street; after the first fire i could see 
 everything that passed, except that I did not sec; them when they 
 reached the pavement on my side of the street. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitxey, for the prosecution : 
 
 Mr. 1 >ietz is a brick-layer, but keeps a green grocery ; I was going to 
 work for him the morning of the shooting; 1 went into the back yard 
 five minutes after fee shooting; I jumped over the back yard fenjce; Mi'. 
 Dietz assisted me over; I did not want, to go. out in the street an 
 taken to corn*! ; after McKaig fell Dietz and I both went in the back 
 yard, and there we remained about live minutes ; he and I talked about 
 what had occurred ; I saw McKaig after the first shot ; I was standing 
 next to the door; a little girl was in the store, also; 1 don't know 
 What became of her; after the first shot I turned around and looked ; 
 when 1 first saw Black and McKaig they were both springing away from 
 the opposite pavement ; the second shot was fired right near the curb ; 
 I only heard the first shot, and the second shot was fired while they were 
 on the pavement; the third shot, was ihvd about the middle of the 
 Street ; \lhe fourth shot was fired after .McKaig had turned to run back ; 
 there is a post in front of Medore's shoe store ; be came near io ii. and 
 turned back and fell in front of the curb at Medore's store; Black was 
 behind him when he fired the last shot ; I ran into the back yard as 
 soon as he fell; McKaig threw up his hands and fell on all-fours ; I 
 saw the pistol in his hand when the second shot was fired ; I noticed 
 no cane ; I had a. full view of his face and his body ; [ did not see the 
 pistol afterwards; Diet/ and i talked about I he alfair, and 1 talked to 
 sonic few others about it. 
 
 Re-examined by Mr. SYESTER for tin- defense: 
 
 Peter Tarnell em no to me twice to know what I knew about it, and 
 1 told him if he did not, let me alone I would break his neck. He is a 
 witness for the prosecution,. 
 
 The wil ness was asked to more fully explain the immediate circum- 
 stance'- of the shooting as he saw them; objection was made by the 
 
 prosecution, as he had been examined at length on that point by the 
 defense. 
 
20 TRIAL OF HARRY SBAWFORB BLACK 
 
 The Court said i In- witness cdqld state again exactly whwe McKaig 
 fell, ami he .-aid he lull near the middle of:the street opposite Medore's 
 slice store. 
 
 George Garnry, for the defense. was called and testified : I live in 
 Washington city, and was in Cumberland on the day of the shooting ; 
 I have no! been there long : 1 was standing on Mr. Ryan's corner, wait- 
 'i- Mr. Hughes, of whom 1 was to get employment, and 1 saw the 
 shooting; I was looking across the street k\ the time} 1 heard the 
 report of a pistol, and 1 looked ami saw Mr. McKaig and Mr. Blafek: 
 Loth had pistols; after the second tire, as Mr. MeKuig rah across the 
 street, lie put his hand behind hi m, as if to draw another pistol, but he 
 could not draw it; he made for t lie other side of the street but could 
 not reach it ; after the third shot Mr. McKaig fell on all fours near the 
 i meat: Mr. Black was On the opposite side of the pavement from 
 that on which Mr. McKaig fell when he fired the fourth shot; Mr. 
 Black then said : "That i< what yon get for seducing my sister, and 
 
 I have another barrel for any d d scoundrel who says I did riot do 
 
 right." McKaig had a cane and revolver in his hands, and he 
 dropped them both after the first shot; 1 did not know McKaig or 
 Black; I only speak of the man that was shot down. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution : 
 
 Q. What do you mean by Ryan's corner ? 
 
 Witness. There ain't but one corner there ; everybody calls it 
 Ryan's corner, and I call it Ryan's corner, too. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. How were you standing when you saw Black and 
 McKaig? 
 
 Witness. I was so standing, when the first shot was tired, that I did 
 not have to change my position to see the tiring; 1 had been standing 
 there about fifteen minutes when the shooting commenced; was by 
 myself; 1 know Enos Davis slightly; did not see him there that 
 morning; I did not know Mr. McKaig; I was about fifteen feet from 
 the bridge, and could see it; 1 had business in Cumberland; was 
 staying with John Carey, who lives on Independent street ; that street 
 is located seven or eight squares up town from where the tragedy oc- 
 curred; I left home about 6J o'clock to get work, and met a. colored 
 man on Baltimore street, and inquired of him for work; didn't know 
 hun and don't now; he told me of a job he had left at Mr. Hughes' ; 1 
 went to Ryan's corner and met a colored man working for Mr. Hughe- ; 
 came there beforethe tiring commenced; the first colored man I met 
 near the St. Nicholas Hotel, which is about four squares from Mr. 
 Hughes'; I saw McKaig have a pistol as he stepped off the pavetnent 
 when the first shot was fired, and it fell out of his hand; I did riot see 
 him throw up his hands, but, rather reached behind as if he was getting 
 another pistol ; then he was shot again as he started for the other curb ; 
 was shot the third time on his return about the middle of the street, and 
 fell, when Black shot him a fourth time ; Black then went toward the 
 jail and delivered himself up; suppose he delivered himself up, as ho 
 got so near the jail he could not get away ; the tirsl shot was tired on 
 the pavement; second as he was crossing the street; third on the 
 opposite pavement, when McKaig threw his arms behind him and ex- 
 claimed, "Oh," and fell on his face ; Mr. Black crossed over the street 
 again and fired the fourth shot; 1 went to work then, and have been 
 in Cumberland ever since. 
 
FOB KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'XAIO, JR. 21 
 
 Bewy HaU\ for 6he defense, was tin- next witness 'Called. lie tes- 
 tified &£ follows : i live about seven criiles east Of Cumberland, and I 
 was in Cumberland oq the morning of the shooting; I knew McKaig 
 and know the prisoner ; l was, at the time of the shooting, in Mr. 
 ( ►•j.-le'- harness shop ; 1 beard the reports of the pistol, and went to the 
 door and saw Mr. McKay fall near the middle of the street, in front 
 of Dr. Smith's office 5 l saw a pistol picked up after he fell ; it was 
 near his right hand; I did not know the person who picked it up, 
 and I know Mi\ Turney ; it was not him, I am sure; I did not take 
 particular potiC ! o| Cue man who picked it up. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. WlllTNEY, for the prosecution : 
 The pistol was Very elbse to tlie body : it had not been removed when 
 the pistol was picked np; the man who picked it up had mixed gray 
 hair; it- was not Mr. Turney. 
 
 Charles Clark, (a boy of about ten years of age,) was called for the 
 defense, and testified : I live in Cumberland; know Mr. Medoro; I 
 knew Mr. McKkig, but don't know the prisoner; I wasin Mr. Medore's 
 1 be morniug of the shool in'g, getti'ng measured lor a pair of shoes ; 
 I looked oul of the window and saw Mr. McKaig near .Mr. Medore's 
 door, nn t Mr. Black following him, ; 1 saw a pistol fall in the street, 
 but did not see it, fall from Mr. McKaig's baud; it fell righl in front of 
 Mr. Turtiey's store, and in the gutter; after the third shot Mr. McKaig 
 fell; Mr. Turney picked up the pistol. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution : 
 I heard only one shot before looking out of the window; I saw 
 McKaig fall ; both of them were off the pavement when the pistol fell ; 
 1 saw only McKaig's left band ; in it he bad a cane ; the body lay in the 
 middle of the street and the pistol layabout seven feet from it; I did 
 notgo out of the store until the shooting was over; the pistol was 
 picked up after the body was taken in, and the body had been pi 
 up before i left tlie sliop ; i 'lid not e- ( ) (<> the body, and 1 did not see 
 the pistol lying there while the body was there. 
 
 Dr. L. K. Hummelshine, who bad been summoned by the prosecu- 
 tion, was called by the defense, and testified : I live in Cumberland; I 
 knew McKaig, and I know toe prisoner; E am a dentist, and have lived 
 twenty years in Cumberland; I witnessed a part of the shooting afl 
 on tii ■ iber; after the first fire I saw McKaig retreat- 
 
 ing from tii' edge o! the curbstone; he went towards the middle of 
 the street; 1 have no recollection of seeing anything in his hand; I 
 pmething fall ; he was near the edge of the gutter when 1 saw 
 it tall; I could not positively distinguish what it was; it was not a 
 : il was n dark object; 1 -aw him ci-ins to the middle of the 
 
 street, and Mr. Black then fired the second time; McKaig continued 
 io cross, and, near the curbstone, stumbled, and oaughl hold 
 post; be appeared, then, to reel; my impression is, that just bi 
 b reached the post, the third shot was Bred; he then retraced his 
 
 Steps toward Mr. Black, and when he was near the middle of l he - 
 the fourth del w,i- liivd ; after the third lire, he put his hand to his 
 hack, said "Oh!" and threw up his hands; I was a witness bi 
 ; rand jury. 
 
22 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Cross-exainined by Mr. WhttNEy: 
 I was standing in froni of Ryan's store when I .saw the firing ; T 
 wailed there until the difficulty was oyer'; my impression is that Black 
 had not left the pavement when he fired t ■><' second shot. 
 
 Lawrence Witeon was next called for the defense and testified: 1 
 was in Furgeson's saloon when Black and McKais* had a difficulty^ I 
 think it was on Wednesdays the llth of October; before the shooting, 
 Mr. McKaig came from the billiard saloon" and rustled againsl Black" 
 Black turned and said, "This is two insults yon have given nits 
 to-day;" McKaig walked out and said nothing; MqKaig jostled Black 
 with his elbow; my impression at the time was that it was an invita 
 fcion to play a game of billiards; the billiard room is astephighei 
 than the bar room and there was room enough to pass wklioul 
 nudging. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney without eliciting any new facts. 
 
 John Long, a witness for the defense, was cabled and testified as fol- 
 lows : I live in Cumberland ; I knew W. W. McKaig, Jr., and r know 
 Mr. Blade, the prisoner; one evening, about two weeks before Mr. 
 Black shot .McKaig, T was standing at Shaw's" corner, opposite the 
 Baltimore and Ohio Railroad depot; I saw Mr. McKaig coming across 
 the railroad from the direction of his father's house ; just as he go1 to 
 the corner of the depot he stepped behind the depot and placed his 
 right shoulder against the corner of it and peeped out down Balti- 
 more street; this excited my curiosity and I looked down the street in 
 the direction McKaig was looking, and saw Mr. Black coming tip 
 toward McKaig; Black came up the street as far as the entrance to 
 the Revere House barber shop and stopped ; when Blatck got nearly 
 up to the Revere House, which adjoins the depot, McKaig drew back 
 behind the building; he had then a revolver in his hand and had it 
 down by his side ; Black hesitated a moment at the door of the barber 
 shop, and then turned and went down the street ; McKaig followed 
 him down to Furgeson's saloon and L saw them no more. 
 
 Cross-examined by Attorney General Jones : 
 1 have been keeping a saloon in Cumberland for the past year; 1 saw 
 McKaig next to the ticket office standing on the edge of the platform ; 
 he looked down Baltimore street toward the bridge; [ was standing 
 directly opposite at Mr. Shaw's warehouse; the city Lamps had just 
 been lit : 1 don't think the train had come in yet; there were not 
 many people about; McKaig looked down Baltimore street ; I also 
 looked down and saw Black by Mr. Little's jewelry store, comhu;' up; 
 the lights were very brilliant ; f had heard of some disturbance between 
 Black's father and McKaig ; Black came to Cooper's barber shop and 
 then turned and went down the street, as far as Furgeson's saloon ; 
 McKaig followed; he walked fast, but had not overtaken him when I 
 quit looking; I saw a pistol in McKaigs hand at the Revere House ; lie 
 held it behind him; the light of the ticket office shone through the 
 window; 1 did not immediately notify Black that McKaig had a pistol 
 looking for him ; 1 did not know what- McKaig would do, as he was a 
 desperate man and always went armed; 1 saw him often in the barber 
 Shop, for three or four weeks before the tragedy, with a pistol ; on 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W, W. m'KAIG, JR. 23 
 
 Sunday evening, the day before McKaigwas killed, T saw TTarry Black 
 and asked birn when lie had seen RlcKaigj he said " \yhat is that to 
 yon;'" 1 told him nothing, bul I had seen McKaig watching for him 
 with a revolver, ami I fchoughl il my duly (o tell liim ; BlaCK told me. 
 to mind my own business, ami I turned and left him, and did not see 
 him again till after the shooting. 
 
 JTciir;/ S!irir>)\ Jr., was the next witness called for the defence. 
 II1 3 testified that Black called at his store on his way to town be- 
 tween half past seven and eight o'clock, on the morning of "the 
 shooting. His testimony was unimportant and was merely intro- 
 duced for the purpose of showing that Black, in going down town 
 by the nearest way, would have to pass MeKaig'S foundry. This 
 was done to do away with the testimony of Mr. Orrick for the 
 prosecution, who testified that lie saw Black pass McKaig ? S foun- 
 dry on the morning of the shooting before it occurred. 
 
 Asa Willisofai for the defense, testified : T have lived in Cumber- 
 land thirty .years. I am not acquainted with the prisoner, but I 
 
 have always heard him spoken of as a remarkably quiet and peace- 
 able man; his good character was the subject of general remark. 
 
 Mr. Whitney objected to 'he witness being asked if the prisoner 
 was industrious and sober, as it was not proper in an examina- 
 tion in which it was sought to prove his character for peace and 
 quietness. 
 
 Fred. J. Nelson, Esq., replied for the defense, and insisted that 
 it was proper, under the circumstances of the case, to introduce 
 all the testimony necessary to establish fully the whole character 
 of the prisoner as a man and a citizen. 
 
 The State's 1 Attorney, Francis Brengle, Esq.,, replied* that the 
 question of character was well understood, and it would do the 
 prisoner no injustice to observe strictly the established rules of 
 law. 
 
 The Court stated that the rule of law was well settled that only 
 questions as to peace, and quietness were admissible. 
 
 The witness continuing: My persona] acquaintance with the 
 prisoner is slight, but I have heard him spoken of as a remark- 
 ably quiet, peaceable, amiable and honorable young man. 
 
 Alfred Spates, (State Senator,) testified: I have heard the char- 
 acter of the prisoner discussed; his reputation is good for peace. 
 
 quietness, and gentlemanly conduct; I have known him fox- 
 twenty years. 
 
 Mr, Voorhees wished to know of the Court if, under its rules, 
 it was not admissible to introduce testimony to show what confi- 
 dence had been reposed in the prisoner by those Who knew trim? 
 
 Attorney General Jones objected to the introduction of such 
 
 testimony, as it did not COnstil ute legal testimony in such a trial. 
 
 Mr. Sy ester replied at some length, urging the importance and 
 propriety of testimony boestablisb in the minds of the jury what 
 sort of a man stood before them for their verdict. 
 
 Attorney General Jones read inn liorities upon the subject, and 
 argued further the inadmissibility of such testimony. 
 
 The Court thought that the inquiry into general character could 
 
24 TRIAL OF HARL'Y t'K \ WF< HID BLACK 
 
 only lie properly directed to the point of "Character involved, and 
 not to other special points or traits of character. 
 
 The witness continued: The general character of the prisoner 
 is very good for amiability, and even gentleness of disposition. 
 
 By Mr. Nelson: 
 
 From your knowledge of his character and reputation, do you 
 believe lie would be guilty of wilful murder? 
 
 The Court warned the, witness not to answer, and said, it was 
 for the jury to draw inferences, and not to have them from the 
 mouths of witnesses. 
 
 Mr. Nelson replied, urging the right of the defense to enlighten 
 the jury by such testimony. 
 
 Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution, replied, at considerable length, 
 earnestly urging the impropriety of giving to the jury testimony 
 of such an improper character. 
 
 The Court, through Chief Justice Maulsby, said it was legal 
 testimony to prove good character for quietness, peace, and 
 amiability, and gave its opinion at some length that the opinion 
 formed by the witness from knowledge of the general character 
 and reputation of the prisoner was clearly inadmissible. 
 
 The witness continued: I knew MeKaig; he was a handsome, 
 stout, well-built gentleman, and was much stouter than the pris- 
 oner; he was about six feet in height, and weighed, I think, about 
 170 pounds. 
 
 By Mr. WniTNEY: 
 
 I have heard the character of Black discussed before and since 
 the shooting; it was the subject of much favorable comment. 
 
 Captain Powers testified: My home is in Baltimore county, but 
 I am now mining in Piedmont, Virginia; I have known the pris- 
 oner for eighteen months; his character cannot be excelled; his 
 general character is very good, Inever heard it questioned; the 
 position of a superintendent of a mine is one peculiarly calculated 
 to try the temper and amiability of a man. 
 
 John L. Browning testified: Hive in Alleghany county, fifty 
 miles above Cumberland, and T am frequently in Cumberland, as 
 I am a county commissioner; I am not acquainted with the pris- 
 oner, but have always heard him spoken of as a high-minded, 
 honorable young man. 
 
 A large number of other witnesses were called, all of whom 
 testified to the unusual good character of the prisoner. It is 
 quite a remarkable fact that many witnesses put upon the stand 
 to testify as to Black's character were witnesses summoned for 
 the prosecution. 
 
 At 3 p. m. the court adjourned until Saturday morning at 9 
 o'clock. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 25 
 
 FIFTH DAY. 
 
 Continuation of Evidence for the Defense — Interesting Debate upon the 
 Admissibility of Evidence. 
 
 On Saturday morning, April 13th, the fifth day's proceedings in 
 this case, was begun, as usual, at i> o'clock. 
 
 All the judges were upbri the bench, and the' same intenBeini 
 was manifested by the community in the proceedings as heretofore. 
 The prisoner came into court promptly, and Looked eicepdihgly bright 
 and cheerful. Immediately after (he opening of i the court, the evi- 
 dence for the defense was continued. 
 
 James O'JSfnl was the first witness called. He testified : T reside at 
 the Franklin mines, and am a miner ; I know the prisoner? hisg ■•■- 
 eral reputation fdr peace and Quiet is very good? he is iu every re- 
 spect a gentleman ; his reputation Tor even temper is very good, and it 
 was often tried at the mines when he was superinti i 're 
 
 Hon. Horace Re&leg, clerkof the circuit court of Alleghany county, 
 testified 1 ! thaveknowti the prisoner twenty years'; his 
 aeter has always been exceedingly good 5 [saw him, a few uiiii 1 
 before 8 o'clock oftb ■ m >rnin ; of the shooting, coining into inc. court- 
 house yard ; lie won' a light overcoat. The coat was shown the wit- 
 ness, and he said Black wore (hat coat, or a similar one, and tin' it 
 was usual for overcoats of that description to be worn at that season 
 in Cumberland. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitnf.y : 
 
 Mr. Black alien led court, iu a civil suit the week before the shoot- 
 ing. 
 
 The witness was asked ifhe remembered the day officii week upon 
 which the father of 1 he prisoner had been indicted for an assault upon 
 Colonel McKaig whh iutenfc tq kill. 
 
 Objection was made by the. defense, and consi lerable argument 
 followed between Messrs. Whitney, Syester, am! Brengle on the 
 Legal propriety of the Question- The defense finally withdrew objec- 
 tion. 
 
 The witness continued: The prisoner was in court on the L2th 
 of last Octoherou business for the Franklin Mining Company, and 
 that business was settled the next day? he wa3 noi - dirt-house 
 
 at any time during the remainder of thai week, as far as the witn 3S 
 recollected ; his father, II. D. Black, was present^ I for shoot ing < tolouel 
 McKaig, and recognized on (he loth of last October. 
 
 Elijah Fuller testified : 1 am register of wills at Cumberland, and 
 I know the prisoner ; hi- general reputation for pea uiel ness is 
 
 verygood? I never saw anything wrong about him ; E saw him a 
 court-house in Cmnberland after the shooting of < lolonel McKaig. 
 
 The witness was then asked what was the purpose of the prison r 
 in coming to the court-house 4 as far as he knew. The question was 
 
26 TRIAL OB BARRY QRAFFORD V>\. AC'K 
 
 objected to by Mr. Whitney, and, after som • desultory discussion, Mr. 
 Voorhees stated thai the defense would waive the question, with tlie 
 right t© recall the witness upon thai point. 
 
 George Layman, sheriff of Alleghany county, testified : The general 
 reputation of the prisoner for peace and quietness i- gopd,- 
 
 By Mr. Nelson: 
 
 Q. Where did you arrest Mr. Black? 
 
 Objection was Made by Mr. Whitney, whoinquired for what pur- 
 pose it was asked. 
 
 Mr. Nelson replied that it was to give to the jury all the circum- 
 stances surrounding the prisoner. 
 
 After considerable discussion between Mr. Nelsonaad Mr. Whitney 
 on the legal right and propriety of the qu ssl ion, the Qourt stated i hat, 
 in its opinion, the fact of the arrest of the prisoner was not evidence 
 of guilt, and, after expressing, al some length, its further opinion 
 upon the admissibility of such evidence, refused to allow the question 
 to be answered. 
 
 The witness continued : I first saw the prisoner, after the shooting, 
 coming around the court-house com sr, and going toward- the jail; 
 Mr. Schafer, my deputy, was with him. The witness was shown a 
 dark drab-colored overcoat, and asked if it was the one the prisoner 
 wore on that occasion ; he replied that, to the best of his recollection, 
 it was, but he could not be positive. 
 
 [A large number of other witnesses, gentlemen of high standing in 
 and about Cumberland, were called and interrogated as to the ebau- 
 acter of Black, and all testified in the most flattering manner to his 
 amiable disposition and gentlemanly qualifications.] 
 
 John M. Resley was the next witness called for defense. He, like all 
 the rest of the witnesses interrogated as to Black's character, testified 
 that it was remarkable lor quiei ness and gentlemanly conduct. He 
 had known him twenty years; they had been playmates together. 
 
 Mr.Syester then handed witness a letter, and ask£d him to indentify 
 
 the hand writing. 
 
 Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution, objected to the question being 
 answered until the paper had been shown to the Court, that fchej 
 might sec its condition and determine whether or not it wouid be ad- 
 missible, lie denied that it was a genuine letter, or everwritten by 
 McKaig, and called the attention of the Court to the fact that it was 
 originally written in pencil and afterward inked over, thereby de* 
 stroying its identity and the individuality of the hand-writing. The 
 paper was handed to the Court, and a moment thereafter, while 
 the judges were examining the letter, Mr. Whitney said that, before 
 objecting further to the introduction of the paper, he would submit 
 the following interrogatories to t he defense for anew ers : 
 
 First. What is the object of the testimony, and what fact is it 
 offered to establish, or that it tends to establish? 
 
 Second. The ground upon which the defense claim the right to 
 establish such a Sict? 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL, W. W. m'kAIQ, JR. 27 
 
 Mr. Voorhees, fbr the defense, submitted the following, in answer to 
 the interrogatories bf Mr. Whitney : 
 
 The counsel for the prisoner 0ff6r to prove, by competent evid 
 that Lis sister was seduced by th<' deceased, and that she Lore a child 
 as the result, and that such facts were made known to the prisorier 
 prior to the homicide, ard had been the subject of intense mental 
 agitation on the part of the prisoner during the night immediately 
 preceding the collision between the prisoner and the deceased, in 
 which the latter lost his life, for the purposes following! 
 
 First : To show the condition of the prisoner's mind at the time of 
 the collision and homicide. 
 
 Second. To enable thejury to determine from such provocation the 
 grade of homicide committed by the prisoner. 
 
 Third. To explain the expressions shown by the prosecution to. have 
 been used by the prisoner at the time of the collision and the killing. 
 
 Fourth. This evidence may be admissible for other purposes at sub- 
 sequent stages of tliis trial, but the Court is only now asked to rule its 
 admissibility for the foregoing purposes. 
 
 Mr. Whitney, tor the prosecution, in rising to argue against tl ! 
 admissibility of the letter and the foregoing propositions of the de- 
 fense, said that, upon reflection, he considered that after the consump- 
 tion of more than two days of the time < if the Court, since the opening 
 statement iri behalf of the prisoner had been submitted, they were 
 now entering upon the very threshold of the theory of defense, which 
 was foreshadowed in the opening statement of the prisoner's counsel. 
 Every case had its theory, and upon that ground counsel are allowed 
 to make opening statements to the jury. These statements are; • 
 contain the tacts expected to be proved, and the law applicable to 
 those facts. They arc made upon the responsibility of counsel, sworn 
 officers of the court, and amenable to that tribunal for the correct- 
 ness of their statements, both as tolawand fact. The theory of the 
 defense assumed in the opening statement, was the seduction by Mc- 
 Kaig of the prisoner's sister, and the fact that he was the father of lieu 
 child. If these questions of fact could be fully gone into, upon the 
 one side a- well as the oiher, no objection would be made on the part 
 of the prosecution to try those issues of fact before the jury, and if the 
 evidence now offered tended to establish their truth', he would make 
 no objection, provided the doors were to be opened wide to both .-ides 
 to investigate the truth or falsity of the facts alleged ; but, understand- 
 ing the rule of. the law to be that where counsel allowed illegal testi- 
 mony to be introduced without object ion, they would not be entitled to 
 oiler evidence in rebuttal, it became, therefore, the duty of the prose- 
 cution to place themselves right before the court and jury, and object 
 to the testimony offered, unless upon the distinct understanding that 
 they should have the right to show the allegation of seduction to be 
 utterly and entirely false. 
 
 Mr. Whitney then argued at considerable length in relation to the 
 effect of the evidence sought to be offered, and quoted largelyfxom 
 authorities to substantiate the position assumed by the prosecution in 
 relation to the evidence tending to prove seduction. 
 
 lie then proceeded to state the legal propositions that he considered 
 laid at the foundation of the entire argument : First, that no provoca- 
 tion known to the law justified a homicide; second, provocation could 
 only be offered to reduce the homicide from a higher to a lower grade ; 
 
28 TBXAi OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 third, thai what constituted provocation was a question for (he Court; 
 and fifth, the existence of that provocation in any particular case wag 
 -lion of fact for the jury to determine;. 
 
 Having fullj elaborated the above pouitjSj lie then proceeded to make 
 their application. Referring to the opening statement of Mr. Syester, 
 he called the attention of the cbtirt to the declaration inn It- by him 
 (Mr. S.) to the jury, thai " this was either a ease of muixler in the first 
 degree, or it was nothings" This was the position) assumed b^the de- 
 fense, and therefore excluded all question or idea of provocation, 
 which alone could be introduced 60 reduce the grade of :i crime actu- 
 ally committed. All efforts, therefore, fid introduce tli •■ evidence apod 
 the ground of prbvbaa/fciori must fail, and if could be urged as admissi- 
 ble only upoU the broad ground of justification. 
 
 Tie then proceeded to argue the proposition advanced by the defense 
 that it was admissible forthe purpose of showing the state of feeling 
 under which Black was laboring at the time of committiug the h( mi- 
 cide. lie called ilie atteivion of the ( 'onri totheifaet that no defense 
 of insanity or frenzy had b'eeti set up in tniscase, and then proceeded to 
 illustrate bow, in certain cases, where insanity was set up as a def 
 evidence of such a character inight be introduced, in those bale's i! 
 was admitted upon the theory that insanity consisted of different 
 kinds, each land having different degreed, and each kind and degree 
 accompanied 1 by its' particular development ; and in a case whereevl^ 
 dence was Ihtrddueed to establish one kind of insanity, accompanied 
 by its peculiar developments, it was then admissible for the puvpose of 
 showing that a sufficient cause existied to- produce the peculiar kind 
 and developments of the insanity sought to be established. 
 
 lie fully reviewed and commented upon tin 1 cases Of Sickles and 
 Mary Harris, and contended that in each of those cases testimoU3 of 
 kind had been excluded. He then proceeded to argue the propo- 
 sition that, even admittiug evidence of that kind to be admissible, 
 there Avas nothing in the letteroffered tending in the least degree to 
 establish the charge of adultery. He characterized it as an evident 
 attempt to shrrk the broad question of seduction, which the State 
 offered themselves to disprove. lie then pointed out the terrible con- 
 nees to society of the announcement of any such principle by a 
 tribunal of justice — that it would not only engraft upon our laws 
 adultery and seduction as a full justification for the taking of human 
 life by any person, ttirough malice or revenge, and then come into 
 a court of justice and set upas his justification that he had been in- 
 formed that either of these Offenses had been committed. Such a doe- 
 trine would place the life of cvvy man in t he hands of the most com- 
 mon harlot, break down all law, subvert government, and overthrow 
 society. Mr. Whitney then proceeded to illustrate the above positions 
 by calling attention to the particular facts in this case. That, meet- 
 ing McKaig upon the mdrning in question, he shoots him down in c >id 
 blood, and after his lips have been sealed in death and Iris soul ushered 
 into eternity, be then, for the first time, standing by the dead body of 
 Ids victim, accuses him of having been the seducer Of his sister, and 
 now claims, as a justification of his bloody t\ci't\, that he had been in- 
 formed that such was the fact, without giving an opportunity to the 
 unfortunate deceased to deny the fact, and to establish his innocence. 
 He contended that this was not only making every man judge, jury, and 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAbd, JR. 29 
 
 executioner, b.til was giving to liim the power to execute befoi ■ he had 
 established tne'guTH of ! the party. Mr. Whitney spoke for ati hour 
 ami a quarter, and his remarks, which were forcibly and eloquently 
 pur, were listened to throughout with Close attention. 
 
 Mr. Voorhqes, for the defense, in reply to Mr, Whitney, said : 
 I shall not detain the court much km#er on the question beforc'lt. 
 It, i.< always pleasant to listen to a counsel so able and ingenious as has 
 jusi, taken his seat, bul the arguments ilseid arc not raewout novel-. They 
 haw been uttesred over the graves < a' adulterers and violators of homes 
 for the past hundred years. They are always heard in eases similar to 
 the one now being trie'di In reference to the wail thai is now being 
 made over the dead body of McKaig, that he was ah ol down without 
 being, 'charged with the act and^au opportunity given to deny it,; jwe 
 will prove, by his own admission, that there was no necessity to 
 charge.it. McKaig had admitted that he wrote the letter. offered as 
 testimony, which, upon its face, bears the evidence of the criminal in- 
 timacy between himself and her to whom it was addressed. The let- 
 ter,, ii appears, was delivered to Mi-s Black while she was on a visit to 
 a- friend's housei; that she tore it iu.-,twp (Pieces and threw it into the 
 grate, and supposed it was destroyed, but where it was afterwards 
 found. All lb ■-." facts, in confirmation of the authorship, were known 
 to the prisoner, and contributed to excite that, freuziecl condition of 
 mind under which he was laboring at the time of his meeting with 
 McKaig. 
 
 The common law, a? written in the books, has been modified by the \ 
 unwritten law pronounced in the, verdict of .juries, which throws its 
 protection over the sanctity of homes, and shields them from dishonor. 
 T have not known a case for two hundred years where a father, a 
 brother, or husband has taken the law in his own hands and avenge • 
 the dishonor of a daughter, sister, or wife, and where the motive Was 
 pure and free from any sordid views, in which a court, or jury has 
 found a conviction. 
 
 I challenge the production of a single adjudicated case, in the whole 
 range of civilized jurisprudence, where any distinction has been made 
 in the rulings of courts or the verdicts of juries between the case of a 
 husband tried for killing the seducer of his wife, a father for killing 
 the seducer of his daughter, and a brother for slaying one who, as in 
 this case, had ruined hissister. The reason fortius uniformity in all 
 such cases consists in the fact that a home is a divine instil ution ; that 
 the purity of the domestic circle cannot be invaded and destroyed 
 without the destruction of Civilized society, and therefore, whoever, 
 defends it violates no law, either human or divine. 
 
 In the onward progress of the sciences, i regret that the science pf 
 Of the law, born in the ruder ages of our race, has hot been improved 
 and adapted to the present higher developments of the age and so- 
 ciety, and to the great social problems of the day. A great English 
 judge has said thai '-the dishonor of a home by the seduction of the 
 wife was a provocation to the husband greater than human nature can 
 bear" — and courts can lake cognizance of human nature. All that 
 men have to do is to consult theirowu heart-, their own feeling-, 'heir 
 own instincts, and theirowu sen-e of honor, and they, too, will de- 
 cide that seduction is a crime which wrings the heart of man bcyblid 
 what human nature can bear. 
 
30 TRIAL OF IIALLY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 T! ise was one. of i thempsf Ably tried cases of the kind in 
 
 the land. It was tried by the ablest counsel on both sides, who ex- 
 hausted every legal aspecl of the case, and, like this, the prosecution had 
 wealth and power behind it. In thai case the precise question which 
 is presented in this case was decided in favor of the defense. The 
 confession of the wife of the defendant was ruled out, because she was 
 hi- wife and ii exonerated her husband, but the expression of the pris- 
 oner at the time of the firing, thai "hia bed had been dishonored," 
 Ac., was admitted, as in this case. So completely 'Ii;! the court allow 
 the proof of adultery to be admitted, that the prosecution afterwards 
 offered to admit the confession of the wife, because, they said, it could 
 not further affect the case. 
 
 We are obliged to refer to the rulings and practice in the most impor- 
 tant and ably t ried cases at nisi priu*. b< cause cases of tlii- kind never 
 reach the higher courts of appeal. There are never any convictions under 
 which the prisoner can carry exceptions to' the rulings of the courts below 
 to the higher courts for review and adjudication. There is one principle 
 now established in connection with ihe subject, thai it is noi ojeeesgary 
 for a husband to witness his own shame — to see it with his own eye. — 
 in order to, justify him in becoming his own avenger ; and the same 
 rule applies to a father and son as to a husband. 
 
 In this case McKaig was not content with 1 destroying the sister of 
 the prisoner, but he sough! by browbeating and menacing the hoy. to 
 pursue and kill him if possible. Such conduct was more than the 
 judges which grace this bench, more than the counsel for the prosecu- 
 . more than those around him, more than the jury in the box, 
 more than human nature could bear, imagine the meeting between 
 the prisoner and the deceased on that fatal morning; one was a man 
 in years, stalwart and powerful in si/.e, the other comparatively a boy 
 
 I in age and physical stature, but when McKaig approached him with 
 his hand in deadly preparation upon his pistol, crossing the streel to 
 confront him, the image of a ruined sister, defiled and trampled into 
 the very mire by this man, connected itself with thoughts of bis own 
 persona] safety and personal honor, and he would have been more or 
 less than human if the very whirl of delirium and t he rage of madness 
 had not inspired his heart and brain. Under such circumstances, no 
 wonder that the powerful man fell in the encounter with this boy. 
 There is always a providence hovering Over such a scene. The pris- 
 oner was 1 lie victim of accumulated ami unbearable wrongs. The case 
 of Mary Harris had been referred to by the opposite counsel. It illus- 
 trated this point. She had never handled or used a pistol, yet, her aim 
 seemed guided by some miraculous agency. 
 
 In the piv-eut case the proof was ■shown that McKaig was a practiced 
 and most Skillful shot, [f he had been clothed with innocence and his 
 quarrel had been just, the Chances would have been ninety in a hun- 
 dred in his favor. If is said iie was a, brave man. Hut conscience 
 palsies the right arm of the seducer and the adulterer whenever and 
 wherever he confronts the injured and outraged husband, father or sou. 
 
 Attorney General Jones then replied to Mr. Voorhocs, in a lengthy 
 argument, contending that the evidence was clearly inadmissible. At 
 its conclusion, the court adjourned until Monday morning, at 9 
 o'clock, reserving its opinion 011 the point raised until that time. 
 
FOR KILLINC COLONEL W. W. M'KAKU, JR. 81 
 
 SIXTH DAY. 
 
 Further Proof as to Good Character — Opinion of the Court in volition 
 to the Evidence of Seduction — That Letter — Interesting Evidence for 
 the Defense. 
 
 Monday* April 17th, the court convened at precisely 9 o'clock A. M., 
 for the sixth day's proceedings in the case. 
 
 The court-room was. at an early hour, Crowded with an anxious au- 
 dience* who, .after listening to the able and eloquent arguments of 
 counsel on Saturday, were anxious to hear what would be the ruling, 
 of the Court upon the question raised. 
 
 As soon as the court was called, Chief Justice Maulsby said, in 
 reference to the point raised by the prosecution on Saturday, that it 
 was the opinion of the Court that it is not competent to prove the fact, 
 of seduction as a fact tending to the issue in this cause. It is compe- 
 tent tor the defense to offer proof of the condition of the mind of the 
 prisoner at the time of the homicide. The question is, what effect was 
 made upon the mind of the prisoner by the communications made t,> 
 him by words, or in any other manner, in relation to the all sged se- 
 duction of his sister? 
 
 After the delivery of the opinion, Mr. Voorhees, for the defense, 
 said that there were present two distinguished gentlemen, who had 
 come here of their own volition, to testify in behalf of the prisoner, 
 and he desired to put them upon the stand, that they might return to 
 Washington by the next train. 
 
 The counsel for the prosecution consented, and lion. II. 0. Davis, 
 of West Virginia, was called. 
 
 Examined by Mr. VOORHEES : 
 
 Mr. Davis* state where you reside, your position at present, and 
 whether you Know II. c. Black? 
 
 A. 1 reside in Piedmont, West. "Virginia ; am a United states Sena- 
 tor from West Virginia ; I have known Crawford Black for the past 
 eighteen months or two years — from the time he wa9 superintendent 
 of the Franklin coal mines; [ knew him in Piedmont. 
 
 Mr. Voorhees. State his character in that community for peace 
 and quietness. 
 
 A. I have not known him intimately, but from what 1 know, bis 
 character was beyond question; I had almost daily intercourse with 
 him i:i a business way. 
 
 Mr. Voobhees. state whether his position as a superintendent was 
 calculated to test him? 
 
 A. I think if was. 
 
 Hon. Jackson L. Orr called : 
 
 1 reside, in the town of Montana, Boone county, Iowa, and am a 
 member of the (Jnited States [louse - or Representatives from that 
 
 Stale; I knew Crawford Black, the prisoner, at my home in Iowa, 
 from the latter part of 1867 until early in the year leGD. 
 
32 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Q. Wba1 v as his business there? 
 
 A. He was clerking in a store which belonged to a Arm of which I 
 
 member. 
 Q. Did yon know hi? general ■ r, an 1 If so, what was it? 
 
 A. i became acquainted with his general cha 'acterWhile there, and 
 u was yvy good ; I never heard anything allege 1 against it. 
 
 Cross-examined by Air. Whitney : 
 
 Q. Do you mean by his general good character that you never heard 
 anything alleg d a >;ains1 i; ? 
 
 A. I do. 
 
 Mr. Whitney said thai he would like to have the reasons fortbe 
 opinion delivered this morning in Poll; that, ae no doubi this 
 would contribute mueh to settle the law in Maiyland, whleh is to gov* 
 ern in cases of this character, il was necessary that they should have 
 ir. to see what bearing it might have on evidence to be offered. 
 
 Chi . aid the whole question had not been clearly 
 
 presented tothe Court, because coupled with conditions. The atto 
 general, in hi- argument on Saturday, said that the counsel forthe 
 e only wanted a decision on the piece of evidence offered, and 
 that in the opinion delivered the Court has attempted to confine itself 
 strictly lo that, because of the great danger of being misapprehended, 
 by either the jury or other persons, they did not amplify, bul thai at 
 requesl of counsel they would present their opinion inure fully, con- 
 ig themselves, however, within the narrowest possible Umifc lie 
 then proceeded to deliver the opinion of the Court as follows : 
 
 "The defense offered to read in evidence a paper which, it has 
 offered evidence to prove, is in the handwriting of the party killed, 
 and which it announces that it will prove to have been addressed by 
 the d o the sister of the traverser, and to have been received 
 
 by I ■•-, and afterwards, and prior to the killing, to have been commu- 
 i i he prisoner. And being called on by the State to state the 
 objeci of fur testimony, and what tact it is offered to establish^ or 
 tends to prove, replies, that it offers to prove by competent evidence 
 that the sister of the prisoner was seduced by the deceased, and that 
 she bore a child as the result, and that .such tacts were made known to 
 prisonernrior tothe homicide, and had been the subject of intense 
 mental agitation on the part of the prisoner during the night immedi- 
 ately preceding the collision between the prisoner and tin; deceased, in 
 which the latter Lost his life, for the purposes of showing the condition 
 of the prisoner's mind at the time of the collision and homicide, and 
 of showing the grade of the homicide, and by way of explaining ex" 
 pres >ions used by tie' prisoner at the time of the homicide, and admitted 
 in evidence by the Court on the cross-examination of the Stale's wit- 
 nesses. 
 
 "The State objects to the admissibility of the proof offered. 
 
 "The court is of opinion that it is not competent to prove in Ibis 
 case the fact of (lie seduction of the sister of the prisoner by the 
 d ceased. It is competent to oiler evidence tending lo prove the con- 
 dition of the mind of the prisoner on the occasion of the homicide, 
 either by proof of communications made to him on the subject of the 
 seduction of bis sister by the deceased, or any facts and circumstances 
 coming to bis knowledge touching that subject; that the paper 
 offered is admissible, coupled with the proof slated, for any and all 
 the purposes before stated by the Court." 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W". w\ m'kAIG, JR. 33 
 
 After the delivery of this Qpjnion Mr. Whitney turned to the counsel 
 for the defense and offered to go into a full investigation of the alleged 
 seduction of£he prispner's sister and the paternity of the child, stating 
 thai although McKaig never knew Myra Black until after the war, that 
 the State was prepared to prove both, by particular acts and general. 
 reputation, that prior to the war she was not a virtuous woman, and 
 that during and subsequent thereto she was a person of known loose 
 character. 
 
 Mr. Voorhees, for the defense, objected to the line of wanton remarks 
 on the part of the prosecution, when there was nothing before the 
 Court. The whole subject of seduction had, he said, been ruled out 
 by the Court, and was not, therefore, a question at issue, and they 
 were not willing to accept the offer <>f the prosecution to make it a 
 question! 
 
 Mr. Whitney then said lie desired to make, an application to the 
 Court. The) defense! in its opening statement to the jury alleged 'the 
 fae! of seduction, the result of which was the birth of a child. This 
 ing statement having gone before the jury, which, under the ruling 
 of the Court, ciiiiiiot be rebutted, he suggested to the Court that so much 
 of it as the Court had stated was not pertinent to the issue should be 
 withdrawn; and asked the Court to instruct the jury that it formed no 
 part of the 
 
 < hief Justice Maulsby said that the Court did not feel called upon 
 tdgive any instructions to the jury at this time affecting the whole 
 : that it was beyond the province of the Court to give, instructions 
 to the jury or rule upon any matters beyond the legal questions pre- 
 sented to it. 
 
 Lloyd L mcnde.fi, Exq., was next called for the defense, and testified 
 that he is a lawyer in Cumberland ; married the cousin of the pris- 
 oner ; never mentioned to prisoner his sister's name after she left 
 I lumberiand until the Sunday lie fore il\r shooting ; the prisoner came 
 to his house that Sunday morning; witness then told him about a let- 
 ter written by Colonel McKaig to his sister; be had not seen the letter 
 himself; only heard of it; told the prisoner that hi- sister would have 
 to come on to attend the trial of her father; told him thai W. W. 
 McKaig was the seducer of his sister ; he seemed greatly agitated and 
 distressed, and left the house and went to Mr. Romanes residence; 
 witness also went up there a i\'\v moments afterwards; and there, in 
 hi- presence, the prisoner read that letter, and soon after left the house 
 next time witness saw him was in his mother's house that same after- 
 noon; the prisoner was in the room and overheard the conversation 
 held by him with his mother; witness asked his mother where her 
 daughter was, and after some hesitation the mother said she could not 
 tell; he said he must know her address, thai he was preparing a de- 
 tens • in her father's case, and i lia! she must return home to attend his 
 trial; she then told him that she had a child four months old, and 
 gave its name and the date of its birth; the prisoner was nervous, 
 ■hand restless; after being there sometime, the prisonerwent 
 into the next room; he hc.ard.him walking up, and down the floor ex- 
 citedly; witness Left and walked up town; the prisoner went with 
 him, and left him at witness's gate; where the prisoner went lie did 
 not know; did not see him again until he saw him going toward the 
 jail on Monday. 
 2e 
 
34 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Mr. Syester, tor the defense, then handed to the witness the follow- 
 ing letter, and asked him to state to the jury whether or np1 it wu 
 one communicated to the prisoner on the day before the shooting : 
 
 "Jfxe20, 18G6. 
 
 44 My Own Dearest : I will make an al tempi 1 1 1 answer j our note 
 jusl received, bu1 1 fear I shall fail before I gel through. Even it' 1 
 do, I shall consider the time well spent. I unfortunately took a drink 
 the other day, and you kiow how Iani when I once get a taste. I 
 cannot stop until I get too much, and thai is i ; ;<' reason I did not lee 
 you when you were out. tins morning. ! was upstreet playing cards 
 and drinking, and r did not come out ttutil 3 o'clock in the evening. 
 [ had a very good time, but ten to one would sooner have been with 
 my little pet. Oh ! you hard-hearted little thing! bdwdare yotitell 
 me that I am losing all love for you? It is not that 1 love you the less 
 that [ am so suspicious of you, but that I love you the more ! NOW, 
 s's no use for you trying to make me believethat you are blind, 
 because I know you well enough to know thai you see already' too 
 well, and you knew when you put that to paper — that 1 did not want 
 to see yon — that you w. re telling what you know to be a lie. I swear 
 (no, I won't swear either,) because you say thai is not proper, and you 
 know I try to do everything that yon. like, bill ! Will be dogged, if you 
 let this opportunity slip, and don't spend the night with me while \ ou 
 are uptown, I shad never speak to you again, because it will be yx>ur 
 fault alone, as there is nothing in this world to prevent your coming. 
 All you will have to do is to bring a couple of thick veils, and not loop 
 up your dress, and you can go away the back way in the morning, 
 and nobody will be the wiser. Now, my dear, i should like to see 
 you before the place is closed, so that we can understand each other, 
 and 1 will have to leave that tor you 'to arranges. And so, good-bye, 
 my dear, and think of me as none other than yours. 
 
 " Forever. 
 
 "If you read this, you will do more than I can." 
 
 Mr. Whitney objected to this letter being read to the jury for the 
 reason that the defense had totally failed to prove its genuineness 
 That being written in pencil and afterwards inked over, no one could 
 pretend to say in whose handwriting it was, and that there was not a 
 particle of proof in the ease that McKaig ever wrote or sent it, or that 
 Myra Black ever received it. 
 
 Mr. Voorhees said it was immaterial whether it was a genuine letter 
 or not, provided it was shown to be a communication made to the 
 prisoner. 
 
 The Court allowed the letter to be read. 
 
 Witness resumed: It is the same letter shown to the prisoner and 
 read by him on the Sunday referred to. 
 
 Witness then read the letter to the jury. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney, for the prosecution. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. Is there any name signed to that letter? 
 
 A. There is no signature to the' letter, except "Forever;" there is 
 no name signed to it ; wil ueSB said that he and the prisoner were talk- 
 ing in reference to preparing the defense of his father on Sunday 
 when he called to see him ; witness told him that his information and 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m"k.\!<I, JR. 35 
 
 opinion was thai McKaig was the seducer of hifi sister; he stated it 
 upon the ground of the letter and upon what the prisoner's father had 
 told liim. and what lie understood from (ho family -and Mr. Black's 
 friends. Witness gave Black the names of certain pari ies in regard to 
 this letter, William W. McKaig and Judge Pearle; Black came to 
 his house between 9 and LO o'clock'; did not know t lmt the prisoner 
 had made a threat to shoot McKaig ; went to Roman's house about 12 
 o'clock; found the prisoner and Mrs. Roman there; don't think Mr. 
 Roman was at home ; saw the prisoner on Friday, the day before the 
 father was presented ; did not hear the prisoner say anything about it ; 
 witness m*s1 heard the contents of the letter on Friday or Saturday 
 morning before the shooting; saw it on Sunday; read i! after Black 
 had read it; Black did not say anything about Dhe letter after he read 
 it, but seemed much excited ; (old him t he Idler w as in Mr. Roman's 
 possession ; how it eame there witness docs no! know; kn sw McKaig 
 tor about three years ; do not know if McKaig was a. man of good edu- 
 cation, or had passed through college, only from hearsay; when wit- 
 ness first saw the prisoner Unit day he had not read the letter, only 
 heard of it. 
 
 John M. Jieslcy, for the defense, called. 
 
 Examined by Mr. Nelson. 
 Q. Did you ever have a conversation with W. W. McKaig - , Jr., 
 about a letter he had written to Miss Myra Black ? 
 WETNESS. 1 did. 
 
 Mr. Nklson. State what that conversation was? 
 Witness slated that, McKaig told him that he wrote the letter. 
 Mr; WirrTXKY. 1 object to any declarations of the deceased. 
 The Conn'. By Ibis evidence it is sought to identify the letter, not 
 
 that it was communicated to the prisoner, but to couple the particular 
 paper already offered in evidence with the deceased. 
 
 Mr. WHITNEY. l^> we understand that it is immaterial whether the 
 letter is genuine or not ? 
 
 The Court, without replying to the interrogatory, said the evidence. 
 was admissible under different theories, and I iiat the < lourt only deter- 
 mined it. so in reference to its legal admissibility to prove, the issues in 
 tin- cause. 
 
 Mr. Yookiiees. We withdraw the question for the present. 
 
 William E. Menahaw was next railed for the defense and testified: 
 I live at the Franklin mines, and know the prisoner, he boards with 
 me. 1 am not positive whether he reached the mines on his return 
 from Cumberland on the Friday night or Saturday morning proceed- 
 ing the shooting; I remember a conversation 1 had with the prisoner, 
 at the Franklin mines, on tin' Saturday evening before the shooting, 
 about 6 or half-past <; on the afternoon of that day; Mr. Black was 
 paying off thai day and was very busy, and when l bad an opportunity 
 to speak io him I availed myselfrof it ; I went into his room when he 
 came into supper and asked him if the grand jury had indicted his 
 father; he said tiny had not; I told him I. was glad of it ; he asked 
 me why I thought he would be indicted; 1 told him A. Beall McKaig 
 bad told me it would be done; he said he had not been able to Learn 
 the truth of what had happened at the fair ground, as- his father had 
 been in no condition of mind for him to a-k about it ; I told him 
 
3(5 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 also that I had beard thai at the fairgrounds Colonel McKaighad ■'••- 
 
 eed his sister as a strumpet ; Ik- said "My Cod. is ii possil 
 changed color, and Beemed much excited ; I then left him, as Khe sub- 
 jecl seemed very painful t<» him that was the only time lever men- 
 tioned ii to him : I do nol know what time he lefl I he mines that night 
 for Cumberland; I think the trains were running about 9o'clock. 
 he wore lighl pants and my coat, which has been shown here as his ; 
 I saw ii in tin- jail the night of the day the shooting took place. Mr. 
 Black was in the habit ■ >r purchasing for the miners grain at Mr. W. L. 
 Shaw's, and mostoftheoil at Mi'. S. C. Shriyer's ; Black must have 
 brought to Cumberland about $2,000; it was put in an envelope and 
 i quite a large package. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Whitney: 
 
 He had, I suppose, about $2,000 after paying off the hands : he sent, 
 in • sheet to the paymaster's department, rendering in it an account 
 
 of his disbursements; this was on Saturday; he knew on Saturday 
 that his sister was in difficulty — which was October the 15th; I also 
 told him that I had heard of something that had occurred on the fair 
 grounds; Black replied that he had not ascertained the facts of the 
 affair at the fair grounds ; I had heard that McCaig had threatened' to 
 shoot Harry's father. 
 
 Mr. Nelson, Have you seen anything in the newspapers about the 
 ilty between McKaigand the prisoner's father? 
 
 Witness. 1 do-recollect of seeing something in the papers; I take 
 the ( Cumberland papers, but destroyed them to keep them from Harry's 
 notice. 
 
 The next witness called for the defense was Mrs. Black, the mother 
 of the prisoner. She approached the witness stand leaning- on the 
 arm of her husband, Harrison D. Black, and every eye in the crowded 
 assemblage followed her. With a trembling step she mounted the 
 Stand, and most of the jurors turned and faced her. She was evi- 
 dently feeble and much excited, tier husband stood "by her aa she 
 gave her testimony. A seat was given her, and as she was about to 
 give her testimony she raised her veil, revealing to the audience a coun- 
 tenance which indicated her the possessor of intelligence and womanly 
 attributes far above the ordinary strata of feminine humanity; and, 
 although the seal of intense mental suffering had left its heavy impress 
 upon her face, it had not obscured in il the traces of fine personal 
 appearance ere those sorrows came. Her face is regular in its features, 
 and prepossessing for a lady of her age, and she has transmitted to her 
 son in a remarkable degree much of her personnel. She gave her tes- 
 timony in a clear, distinct manner, except when her feeling.-, overcame 
 her. A1 these times she placed her fan to her face, concealing it from 
 the gaze of the crowd, bowed her head, and seemed deeply affected. 
 The prisoner was greatly moved during the time she was testifying, 
 and, leaning over, buried his face in his hands, and wept bitterly. The 
 most respectful silence was observed while Mrs. Black was upon the 
 stand, and the sympathies of all were moved at the exliibitions she 
 gave of deep and earnest feeling. 
 
 Mr. Syester, tor the defense, asked her if she was the mother of the 
 prisoner. In a clear voice, a little tremulous, she said, "Yes, sir; he 
 is my only son." 
 
TOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. 37 
 
 By Mr, Svf.steb: 
 Can vmi tell the j ury, what time he dame home on Saturday night 
 before Colonel McKaig was killed? — A. lie reachrd liumc about 11 
 o'clock that night. 
 
 By Mr. Svf.ster : 
 
 Stale, if you please, what happened the next day? 
 
 A. On Sundaj morning he went up town as usual, after getting his 
 breakfast; he always goes up on Sunday, when at home, to see his 
 aunt; I knew what had been told him ; 1 knew he had been told all. 
 [Here Mrs. Black burst into tears.] But I never said a word to him 
 about it; we never talked about the matter at home ; we could not 
 talk ab.mt it. [Again Mrs. Black appeared deeply moved.] On Sun- 
 day evening Harry came home; I was sick in bed that day; he was 
 up stairs in my room, lying across the foot of my bed ; Mr. Lowndes 
 came into the house and sent up word that he desired to see me ; 1 sent 
 him word that 1 was side and could not see him ; he replied that he 
 must see me ; be then came up to my room, and, after the usual salu- 
 tation, asked me when- Myra, my daughter, was, and said she must 
 come home; no one knew where Myra was 1 but me ; even her father 
 did nut know; I told Mr. Lowndes thai she could notcome home: he 
 said they were preparing a defense for Mr. Black, and she would have 
 to come as a witness ; 1 told him she must not come home, that I could 
 nui have my child brought upon the witness stand in such a case as 
 this, that I was willing to risk my life and liberty for her sake, and 
 her father was willing to do the same. [~Sh~. B.'s feelings nearly over- 
 came her at this moment, and she was given some restoratives to 
 support her.] She then continued : Mr. Lowndes asked me if she was 
 nui able to come home; I told him she was in good health ; [then 
 told him, for the first time that I had ever told any one, that Myra had 
 given birth to a child and that it was then four months old ; when I 
 told him this my son fell bark on the bed and said nothing; this was 
 the first time I had ever told him his sister was ruined. Crawford, 
 after a moment, got up, went into the hall and walked up and down, 
 as Mr. Lowndes said; when Mr. Lowndes went away CraWford went 
 up tow u with him ; he came back in the evening about 6 or 7 o'clo'ck ; 
 later in the eveuing lie went to bed; he sleeps in a room adjoining 
 mine, and there is a communicating door bet ween ; just before he vvenl 
 to bed he asked me if I felt better, l told him not much ; he is a i 
 kind and loving son, and never likes to give me trouble, (she again 
 burst into tears;) ( heard him alter he retired, up and down all 
 night; i do not think he slept ; I could not, and 1 know lie did not; 
 toward morning — it was almost daylight — he came into my room, 
 threw himself upon the foot of my bed, and asked me if I felt better ; 
 I told hi in ''yes;* 1 he then went back into his room, ami I knew that 
 he had fallen asleep ; I did not. sleep all that night; on the evening 
 before, when my sou cam'' home, I said, "Crawford, will you re 
 to the mines in the morning ;" he said " yes." In the morning J 
 up and went down stairs quite early; I knew that the train tor the 
 mine- left ai 7 o'clock, but I knew thai Crawford had not, slept any, 
 and I could not beat- to disturb him ; about 7 o'clock he dressed him- 
 self and came down stairs, with his baton; he asked me what i 
 it was; 1 told him nearly 7 o'clock, and that it was too late logo to 
 
33 TRIAL OF IIARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 the mines that morning; he said ii did nol make much dlffi 
 In' bad some bills yet »o pay that he had nol paid on Saturday, b 
 asked me why 1 did nol call bim ; 1 told him I did nol like to disturb 
 him, as he had been so restless the nighl before; [ told him to come 
 to his brsakfast ; he said he did not want anyfning to eal : I begged 
 him to cat something ; lie said he could not eat ; [asked him to take 
 a cup of coffee; he sal down beside me at the table with his hal on, 
 a little coffee and then said again he could flol eal : he went up 
 and got his overcoat, and then came down ; he told melt was 
 Mr. Henshaw's overcoat, he wbre the overeoal because he ha I not yet 
 iged his summer clothing ; he then had on lig pan ■; when he 
 started down the street, [ went with bim tothe lower portico; [always 
 wenl to the door {here she evinced greai emotion;) I was so Lonely and 
 desolate; I had lost one by this terrible affair and perhaps am 
 would be taken from rile ; I could not bear to see him leave me (again 
 she shed tears and was greatly agitated ;) I was afraid to see htm go ; 
 I always sat and watched him as he went down the s'treet ; it. was 20 
 minutes or half-pasl 7 o'clock when he went; I'went down tothe 
 where I sat to watch him, and looked after him as he '.vent a, way: 
 I had never before this told himofthe ruin of his sister by Mr. William 
 Mi Kaig; I was afraid to tell him; 1 had heard that General McKaig 
 had said he would loose three nephews in thisallair; when he w6nt 
 }\p town he always went up Centre street, the other way being almost 
 impassable. 
 
 Mrs. Black was not submitted to a cross-examination. 
 
 Mr. Syester said that the defense would now rests it case. 
 
 Mr. Whitney said that they were surprised at this announcement, 
 would lake a moment to consult. After a consultation Mr. Whit- 
 ney said they would now call rebutting testimony. 
 
 Lawrence Dickinson, for the prosecution, was called, and testified: 
 
 de in Cumberland ; it is my native place; have lived there from 
 
 birth, wii h the exception of a few years ; 1 knew Myra Black slightly 
 
 By Mr. Whitney : 
 
 Did yon know the general reputation of Myra Black before, during, 
 and after the war? 
 
 Mr. Voorhehs. r object, and am astonished at this attempt fcointro- 
 evidene'e so (dearly inadmissible. There can be but one purpose, 
 and that is to 
 
 Mr. Wutt.vey. I am able to state tothe Court for what purpose I 
 seek to introduce the evidence. 
 
 Mr. Voorhehs. The purpose is perfectly apparent in the absurdity 
 Of the proposition. 
 
 Mr. Whitney replied that he had asked the question under a. sense 
 of his responsibility as a sworn officer of the Court, and was responsi- 
 ble to it alone for his action. The defense having offered evidence of 
 communications made tothe prisoner, which tended to show the con- 
 dition of his mind at the time of the homicide, he claimed it competent 
 for the Siate to show that the reputation of Miss Black was of sucha 
 bad character and so generally known in the community of which the 
 prisoner was a member, that if must have come to his ears, and there- 
 fore such communications could not have operated upon his mind as 
 claimed by the defense. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 39 
 
 The Court, through Chief Justice Maulsby, said it was competent 
 for (lie State to reply to prool as to i he^onditioa pi' the pri soner's mind 
 byuany proof going to the prisoner's mind pp. the same subject. The 
 feot soughl to be proved could have no Legal connection w ith the facts 
 in this issvc, and the Court is of the opinion that the evidence oil'ercd, 
 as offered, is not admissible* 
 
 Henry 8hrwer^Jr. v testified : I saw Mr. Black at Mr. Qpodman's 
 store halt an hour before the shooting; he bought two cigars, and left, 
 my store smoking; saw nothing unusual about him. 
 
 Dr. Smith, for the prosecution, called : I reside in Cumberland, but 
 am a native of Frederick county ; have resided in Cumberland fifty- 
 one years ; I saw Harry Black the morning of the occurrence about 8 
 o'clock; [ was- returning from the post-office, , and observed Black on 
 the corner at llumoird's store ; Black crossed over to the oilier side ; I 
 heard the first shot, tired. 
 
 Mr. Whitney-. Did you see anything in McKaig's hand? 
 
 Mr. Syk.stki:.. I object. This certainly cannot be considered legiti- 
 matc cross-examination. Th" prosecution have closed their ease so 
 far as evidence of the shooting is concerned. 
 
 Mr. Whitney said that since they had (dosed their case the plea of 
 Self-defense had been set up, and ihey had yet had no opportunity to 
 combat it. He contended that it was legitim ite rebutting testimony. 
 
 Mr. Syestcrsaid that this was cutting up their testimony by piece-meal, 
 and was not n hutting testimony. II" contended that it was evidence, 
 in chief, and that When the plea of not guilty was put in it was notice 
 to the Stale to prove their case. He illustrated their position by say- 
 ing that if after the Slate had closed its evidence in tjbe first ease, and 
 the defense had submitted it on that evidence, and they had sought to 
 open it to hit roduce evidence like this, would it have been allowed? Mr. 
 Syestor cited as authorities 577 1st Archibald's Criminal Evidence, sec. 
 44; G-reenleaf on Evidence; 21st Common Law Reports, page 4-Jl. 
 He contended that the prosecution could not develop a pari of its case 
 and then rest to see what would be broughl ooi by the defense, and 
 then bring testimony that was brought here for the express purpose, ot 
 proving their case, and should have been put upon the stand at the 
 opening of their case. 
 
 Mr. Sye-ter was followed by Mr. Brengle, who made a lengthy argu- 
 ment urging the admissibility of the evidence sought to be offered. 
 
 Mr. Whitney next addressed the Court, and said that owing to the 
 ab'r-ity with which his colleague had argued the question it was un- 
 necessary for him to detain the Court long. He said that self-defense 
 isan affirmative defense, and necessary to be proved affirmatively, to 
 which the State had the right to reply. 
 
 Mr. Nelson, forthe defense, said thai the State, tor the purpose of 
 proving this identical fact, had brought Dv. Smith down here, and 
 they were fully aware of the defense when they rested t heir case. 1 [e 
 had just began his argument when the Court interrupted and said that. 
 it was the hourfor adjournment, and the Court would adjourn until 
 Wednesday morning at o'clock. 
 
40 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 SEVENTH DAY. 
 
 Argument of Mt. .Y Ibility of Evidena — Deci- 
 
 sion of the Court upon Hn Point Radaed-rRebutting Evidence Offered 
 b'jthf 1'. n—Th Eoidenceon Both Sides Closed* 
 
 The court met precisely at 9 o'clock a. m.; all the judges and 
 other officers of the court iu their proper places. 
 
 There was no lagging of interest in the trial, and the court-room 
 . if possible, mure crowded than ever. 
 
 The decision of the Court upon the question raised on Tuesday 
 was looked for with great anxiety by the friends of both parties, as 
 each considi red it of the greatest importance to their case. 
 
 Immediately upon the assembling of the court, Air. Whitney 
 said that before the counsel for the defense proceeded he desired 
 to submit to the Court their proposition in writing, as follows: 
 "The (State having proved tin? killing of the deceased by the 
 prisoner, and offered evidence to prove express malace, (the 
 counsel for the defense having made no opening statement) 
 closed their case. The prisoner's counsel then proceeded to 
 make their opening statement to the jury, and for the purpose 
 of establishing the theory of self-defense, offered evidence to show 
 that the deceased, at the time of the shooting and afterwards, 
 and while he was crossing the street, had a pistol in his hand. 
 To rebut this theory of self-defense and the evidence offered 
 under it, as above stated, the State proposes to prove by Dr. 
 Smith and other wit nesses, who saw the deceased during the time 
 spoken of by the defendant's witnesses, that he had no pistol, 
 and that the allegation made by the defense is not true." 
 
 .Judge Maulsby suggested that the question in the case was not 
 only the admissibility of the fact proposed to be proved, but what 
 is the evidence by which it is proposed to prove it. 
 
 Air. Whitney withdrew the statement. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby directed Mr, Nelson, for the defense, to 
 proceed with his argument. 
 
 AKGTMENT OF MR. NELSON. 
 
 Mr. Nelson said that when the court adjourned last evening we 
 were considering the question whethertheeviden.ceoffered was in 
 chief or rebuttal. All the counsel on both sides have come to the 
 conclusion as to the' principles of law governing, the, only difficulty 
 is in that particular application to this case. J t has been said by 
 the prosecution no not iceof t hedefense nowset up, and which seems 
 to be one of the issues in this case, had been given them, and also 
 that the issues in reality have changed. We take issue on both alle- 
 gations. We have put in the plea of not guilty, a broad plea. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M*KATC, JR. -11 
 
 which covers all the defenses, and is notice to the State of eveisy 
 defense which can lie made use of under such a, plea. We contend 
 that they have had full notice, not only by f he plea put in, hut that 
 when thiscase occurred in Cumberland it was stated inthepubKc 
 newspapers of thedaythat a pistol had been found lying in the 
 street near the deseased; that it was not known who had thai, pis- 
 tol 1 , the deceased or the prisoner. Again, our line Of cross-exami- 
 nation indicated that our defense wouhl he self-defense, therefore 
 the excuse that they had no no! ice will not hold. Now, upon two 
 grounds we submit that the evidence to be offered is not compe- 
 tent: First, if a party goes into a case and offers a piece'bf testi- 
 mony, and (doses with (die expectation of offering evidence of the 
 same class after the evidence i closed, tbat is certainly not 
 
 la.w, as you will see by reference to the case of Brown vs. Murray, 
 21st Common Law Reports. The law found there is applicable to 
 t his catee. Witnesses were called to pfove 1 lie tact of killing, and 
 further offered a piece of evidence which, if not. tor the pui pose of 
 self-defense, had no legal meaning, to wit, whether the deceased 
 did not throw up both bands. What bearing did it have on the 
 killing V vas it not designed to create the impression <>u the 
 mind of the jury that the deceased had no pistol. or arms, and for 
 no other purpose? If that is so, it was affirmative testimony, 
 which we had the right to the ueg$tiye,and which denial thej are 
 estopped from rebutting. Another proposition weassume is that 
 |r thing which| occurred around this whole transaction that 
 would go to conlirttfylt.li e theory of i lie State mustbegiven in chief 
 and is evidence i^ehief. For instance, in a robbery the State 
 proves the fact of theft, and then rests; the prisoner comes in, 
 prove., an alibi, and the prosecution, knowing the alibi is not true, 
 disproves it iu the first place, dan they disprove it again? And 
 in cA<a of larceny the state proves possession of the ai ticle stolen 
 
 and then rests; the prisoner conies in with the defense thai he 
 purchased ii. Can the State then give in evidence that it was 
 stolen? ( lertaiply not, and L refer your honor toSCarrand i'ayn, 
 page 299; 24 English Common Law Reports, page 340; thee, 
 Rex vs. Hildige et at, and 41 English Common Law Reports, page 
 'J.~;\. Again, there is evidence here of bullet shots, each one 
 sufficient to cause death. S appose the state had. proven hut one 
 shot and then closed, and the defense had set up I he defense that 
 before he had time to die of the wound inflicted apoplexy inter- 
 vened, and proven by medical testimony that it caused death, is 
 ipetenl to reopen the case aud show 5 that a second shot was 
 fired which caused heath'.'' That is no answer to the apoplexy. 
 Can it be allowed t > break down the defense iti that manner? We 
 lipid that confirmatory evidence cannot be given, as it is original 
 aony. Upon both propositions we are sustained by the 
 authorities, and believe that we may rest the question with the 
 Court. 
 
 O tUX ION OF THE COURT. 
 
 Judge Bowie, for himself and Judge Lynch, said that they were 
 of the opinion that the evidence sought to be introduced bj the 
 State was admissible, and added that the traverser in his defense 
 
42 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 proved thai when he fired the fatal shot the deceased had a r 
 ver in his hand, which fell in the street, and closed his testimony 
 in chief. The state produced a witn< ss, who was present al the 
 time of the homicide, to prove thai the deceased had n ■ 
 
 srser objected. The 1 majority of i : "' eourl are of the 
 opinion that the evideace is admissible, because it is in rebuttal 
 of the testimony of the i raverser tending to establish, self -defi 
 The State must in the first in five, evidence of all the J 
 
 relied on to prove t he offense, and will ■ '. ; . er the 
 
 traverser has concluded, 1 >introdu • in rebuttal any.cuuiul 
 evidence to establish the facts which the law demands the : 
 to prove in chief, and will not be permitted to 3 and rebut 
 
 matter proper to be -given int evidence in defense. The tra- 
 verser will be required to give;in evidence allfacts relied on as 
 matter of defense. When thedefense has done with its evidence 
 theStatewill be permitted to rebut by evidence ;in\ fact inl roduced 
 in the defense as new matter, and this whether it be a part of 1 he 
 occurrence at tbe time of the homicide or otherwise; that this 
 self-di fense is a .matter of confession and avoidance and affirma- 
 tion on the part of the defense; which it is proper should be 
 rebutted, and that, in our opinion, the authorities read by the tra- 
 verser's counsel do not sustain their theory. 
 
 .TFDGE MATJLSBY DISSENTS. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby expressed his regret at being compelled, 
 by a sense of official duty, to differ from his brethren of 1 he bench, 
 for the first time since he had the pleasure of occupying it with 
 them, and his thanks to the counsel of defense for the arguments 
 by which he had been convinced that his first impressions in fa t or 
 Of the admissibility of the evidence offered were erroneous. lie 
 then read from 1st Greenleaf , section 74. to the effect tiiat a p 1 
 who asserts the affirmative of an issue is entitled to begin and 
 reply, and having begun, is not permitted to go into half of his 
 ease, and resume 1 hi; remainder, but is generally obliged I develop 
 the whole, regard being had to the substance and effectof the 
 issue rather than to the form of it, the test being whether the 
 defense is indicated with sufficient particularity to render the 
 plaintiff's evidence intelligible, and to note J> to section 81, to 
 the point that in criminal cases I he burden of proof never shifts, 
 but is on the State throughout, and that the State is bound to 
 prove that the prisoner is guilty in mariner and farm as charged in 
 the indictment; and to section 469, that the State must put in its 
 whole evidence to every point on which it opens, and then the 
 prisoner must put in his entire case, and the State's reply must be 
 limited to new points first opened by the defense. He referred 
 to 1st Carrington and Murshnian, 500; 2d Uarrington and Payne, 
 41o, and Kyan and Moody, 254. The principle announced in the 
 last case is that when but one transaction is in question the party 
 maintaining the affirmative must put in chief all the evidence 
 relating to that transaction, and will not be allowed to give in 
 reply any evidence relative to that transaction. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. 43 
 
 Tho application of the law so stated to this case he, made as fol- 
 lows: 'That the State had proved in chief thetransaction resulting 
 in the killling — the meeting of the parties; their attitudes toward 
 carl) other, the firing, the fatal shot, the fall, the death. &c, 
 Tie said that the state was bound in law to offer in chief all the 
 facts of that transaction, and eon hi not prove in chief some of the 
 faeis, ami, in reply, other of tin- facts of thai onet ransaction; that 
 is, the staie was bound to give in chief all the evidence pertain- 
 ing to that transaction, So as to describe it fully according to its 
 real character. Having close!] its proof, the defense produced 
 evidence describing the same tra tsactiou in a different manner, 
 and had stated some facts attending the transaction which the 
 State's witnesses had not described to exist, as the having in his 
 hand by the deceased a revolver at the time when the, prisoner 
 fired the fatal shot. N"ow, the State offers to call in reply other 
 witnesses to describe the same t ran sad ion, and to prove that t hey 
 did not see the revolver in the deceased's hands. He thought 
 that this would be merely to repeat the evidence in chief, to prove 
 the same description of the transaction which the Slate had 
 pfoved in chief. The admissibility of the proof offered in reply, 
 lie said, was supposed to vest on this: That the State had not 
 proved in chief the fact of the deceased not having a, revolver iii 
 his hand, and the defence having proved the fact that he did have 
 it, that was a new fact proved by the defense which entitled the 
 Stal(! to reply to it by proving that it was not so. This, the judge 
 said, was confounding facts proved on each side of an issue with 
 the evidence ow each side. That is, the evidence to a transaction 
 embraces all the fads attending it, and all the evidence be 
 required to he pal in and then replied to. The evidence so gj 
 on both side's went to (lie jury to enable them to determine what 
 the facts of the trans. ict ions were which the evidence proved. If 
 the doctrdrie contended for could be correct then each sepai 
 fact could lie proved by the evidence on both sides to that fact, 
 which was b il one Of the many facts attending the narrative of 
 one transaction, and so the issues and the order of process on 
 them would be multiplied ad infinitum, each fact attending the 
 principal fact forming a seperate issue, so far as the ordinary proof 
 was concerned. The proof offered could only be to prove all the 
 facts, ^r some of the fa.ci - tding the one transaction already 
 
 proved by the State in chief, and wasrqu ally inadmissible whether 
 
 it were simply to repeat testimony given in chief, to prove the 
 same fact , or to prove some of the fad s of t he affair, ail 6f which 
 
 the State had proved, or was bound to have proved in chief. The 
 result, would be that when a party proved his side of an issue, and 
 the Opposite side proved his version of the same matter, without 
 introducing any new collate red fact, but simply proving the same 
 affair to be different from what the first party have proved it to 
 be; tin; fijoat party could have the last only, by calling other wit- 
 nesses to prove that it was as his witnesses had first proved it, 
 and not as the defendant's witnesses had proved il. This was not 
 the law of evidence. 
 
 lie said that if the defense had proved any new fact collateral 
 to the transaction, or disconnected and apart from it in respect to 
 
44 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 the tenor of its occurrence, the State would be at liberty to offer 
 »f in reply in respect to i bat colateral fact. But that was not 
 this case and he thought the proof offered in reply was clearly 
 inadmissible. 
 
 Dr. s. p. Smith recalled for the prosecution: I saw McKaig 
 almost simultaneously at the time of the firsl shot; saw the 
 Bmoke when not much higherthana man's head: saw his hands 
 distinctly; he hadno pistol in his hand, and saw none till the 
 lime the body was taken up; 1 was at no time more than nine 
 steps from him, sometimes not more than live; I saw the body 
 in the office, and assisted in carrying it in; I know Ch 
 Medore; my impression is Charles Medore did not unbuckle the 
 belt; I would not allow any person to gq to the body until his 
 friends came; I told the brother of the deceased, when he came, 
 to take everything into his possession; lie, in opening the vest,. 
 disclosed the belt; [did not see the belt before then, as it was 
 covered by the vest; there was one pistol in the holster fastened 
 d>\vu by a flap buttoned; the other holster was empty; perhaps 
 Medore assisted in removing the body; there was no obstruction 
 between the body and myself, hut I had an unobstructed view; 
 my eye-, were on him (McKaig) from the first lire. 
 
 Mr. Whitney: What was W. W. KcKaig's character? 
 
 Mr. Syester objected. 
 
 Mr. Whitney stated that the defense had offered testimony as 
 to the character of Black for peace and quietness! under the theory 
 that he acted in self-defense, and the killing was the result of a 
 mutual rencontre, to show the improbability otitis having made t he 
 first at lack. To meet this theory the State now proposes to prove 
 the good character of McKaig for peace and quietness to establish 
 improbability of his having' made the first attack, as assumed. 
 The Court sustained Mr. Syester 's objection, and the Court ex- 
 cluded the testimony. 
 
 Cross-examination by Mr, Syester: 
 
 His body was in the office, but how long I know not; I think 
 there were three or four persons present ; they were not strangers, 
 but 1 bave forgotten who they wen ; when L saw McKaig he was 
 down off of the pavement, out of the gutter, backing into the 
 street, witii face obliquely from me, and his hands up in an im- 
 ploring position; 1 do not say Medore was in or out of the office, 
 as the crowd there became large very soon; the people living in 
 
 hotly was untouched unlit Mervin McKaig came, Which was in 
 about fifteen or twenty minutes; I examined the body; I did not 
 see pockets in the rear of his pantaloons, or any pocket torn out; 
 Mervin McKaig unbuttoned the vest and unbuckled the belt; he 
 opened his vest at my suggestion to take out his brother's papers 
 and valuables, and then it was I saw the belt; I can't say whe.ro 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIGF, JR. 45 
 
 the belt was located, only abbut the waist; can't locate the par- 
 ticular spot; one, of the holsters was empty, the one that had the 
 flap torn off ; the pistol was ptil into the holster byMervin Mc- 
 Kaig and the belt buckled about himself; when he went away he 
 took t he pistol with him; I came up street that morning, but not 
 certain from where, may have been to other places than the post- 
 office; the body when brought into the oil ice was laid on a set lee; 
 the vest was not- opened', that I know of, before Mervin McKaig 
 eanie; I I'orhade any person to go near the body. 
 
 .'. Edfiehl next called and examined by Mr. Whitney: I reside 
 in Cumberland, but am originally from Pennsylvania. 1 am clerk- 
 ing in Craigen & Co.'s drug s'tere; 1 saw where the body of Mc- 
 Kaig lay, and saw it raised up to betaken in the office; as it was 
 raised up I saw a revolver l'all from the bod)-; I don't know Who 
 picked it up; it lay about a foot from him; I saw Black after the 
 shooting; he stepped back on the pavement with a revbiver-irt his 
 hand; I saw McKsaig as lie was falling, jnst about toucbingtbe 
 ground; as the body was carried to the oliice I followed, I did not 
 see any one pick up a pistol. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Sykstek: 
 As his head was raised up a pistol fell from the left side; I did 
 not see the whole of the transaction; I heard only t hree shots; I 
 was engaged in conversation with another gentleman and could, 
 1 think, have heard the other report if it had been as loud as the 
 rest; I don't remember of having had a conversation immediately 
 after the shooting with Mr. Mickey; I often have conversations 
 With Mr. Mickey, as he is one of the firm in whose store I stand. 
 
 Mr. Gahitt called and examined by Mr. Whitney: T was not ex- 
 actly present when the body was taken up, but I was running 
 toward if; I saw something fall and I was impressed that it 
 was a pistol; it was picked up by Mr. Turney near the body, 
 which 1 saw. 
 
 Dr. Smith was recalled: One of the holsters was buckled up with 
 a pistol in it; the other was empty and the flap cut off. 
 
 Mr. Mori fund called and examined by Mr. Whitney: I am the 
 party who assisted in picking up the body of McKaig; L live in 
 Cumberland and was in my store on that morning; as I raised 
 the body up it is my impression that something jingled on the 
 stones of the street, 1 did not stop to look at it or pick it up, but 
 continued on carrying the body in the office; in raising the body 
 up the coat hung down so as to obstruct, my view; L saw McKaig 
 from the time he was on the opposite side of the street from Black 
 until lie was killed. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Stestbr : 
 
 I was Loading a dray with a stove and furniture; had got the 
 stove on and had gone into the store to get the furniture when I 
 heard the first shot fired. 
 
46 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLAi 
 
 6 orge M. Gross called and examined by Mr. Whitney: I was up 
 stairs above Mr. Morehead's store, looking out the window when 
 the I McKaig was picked up; I sawa pistol picked up by 
 
 Mr. Turney, near the body, about the middle of the street. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Syester: 
 
 I am the same witness who was up before, and was prevented 
 by counsel from stating this fact before. 
 
 Mr. Syestek: Was that the reason you did not swear to the 
 whole truth as you now swear? 
 
 Witness. Yes; sir. 
 
 W. 3f. Buckholdtz called and examined by Mr. "Whitney: I was 
 in the store door of Ciabaugh & Ryans, in Cumberland, on the 
 morning of theshooting; the store is near the bridge; the diagram 
 shown me represents the door correctly; T was at the store door 
 
 after the first shot, tint not at the time it occurred; I only saw 
 Dr. Smith on the opposite side of the street; Mi'. Connor was in 
 the store; Dr. Himmelshine had been there, hut had gone out'; I 
 sa.w no colored man there or about the place; [did not see Mr. 
 Connor come in the store, but I am certain he was at the water- 
 cooler when the first shot was fired. 
 No cross-examination. 
 
 Dr. Dougherty called: T was not in Dr. Ilealy'ssbop when the body 
 was Drought in, but about fifteen minutes after it had been placed 
 there; Mervin McKaig opened the vest; Dr. Smith called his at- 
 tention to the belt, and he unbuckled it, and put it around his own 
 body; I am acquainted with the localities at the Revere House, 
 and made an examination of them yesterday and last night; there 
 is a, verandah attached to the hotel; the Revere House stands on 
 a line of six feet behind the Green House below it; the verandah 
 extends about two feet from the hotel; standing at the corner of 
 the hotel you can only see the outside of Little's sign near the end 
 of pavement, and then must leak through an opening in the rail- 
 ing of the verandah; the Green House and railing obstruct the 
 view; you might recognize a man in broad daylight from the cor- 
 ner; I made an examination last night; could see the light, but 
 could not distinguish any person passing by it; a friend of mine 
 went over to l lie corner to try ir, and it is impossible to recognize 
 any person standing at the Revere House; the light at the railroad 
 ticket office at the Revere House throws alight into the street, 
 and leaves a person standing by it in the shade, rendering it im- 
 possible to distinguish whether it is a white or black man. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. Do you know the general character of John 
 Long? 
 
 Objection being made by Mr. Nelson, the question was with- 
 drawn. 
 
 Cross-examination by Mr. Syester : 
 I made the examination yesterday, and this is my first visit to 
 
FOR KILLINO COLONEL W. W. m"kAIG, JR. 47 
 
 Frederick during this trial; T made the exnvnination at the request 
 of Smith Johnson, who asked me to go with him; he said, l 'Hid 
 yon see John Long's testimony?" I replied "yes. 11 
 
 [The witness was here going to express an opinion about the tes- 
 timony, when he was stopped by the defense.] 
 
 The witness then continued: The Revere House is about six 
 feet in tii'' rear of the Green House; the Green House is a saloon, 
 and has, I think, two windows in front, and oval glasses in the 
 door, though I do not know for certain, as 1 do not visit such 
 places; I could not see because the verandah obscured the view; 
 there is a barber-shop under the Kevere House, and if you look 
 under the verandah you can see the entrance to it; the verandah 
 runs nearly up to the corner, and is about six feet high; the rail- 
 ing around it about:, two and a half feet from the floor; the plat- 
 form descends, and you must dodge down in order to see under 
 the verandah; there is generally a light hanging out of the Green 
 House; (here is a light at Ferguson's saloon; the saloon stands on 
 a hue with the Green House; the Green House isabove Ferguson's; 
 there is a little alley between the Revere House and the Green 
 House; there is a saloon under the Revere House; next, 1 think, 
 the Green House; I think there is a lamp-post in front of the Re- 
 vere House, but no lamp; there is no light in front of the barber- 
 shop; I have not been extraordinarily active in this case; the lamp 
 in front of Ferguson's saloon is a large one, but 1 don't think it 
 was lighted up; one also at the Green House, which was not lighted 
 Up, nor the one at the other saloons. 
 
 ftfr. Sykstek. Why did you make the examination without hav- 
 ing the lamps lighted? 
 
 Witness. Because I made it in broad daylight, both in the 
 morning and afternoon; 1 made it first by myself, and then in the 
 afternoon with Mr. Johnson, at his request; I don't think [ could 
 have recognized any person from the corner of the Revere House 
 coming up the street, as the opening to look through the veran- 
 dah is only about three inches wide; 1 did not send any person 
 down to walk up, as 1 thought it not necessary; the strongest 
 lights, if lighted, would be in the rear of anyone walking up 
 street, and not in front; the dim ones would be in front; L have 
 not taken an unusual amount of interest in this case; what inter- 
 est 1 have taken is caused by my opinion that an outrage had been 
 committed in the community by shooting; I did look up some testi- 
 mony, because once 1 became near being murdered without cause 
 in the same way. 
 
 Re-examined by Mr. June : 
 
 I have lived in Cumberland twenty-five years, and practiced 
 medicine there twenty-four years; I interested myself in this case 
 only as a good citizen should do, and denounced it in the office 
 v. here the body lay; my Life was threatened without a cause once, 
 on political grounds, not that anj thing of this character was im- 
 puted to me; John Resley attempted it, and the sheriff caught the 
 pistol from him; i myself had heard of Ins threats, and meeting 
 
43 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 liim took a pistol out, and laying it in my hands, Baid to him that 
 T was prepared for him, likewise that I had heard of his threats; 
 the sheriff took the pistol from John which he had; he is a desper- 
 ate young man. 
 
 Mr. Syester, Did John Resley have a pistol in his hands when 
 you pulled your pistol out? 
 
 V. ri n ESS. I saw none. 
 
 Mr. Syester. Thai isthe way your life was threatened, is it? 
 
 Witness. Yes. sir. 
 
 Smith Johnson caller! and examined by Mr. Whitney : T heard 
 John Long's testimony; T partly examined the locality; the ticket 
 office was lighted when f examined it last; by the light it was 
 impossible to tell a pistol or gun; I leaned against the corner and 
 looked towards Mr. Little's, down street; [.had to look through 
 the verandah, which so obstructed my view that I could not recog- 
 nize any one at Little's store. 
 
 Cross-examination by Mr. Syester: 
 
 I left here on Saturday evening at 7 o'clock; did not leave for 
 thepurposeof making the examination, but to go home to Cum- 
 berland; I first went down to the Revere House on Sunday at 10 
 o'clock, to examine the locality Long testified to, and again on 
 Monday at 1 p. m.;the first time I went alone; the second time 
 with Dr. Dougherty; I made three examinations, the last this 
 morning at 2 o'clock, when I left Cumberland for Federick; I did 
 not look down street then; Dr. Dougherty and John Cruzin were 
 there, helping to make the examination; Cruzin came there not by 
 my request; lie said he had heard that the money drawer of the 
 Revere House had been broken open, and the money had been 
 I ii. and he came up to see about it; lie heard it when they came 
 to his saloon for a policeman ; I have been in Cumberland seven or 
 eight years; 1 am engaged in the coal business and Kfe insurance 
 and real estate agency; I may have been active in this case; Imay 
 have been looking after witnesses, and may have asked some of 
 them what they knew; I told Mr. Benan that Mr. Whitney or Mr. 
 McKaig wanted to see him; but he did not go; he is the only one 
 I asked to go; I did not ask any of the witnesses for the defense 
 what they would prove; I was at the place of shooting half an 
 hour after it occurred, and did not use much intemperate langu- 
 age; I have not offered t<> bettbat the prisoner would be convicted 
 and hung; some one said that he would bet two to one that the 
 prisoner would be acquitted^ which 1 said I would take, but there 
 was no bet; I had not inquired into any of the privacies of this 
 case before returning to Cumberland. 
 
 Dr. Ileal y called and examined by Mr. Whitney: T called Dr. 
 Smith's attention to the shooting; 1 was sitting in the ollice win- 
 dow waiting for my horse; L am lame and can't walk much, there- 
 fore use a horse; while sitting there I observed the two gentlemen. 
 
FOR BILLING COLONEL W. W. M*KAIG, JR. 49 
 
 Mr. MoKaigand Mr. Black; T kept my eye on them; I saw Mr. 
 McKaig's hand; there was no pistol in it. 
 
 Mr. Syester objected to the testimony, as he had been examined 
 in chief to the same, thing, and said he himself asked the questions 
 on cross-examination, and that the witness replied that such "was 
 his position that it was impossible to see a pistol in McKaig's 
 hand if there was one. 
 
 WITNESS. Mr. Syester. T made no such statement as that, and 
 don't recollect having said anything about it yesterday, though 1 
 might. 
 
 Mr. Syester contended that an examination had linen made be- 
 fore on the same tiling, and produced notesof a reporter to sustain 
 himself. The Court ruled the question not proper. 
 
 Dr. Ilealy resumed his testimony: I conversed with Mr. Wolfe 
 several times about it; Mr. Wolfe" never said he saw a pistol in 
 McKaig's hand; Mr. Wolfe told me he never did see one in his 
 hand. 
 
 Mr. kelson objected to the last answer, as it tended to impeach 
 Mr. Wolfe, and a proper foundation had not been laid. 
 
 The Court ruled the answer inadmissible. 
 
 Witness. I never heard of a pistol being in McKaig's hands 
 until I came to Frederick. 
 
 Cornelius Cornier was called and examined by Mr. Whitney: I 
 was walking to the liquor establishment of Clabaugh & Ryan, and 
 MeKaig passed as I went into it; was in about one or one-and-a- 
 half minutes when the shot was fired; had just cleverly got in 
 and immediately came out; I did not see a colored man there or 
 about; I sawCnly Dr. Ilummelshine and Mr. Buckholtz. 
 
 Andrew Goneler called and examined by Mr. Brengle: I know 
 when MeKaig was shot by Mr. Black, Sr. 
 
 Mr. Syester. We object to that, as it does not rebut anything 
 given in evidence by the defense. 
 
 Mr. Whitnry said the defense had offered Lloyd Lowndes as a 
 witness to prove that the fact of MeKaig being the seducer of 
 Black's sister was first communicated to him on the Sunday pro- 
 ceeding thekilling. The state, for thepurpose of showing this tes- 
 timony untrue and absurd, proposes to prove by this witness that 
 some four mouths prior to this murder Black's father had shot 
 and severely wounded MeKaig with a double-barrelled gun on one 
 of the principal streets of Cumberland, for the very same cause now 
 set up by the son; that Black, Sr., was arrested at the time tor an 
 assult with intent to murder, failed to appear before the grand 
 jury, and the whole affair published in the three Cumberland 
 papers ; that the jury, as sensible men, could draw no other con- 
 clusion but that young $>lack, who was there at the time, must 
 have known of the shooting and its alleged cause. 
 
 The Court. Do you further proposeto inquire when the fact was 
 conveyed to the prisoner? 
 
 4e 
 
50 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK. 
 
 The counsel for the prosecution consulted for a moment, when 
 Mr. Brengle arose and said the State would now rest its case. 
 
 The counsel Col t he defense, after a short consultation, staled 
 they would also close, at which announcement there was quite a 
 feeling of suprise manifest among the audience. 
 
 Chief Justice Maulsby stated that the Court would adjourn 
 until Wednesday morning, at 9 o'clock, when the arguments would 
 he heard. 
 
ARGUMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 ATTORNEY GENERAL JONES. 
 
 Mav it please the Coubt and Gentlemen of the Jury, 
 in the discbarge of the responsible duty which my official position 
 imposes upon me, I desire to address you in plain words. I wish 
 to impress upon you the grave and solemn responsibilities of the 
 duty which the State now calls upon you to perform. I share with 
 you in the sentiment that the duty is as painful and unwelcome as 
 it is solemn and important. But your State lias the right to demand 
 your services in whatever capacity the public interest requires. 
 And, whether you are called upon to peril your life upon the field of 
 battle in her defense, or, in her civil service, you are called upon to 
 sit in judgment upon a question involving the life of a fellow- 
 being, the State expects and requires you to nerve your heart a ad 
 mind to the high and stern performance of your whole duty. 
 Already you have listened to appeals and witnessed scenes in the 
 course of this trial well calculated to swell the fountains of your 
 sympathy for the prisoner and his sorrowing parents. They have 
 been in your presence during the long and weary hours and days 
 of this trial; and doubtless in the addresses which will be made to 
 you by the very able, zealous, and eloquent counsel for the defense, 
 nothing will be left unsaid which may tend to excite your emotions 
 of pity and sympathy for the prisoner. I know you are but men, 
 and that such emotions, in listening to such appeals, and witness- 
 ing scenes of distress, spring up in the noblest hearts and often 
 mislead the most honest minds. The stern performance of a pain- 
 ful duty under such circumstances is often most difficult. The 
 example of the Roman father, whose high public duty demanded 
 of him the sentence of death upon his own son, has been held up 
 to the admiration of successive generations as a heroic triumph of 
 public duty over parental emotions. Our laws do not impose such 
 anguish upon those now called to the performance of such public 
 duty. They do not require or allow a man to be judge in his own 
 case, or in that of a relative, even in civil suits. Just and impar- 
 tial minds are to weigh the evidence and pronounce upon | he law. 
 They are to discharge this duty under the most solemn and bind- 
 ing sanction which can influence the conscience of men, \ on 
 have been selected and assigned to duty in this case. To enable 
 you to perforin it aright, the Constitution has invested you witli 
 the highest possible powers. It declare- that in all criminal eases 
 the jury shall be judges of law as well as fact. If you convict, the 
 Court has a discretion, upon good cause shown, to grant a new 
 
52 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLA'cK 
 
 trial before another jury. Bui if you acquit there Is no earthly 
 tribunal which can try the party again for the same offense. 
 
 In view of such powers and such consequences you arc called, to 
 try this case. The law has afforded theprisoner every possiblesafe- 
 guard against injustice. The eloquent counsel, who made to you 
 what be called the opening Statement for the defense, complained 
 that the state had caused the trial to be removed from Cumber- 
 land where this tragedy took place, and where the parties were 
 best know. The record shows that this was done after eight 
 jurors had been sworn, and upon the oath of the State's attorney 
 that the State, in his judgment, could not have a fair and impar- 
 tial trial of this case in that county. Under these circumstances 
 it was removed, and it may be fairly inferred that the necessity of 
 the removal for the purposes of justice was forced upon the mind 
 of the State's officer while the selection of the jury was going on. 
 But the State has provided the prisoner with every facility for a 
 fair and impartial trial here. The attendance of every witness he 
 desired has been enforced. He lias freely exercised' his right of 
 peremptory challenge, and challenge for cause, until a jury has 
 been selected, to which he can take no exception. And from the 
 high character for intelligence and integrity awarded to you from 
 every quarter the best guaranty is afforded for the faithful admin- 
 istration of the law. 
 
 A jury of twelve honest, upright, impartial men, experience in 
 the affairs of common life, is universally admitted to be the best 
 constituted tribunal for the trial of controverted facts, and for 
 the ascertainment of the motive of acts, which the accumulated 
 wisdom and experience of past ages has been able to devise. 
 
 But I again invoke you to bring to the consideration of this case 
 a calm judgment and a stern resolve. I invoke you to remove from 
 your minds any impression which may have been made upon them 
 by the impassioned eloquence of the opening counsel for the de- 
 fense upon a detailed statement of a case of seduction, which has 
 turned out to have existed only in his excited imagination, and of 
 which there is not before you one particle of legel evidence. And 
 this brings me to remind you upon what you are to found your 
 verdict. You are not to try this case by excited emotions of sym- 
 pathy for the present distress which your eyes may see. The an- 
 guish of a deep grief crushes the broken hearts of mother and 
 wife of the deceased William W. McKaig in the seclusion of their 
 distant homes. The shock of his instant death which closed the 
 places of business in the town of his home, and sent unusual mul- 
 titudes of sorrowing citizens to his funeral, has not ceased to 
 vibrate in the memory of those who best knew him, and whose 
 confidence and respect he had so generally inspired. But these are 
 not the considerations by which you are to be influenced in your 
 verdict. 
 
 Whatever of pity and sorrow you may feel as fellowmen for 
 those, whether present or absent, whose hearts bleed under the 
 consequences of this terrible tragedy, must cease to disturb the 
 calm operations of your sober judgment, as public officers of the 
 law, charged with the responsibilities of a high public duty. 
 
 When this indictment was read to you, charging the prisoner 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. 53 
 
 with the highest crime known to the law — murder with malice 
 aforethought — you were informed that it was perpetrated against 
 the peace, government, and dignity of the .State of Maryland. 
 These are to be vindicated. The sanctity and security of human 
 life is to be vindicated'. The very foundation a of law, government, 
 and civil society are involved in the questions submitted to your 
 consideration. And by What rule are these questions to be de- 
 cided? < >f what law has the constitution made you judges? I beg 
 to remind you of the terms of that oath, for the sanctity and due 
 observance of which you have severally made your solemn appeal 
 to God, "you shall well and truly try, and a true deliverance make 
 bet ween the State of Maryland and the prisoner at the bar whom 
 you shall have in charge, and a true verdict give according to the 
 evidence, so help you God." Your verdict is to be founded upon 
 the evidence of facts legally before you, and upon the existing 
 established law for the punishment of homicide. The definitions 
 of murder in the first and second degrees, and of manslaughter, 
 and the well-defined distinctions between those crimes have been 
 already made known to you. I may advert to them again in the 
 application of the evidence. 
 
 I now beg you to contemplate the facts which are in evidence 
 before you. It has been shown that the prisoner and the deceased, 
 Colonel MeKaig, were both natives of Cumberland; that both left 
 i heir homes, and were soldiers in the Confederate army in the late 
 war bel ween the. States ; they had both periled their lives for the 
 "lost cause;" they were both familiar with the use of the pistol 
 and with scenes of imminent personal danger. It is not pretended 
 that it was a case of a brave, fearless, and dangerous man on the 
 one side, and cf a kind, nervous, frightened man, unused to the 
 sight and practice of tire-anus, upon the other. It is important to 
 
 i bis fact in mind, especially in considering the theory of self- 
 defense which is attempted to be established. 
 
 ■ facts attending the tragedy of the fatal morning of the 17th 
 of October last, which are proved beyond possible question, are 
 that early on that morning the prisoner was seen in the vicinity of 
 the place of business of the deceased, and looking into his office. 
 For what purpose was he there ? What was his motive ? This, gen- 
 tlemen, you art- to infer from his acts and conduct. God only knows 
 with absolute certainty the secret workings of the human heart-, 
 [f such knowledge were required in human affairs, it is manifest 
 that the administration of human government would be utterly 
 impossible. Omniscience is the indispensable attributeof Go i who 
 governs the universe; but lie has made social life — the. dwelling 
 together of men in communities— the law of man's existence. 
 Hence results the absolute necessity of civil government as a di- 
 vine institution. For the purpose of its rightful exercise God has 
 endowed man with an immortal sonl, and with the high faculties 
 Of reason and conscience. 
 
 Our laws, then, arc made by men for the government of m&n^ and' 
 to be administered by men ; and whenever in human affairs the 
 question arises with what motive an act was done, you have to 
 
 s of it by your knowledge of your own hearts, passions, and 
 Dions, and by the light which experience and observation 
 
51 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 afford. In this way you judge of the condition of mind, the ptrr- 
 
 i he motive with which an act was done ; and forthis pui 
 y< u are to consider all the surrounding circumstances of the par- 
 ticular transaction. And you remember that it was to sbowto 
 
 ' he condition of the prisoner's mind at the moment of firing 
 the fatal shots that the Court admitted in evidence conversations 
 held with him, on Saturday evening previous, by Henshaw, and on 
 Sunday'by Lowndes and the prisoner's mother. 5Tou are better 
 informed as to what those communications made to the prisoner 
 were than I am. You heard the statement of the wil n< • -■. Not 
 having been present on that day, I know the testimony then given 
 only from the newspaper accounts. Whether those reports were 
 corrector not you will judge. From them T learn that the evi- 
 dence of Mr. Henshaw was to the effect that he had. on Saturday 
 evening, inquired of young Black if the grand jury had indicted 
 his father, and he said they had not. The wil ness told him that 
 he had two reasons tor believing they would ifidict his father; one, 
 because Beale McKaig had told him they would; the other, be- 
 cause he had heard that Colouel McKaig, at the fair grounds, had 
 
 unced his sister as a common strumpet; that young Black re- 
 plied lie had not been able to learn the truth of that report of the 
 i mark of Colonel McKaig. Witness further told him that he had 
 heard that, at the fair grounds, Colonel McKaig had told Black's 
 father that whoever said he (McKaig) was the seducer of his sis- 
 ter was a liar; upon which Black said, " ily God, is it possible !" 
 changed color, and seemed much excited. 
 
 (Mi cross-examination this witness stated that he had read in 
 the Cumberland paper that the prisoner's father had shot 0< ' 
 McKaig. That publication had been madeseveral months be 
 and it would seem incredible that the prisoner could have rema 
 ignorant of the shooting, and of the alledged cause of ii. Evi- 
 dently the conversation of Henshaw was predicated upon his b - 
 lit-f that the prisoner Was fully aware of the shooting, otherwise 
 he would not have asked the prisoner whether the grand jury had 
 indicted his father; and the reply of the prisoner that they had wOt 
 is inconsistent with the theory attempted to he set up by the de- 
 fense, that the prisoner was then for the first time informed of 
 any cause for such indictment. Then, if for several weeks or 
 months he had known of the shooting of McKaig by his father, 
 and of the alleged cause of it, he was on that Saturday evening 
 informed that Colonel McKaig had, in the must emphatic terms, 
 denied that he was the seducer of the prisoner's sister. With this 
 information he went home, reaching there, as his mother states, 
 at about 11 o'clock that night. It does not appear from her testi- 
 mony that he manifested any unusual excitement that night. .No 
 inquiry by the defense appears to have been made of her upon that 
 subject. The inquiry by the defense was, "What happened the 
 next day?" The reply was, tw lle went up town as usual after 
 breakfast ; he always goes upon Sunday, when at home, to see his 
 aunt; that she knew what had been told him ; she knew lie had 
 
 ; fold ail. 1 ' Then Mr. Lowndes testified that between 9 and 
 10 o'clock on Sunday morning the prisoner went to his house, and 
 he informed him of the letter from Colonel McKaig to his sister. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'kaIG, JR. 55 
 
 On cross-examination the -witness stated that they were talking in 
 reference to preparing his father's defense. The witness was 
 counsel for the father. 
 
 It lias been shown by the record that the father bad been pre- 
 sented to the grand jury, on Friday, the 14th of October, 1871, for 
 shooting "W. W. McKaig, with intent to kill him; and that on 
 Saturday he had entered into recognizance for his appearance to 
 answer that charge. 
 
 Mr. Lowndes told the prisoner that his sister would have come 
 on; and that he, the witness, was informed Colonel McKaig was 
 the seducer of his sister; and the prisoner seemed distressed over 
 the ruin of his sister.* From Mr. Lowndes the prisoner went to 
 Mr. Roman's; Mr. L. soon followed, and saw the prisoner read 
 tlic letter which has been shown and read to thejury. In refer- 
 ence to that letter, you will observe that it bears date June 20, 
 1SGG, about four years before the birth of the child, which has 
 been spoken of. The letter itself is of singular import, and it 
 comes before you in a mysterious way. It is alleged to have been 
 written bv Colonel McKaig to Miss Black; but there is no evi- 
 dence -whatever that either of them ever saw the letter. Where 
 it came from, who tore it, who put the pieces together, in whose 
 keeping it has been for these four years and more, why it has been 
 kept, and how it finds its way here are left unexplained. Mr. 
 IJesley testified that he believed it to be in the handwriting of 
 Colonel McKaig. But evidence of handwriting, especially 
 after four years have elapsed, can not be free from great 
 uncertainty. The letter itself shows, upon its face, that it has 
 been tampered with since it was written. It was evidently writ- 
 ten in pencil, and has since been inked over, for the pencil marks 
 are yet visible all through it. It is now written in a plain, round 
 hand, so legible that no one can have any difficulty in reading it. 
 And yet at the bottom, there are added tin se words : tl If you read 
 this, "you will do more than I can." This, too, is traced over 
 with ink; but the pencil marks appear. It is stated also that 
 these part ies were of high respectability in Cumberland, and that 
 Colonel McKaig was a well-educated gentlemen. This letter bears 
 upon its face evidence that it had no such origin as is now alleged. 
 [t bears the impress of ignoranceand vulgarity. It would seem 
 incredible that it could have been written by Colonel McKaig to 
 Miss Black. 
 
 But by whomever and to whomever written it affords not the 
 slightest indication of a case of seduction. It manifests a shock- 
 Log case of familiar, criminal intercourse. It purports to be a 
 reply to a letter received, which upbraided the it cciw r with not 
 wanting to see her, and that he was losing all love for her. 
 
 But it will be for you, gentlemen of the jury 1 , to determine from 
 all the circumstances whether the pi isoner did believe it to have 
 been written to his siBter as represented to him, and what effect 
 it had, or OUght to have had upon his mind alter the interval of 
 nearly twenty-four hours for eooling r< fieel ion. 
 
 It will also he tor you to determine what effect the conversation 
 betw< en the mother and Mr. Lowndes, on u,;it fejundaj evening in 
 the hi aring of the prisoner, had upon his mind; and how far it en- 
 
56 TRIAL OP HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 tiered into the motive for his conduct and acts on the ratal Mon- 
 day morning. STou will bear in mind that Mr. Lowndes testifies 
 that he went to Mrs. Black's that afternoon, inquired of her 
 where her daughter was. and told her that she would have to 
 come mi to the trial of her father: that after refusing, and being 
 told that her husband would prdbably be senl to the penitentiary 
 the mother finally stated where the daughter was; that she had 
 given birth to a child, which was four months old, but that the 
 father would have to take the chances of his trial without her 
 testimony, for her daughter could not be brought to the witness 
 stand in his case. But it may be asked, why not? It could not 
 add to the daughter's disgrace to go upon the witness stand and 
 testify that all that high-wrought, impassioned tale of seduction 
 to which you listened in brother Siyester's opening, was but the 
 literal truth, if she could truthfully sb : testify. It is true McKaig 
 was then living and was a witness for the prosecution. But if in 
 1865, when he met her, she was a pure ami virtuous woman, and 
 so universally held esteemed in the town and neighborhood of her 
 residence, what have conscious truth and virtue to fear, even in a 
 conflict of testimony before a jury in such a case?. But McKaig 
 is dow dead. No such conflict from him is possible. The brol her 
 is on trial for his life for murder, and yet nptwithstahdiug what 
 you were, told in that extraordinary and astounding address, she 
 is not put upon the stand; no offer to do so has been made. But 
 this terrible, charge against the deceased McKaig isleij't forest 
 upon this miserable, stale letter, and loose, hearsay declarations,. 
 The jury will recollect that when the letter was offered in evi- 
 dence, the counsel for the State inquired the purpose,; and were 
 told that tin' defense offered to prove, by competent evide 
 that the prisoner's sister was seduced by the deceased, and had 
 borne a child a.s the result; that these facts were made known to 
 the prisoner prior to the homicide, and has caused intense mental 
 agitation, for the purpose, first, to show thecondttion of his mind 
 at the time of killing the deceased, and second, to enable the jury 
 to determine the grade of homicide. To this the State replied 
 that the letter had no tendency to prove seduction, which charge 
 the State, was ready to meet, if legal evidence to establish it was 
 offered and admitted, and the S:ate was permitted to rebut it. 
 The Court ruled that it was not competent in this case; to prove 
 the fact of seduction, but that the communications made to the 
 prisoner might be given in evidence to show the state of his mind, 
 and to determine- the grade of the homicide. Wed, you have all 
 that evidence before yon: the letter, the charge against McKaig, 
 resting on hearsay; his denial; his rumored stigma upon the sis- 
 ter; the birth of her child; the pending prosecution of the elder 
 Black; the danger of the penitentiary, if the sister does not come 
 on to be a witness, and the mother's declaration that, whatever 
 might be the consequences, her daughter could not go upon the 
 witness stand. The mother thinks the prisoner did not sleep 
 that night, but passed the night in deep distress and nervous 
 agitation. The two subjects of discussion and consultation dur- 
 ing the day and evening doubtless occupied his thoughts during 
 the lonely watches of that night; these were his sister's disgrace 
 
TOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. MKAW, JR. 
 
 and tin' father's dapper of the penitentiary. He had been told i hat 
 McKaig was the atithor or both. He lia<l theeni ireday and night 
 for reflection and "cooling time." Toward morning he fell 
 
 asleep. AVIien lie awoke, near 7 o'clock, the, mother conversed 
 with him, but does not describe him as in a transport of passion 
 or phrenzied excitement. On the contrary, he was qprnparatively 
 calm— did not care about being too late for the cars— had hills to 
 l>ay, and could go on the 12 o'clock train, and thus he started to- 
 ward Cumberland. He was next seen at Shantytown, in a store, 
 buying cigars, and left the store smoking, going in the direction 
 of the foundry, which was McKaig's place of business. Mr. Ar- 
 rick saw him walking slowly by the foundry, looking into the 
 office, with his hands in the pockets of his overcoat. Cragin saw 
 him at the corner of Baltimore and Mechanic streets, walking 
 slowly and looking over the bridge, which McKaig must cross on 
 his way to his foundry. Mr. Hughey, as he was passings saw him 
 in the recess of the door of ShrLver's drug store, and when the 
 prisoner stepped out upon the pavement, went back to him and 
 held a short conversation wiib him; noticed that he kept his 
 right hand in bis overcoat ppeket, which seemed tobeoccupied by 
 something more than his hand—he gave Mr. Hughey his left hand, 
 and after the few words of conversation, left Mr Hughey rather 
 abruptly. Dr. Smith had also seen the prisoner standing in the 
 door of Hambird's store, which commanded a view of the bridge. 
 
 Thus the prisoner is shown to have passed a full half hour in 
 that vicinity. For what purpose was he there ? lie is not shown to 
 have transacted any business, or to have paid any bills, At length 
 Mr. McKaig is observed to cross the bridge and following his ac- 
 customed way, he goes over to the south side of Baltimore street, 
 proceeding to his place of business. At this momeut be is obseved 
 by Dr. Healy, who, happening to look up the street, saw the pris- 
 oner approaching McKaig on the same side of the street. Dr. 
 Healy being upon the opposite side of the street, kept his 
 steadily lixe 1 upon the two young men. When within a few steps 
 of each other, the prisoner suddenly made a few quick steps and 
 lired upon McKaig, The position of the wound and course of the 
 fatal ball, as described by Dr. Duvall, show that the parties \\-i-\-<\ 
 side hj side when the first shot was lired. Dr. Healy, Dr. Smith, 
 and several others who saw the parties instantly after the first 
 shot, testify that McKaig threw up both hands, and had nothing 
 ih either; had evidently received a mortal wound; backed off the 
 pavement into the street, facing his assailant, was again sii 
 as he was backing diagonally across the si feel ; t hat t he prj 
 then left the pavement, crossed i he s( reet to near where McKaig 
 was clinging around a sign post, tired a second ball into ins body, 
 and, as thedyiugman was exerting the last staggering effort of 
 his failing strength to escape from his pursuer, and was falling to 
 the ground, a third shot into the almost lifeless body, was the 
 finalacfcin this bloody tragedy 1 Thus was William \v. McKaig, 
 without a word, or a moments warning, shot down, dead, in the 
 street of Cumberland, by the prisoner at the bar. 
 
 From this act, as has been read to you, and is not denied, the 
 law implies malice aforethought, constituting the crime of willful, 
 
58 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK! 
 
 deliberate, a,nd premeditated murder. Because every' man shall 
 be held to intend the natural and inevitable consequences of 
 bis act, the burden of piroof is upon bim to satisfy the fury of 
 the contrary. This is admitted; and theableand eloquent counsel 
 for the prisoner have suggested two theories of defense, by both 
 or byoneor the other of which^.they propose to rebut the] 
 presumption of deliberate malice. The one, is theirtheoryof pr6V- 
 ecation, that is, a sudden injnty or insult of such i that 
 
 human nature is not able to bear it, bill is roused to such phrenzy 
 of anger, to such a transport of passidn, that in the beat of Mood 
 and without malice, he takestne Lifeof his fellow. But the law 
 is, that if, between- the injury or insult and I ,' killing, 
 
 there has been, sufficient cooling time for reflection and for reason 
 to resume its sway, the act will be murder. I propose to read to 
 you some instances to illustrate what has been held I 
 cooling - time — Mr. Jones read from Wharton's American Crimi- 
 nal Law, several cases upon the point — and then proceeded. 5Tou 
 will thus perceive that the case before you comes far Short of fall- 
 ing within the principles of the cases L have read. Where is the 
 evidence of such heat of blood, or ungovernable passion, suddenly 
 aroused, without previous malice, impelling to this fatal 
 Look through the entire evidence attending each su 61 ssive step 
 of the prisoner from the moment of his awaking in the morning, 
 till the final bloody act and, with your hand on your hearts and 
 your conscience alive t6 the oath you have taken, say if you per- 
 ceive anything but a cairn demeanor, a patient looking and wait- 
 ing for his victim, and the deliberate execution of a well-planned 
 purpose. 
 
 The second theory of the prisoner's counsel is, that he took the 
 life of McKaig in self-defense. Kow, gentlemen, you dannot fail 
 to see how utterly inconsistent, and mutually destructive i 
 two defenses are. Provocation, exciting a person to ungo 
 lurry, drives him to seek the author of it, and, to attack him; 
 while self-defense is just the reverse. The person who sets up 
 lefense, must decline a combat, if he can. The old common 
 law required him to retreat to a wall, or as far as he safely could 
 consistently with the preservation of his own life. And the 
 utmost extent to which, even now, the law allows, or has 
 allowed, a person who has committed homicide to excuse tie 
 on the ground of self-defense, is to show conclusively to the jury 
 that he committed the act in the real, bona fide belief that it was 
 absolutely necessary to the preservation of lii's own life. The same 
 legal presumption of malice which constitutes murder, conl iuues 
 to exist until the prisoner rebut it by proof. Clear and satisfactory 
 to the minds of the jury, that he acted solely under a sudden impulse 
 of self-preservation, in the presenceof a danger, which heactually 
 believed, at the moment, to be imminent and inevitable, except by 
 killing the assailant, i on will bear in mind that the burden of 
 proof, as in the case of provocation, is upon the prisoner. Now, what 
 particle of evidence' has been adduced to show that the prisoner 
 had any reason whatever to apprehend an attack upon him by Mc- 
 Kaig? As to the story of Long it is shown by two witnesses who 
 have examined the location in Which he states he stood and S&w 
 
FOR KILLrNO COLONEL W. W. m'kAIO, JR. 59 
 
 McKaig holding a pistol behind liim, at the corner of the Revere 
 House, watching Black as he approached him, that it is impossible 
 the statement can l^e true, because of obstacles in the line <>r vis- 
 ion, as describe'] by Long. But suppose t he statement to be true. 
 it proves that McKaisr, pistol in hand, concealed by the corner of 
 the houaej watched Black till he approached' within ten feet of 
 him; and when Black stopped, turned, and went up the street 
 again; that McKaig leisurely followed him v as far as Long saw 
 them. But according to this McKaig - , having the fullest opporttir 
 nity to shoot Black, if he desired to do<so, dad cot molest, bim. 
 .And when McKaigwas charged by Black with jostling' him in the 
 billiard saloon, the witness says, McKaig said not a word. Out 
 turned and went out. What reason, then, had McKaig to make an 
 attack on Black, or had Black to apprehend such a! tack '. J Not t he 
 slightpst-SQ far as is shown by the testimony. Is there any cred* 
 itable evidence that previous to. or at the moment of, the prison- 
 er's firing the first shot, he had any reason whatever to apprehend 
 danger to himself from McKaig? In the opening statement to 
 you of what the defense expected to prove, it was said that .Mc- 
 Kaig, when near Black, changed his cane froai his right to his 
 left hand, and presented his pistol, hut Black, having H self-cocker^ 
 was too quick and tired first. Now, I submit to you, gentlemen; 
 whether that statement has been sustained by a, particle of evi- 
 dence. Meilore tcsti, ied that he.was in hiSiShop, standing; with 
 his back to the window, when he heard the first -hot; lie turned 
 round, looked through the window pane and saw McKaig crossing 
 the street on a trot, with a revolver in his hand. Then, confess- 
 edly, he did not see the parties meet on the street, and could not 
 testify that McKaig had a pistol in his hand before the first shot. 
 Dr. Duvall testified that the shot in the, side, which, from the tes- 
 timony, you cannot doubt was the first shot, was mortal; that it - 
 effect was almost instantly to paralyze the heart and brain. And 
 Dr. ileaiv, who was intently watching both, sw ars t hat Mc I . 
 at the first lire, instantly threw up both hands, and that it was 
 impossible, according to his belief, that he could have had a- pis- 
 tol in his hand, or that it could have dropped out of Ins iiand 
 without his seeing it. Mr. Wolf was standing by Dr. Elealy, ami 
 states thai he saw a pistol fall EromMcKaig's hand, after the first 
 shot. But Dr. Healy states that Wolf told him, at Cumberland, 
 that he saw no pistol in McKaig's hand; that In 1 , \)r. Elealy, in 
 all the. talk about the events of the morning, in Cumberland, 
 
 never heard that anyone had saiil a pistol had been ^'rn in Mc- 
 Kaig's hand at the time of the shooting, until since, he came to 
 Frederick. John Hipp did not see them till after the first shot. 
 He slates thai, he turned around and sa\> ., .s, g running and 
 Black after him, and says he saw a revolver in the hand of each, 
 nut Ins whole description of the affair is so coat radiefcory in itself, 
 and of all the others who wil nessed it, as to destroy its credibility. 
 
 L submit wii et. her the same is not, also the effect of the bI 
 iiH'uis of the two colored witnesses, Davis and Grarney, riiey 
 both testify that at the moment of the first sh »t, each was stand- 
 ing at Byan'scorner, yet neither saw the other, a. id neither was 
 se. a by I !<• I wo or three resj BC table witnesses who came out of 
 
GO TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 RyaDS's store instantly on hearing the first shot. Garney says he 
 heardapisto] shot, looked up and saw Black and MeKaig, and 
 both bad a pistol. Then he does not profess to have seen a pis- 
 tol in Mi'K tig's hand before the first shot. Davis says after Me- 
 Kaig passed him. he saw a pistol shining out of a holster; did nol 
 see the first fire, and does not state that he saw a pistol in McKaig's 
 hand at all. The lad, Clark, states that he was in Medore's shop. 
 Now, this Medore is the witness who testified that Clark was 
 with him in his shop; after the first shot both t nrned and looked 
 out of the window; and yet how totally different h the statement 
 of the two; Medore says be saw a pistol in McKaig's hand; Clark 
 says he did not, but saw a pistol fall, but does led know from 
 whom. Xow, I appeal to yon again, has any witness testified 
 that, before the first mortal wound was inflicted, he saw a. pistol 
 iu McKaig's hand, much less presented at Black ? A pistol was 
 seen on the ground, aud two most respectable witnesses say they 
 saw it fail from McKaig's person, as his dead body was being lifted 
 up for removal into the office. 
 
 ft is true MeKaig had two pistols on his person, but it is submitted 
 whether the result of the whole testimony does not force convic- 
 tion upon your minds that MeKaig was taken utterly by surprise 
 when he r jceived the first mortal bullet into bis body, and tlirew 
 up his empty hands, retreating from his assailant in dying agony; 
 and pursuvd by tiie prisoner with repeated shots and murderous 
 intent until his lifeless form lay prostrate in the street ! Did the 
 circumstances given in evidence excite a sudden phrenzy and 
 transport of passion? Ordid they produce in his mind an intense 
 hate, a fixed purpose of revenge, a deliberate determination to 
 his victim on that morning, and take his life? Was it self* 
 use or willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder? in con- 
 tradiction of both these afterthought theoriesl call your attention 
 to the evidence of one who best of all on earth hriew the motives 
 and purposes of the prisoner's heart, and his reason for killing 
 MeKaig. 
 
 1 have repeated to you the undisputed law, that upon the actual 
 killing being proved the law presumes that it was willful ; thai is, 
 intentional, and that it was done with malice aforethought ; that 
 i^ was purposely done is not denied. 
 
 I have reviewed tiie evi lenee adduced to prove the inconsistent 
 defenses of sudden phrenzy of passion and of self-defense. If 
 either of them were true, who so well knew their truth as the 
 prisoner himself? If he had walked off in silence he would have, left 
 room for argument upon the circumstances, and the probable mo- 
 tives which actuated him, to rebut the presumption of d. liberate 
 malice. If he had seen a pistol in McKaig's haul, and in appre- 
 hension of imminent danger to his own life, and m the b m l ft '< 
 belief that the instant killing of MeKaig was necessary to save his 
 own life, what would have been the natural, irrepressible outburst 
 from his' he. irf and lips to those around him who had witnessed the 
 homicide? Would he not instantly have exclaimed, "he drew his 
 pistol,! goi the first shot; 1 was compelled to fake ids life to save 
 my own. 1 knew he was a deadly shot, and ' killed him in self- 
 defense.'' If this had been true, is it possible that he should not 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'k.VIO, JR. 61 
 
 have tittered words to that effect? Then, if lie did not, it was not 
 
 true; and if not true at the moment, it, is not true now, and no in- 
 genuity or eloquence can make it true. Did he make any such 
 utterance? Bid lie assign any such reason tor his act? Did he 
 walk off in silence, and leave room for conflicting witnesses and 
 ingenious theories? No,no! gentlemen, f am sure you must have 
 seared into your memories the manner of their utterance, and those 
 terrible words With which hte closed that awful scene. Leaving 
 tin- prostrate body of the dead MeKaig, he walked back to the 
 pavement where the tragedy commenced, levelling- the pistol which 
 had done the murderous wOrk toward the body, and those, who 
 were about to remove it from the street, he said to t he dead borry-— 
 ''Tnat is what you got for ruining my sister, and trying to send 
 
 father to the penitentiary, and 1 have another Shot for any d d 
 
 scoundrel who says I have done wrong!" Is that the language of 
 self-defense? And these words were admitted in evidence by the 
 Court, at the instance of the counsel for the prisoner, as being ut- 
 tered so instantly after the act as to form a part of it. Then the 
 act of killing and the declaration arc one. The words explain the 
 act. They avow and justify it for the reasons assigned ; they ex- 
 plain that looking into the window, of the foundry office : the look- 
 ing across the bridge; the half-hour's waiting about Humbird'sahd 
 Cragin's corners and Shriver's store, and the instant starting 
 toward McKaig as soon as he was seen to cross the bridge. They 
 explain why that right hand was kept in the overcoat pocket. It 
 is shown that it held a deadly, self-cocking pistol for a deadly pur- 
 pose ; they explain the sudden stride which brought him side 
 by side with his victim, and the instant shot which sent the deadly 
 bullet into his vitals, and the fell purpose of revenge which fol- 
 lowed, with repeated shots, the wounded and dying man until he 
 lay a motionless corpse; they explain all ; they were the outburst 
 of the pent up malice; they were the result of the night's medita- 
 tions. The deed was done. Whether McKaig was innocent or 
 guilty of his sister's ruin, his lips are now sealed in the silence of 
 death. 
 
 Another thing was certain : he could not appear as a witness in. 
 court to send his father to the penitentiary. These two purposes 
 were accomplished. A young husband and father, and one. of the 
 most prominent and respected young men of his county, had been 
 slain without a word of warning. The law had been set at defiance; 
 the peace, government, and dignity of the State had been out- 
 raged, but even this was not enough; the freedom of speech is to be 
 silenced by the same manner ; a snot is reserved for any one who 
 should date to pronounce the killing of -McKaig a wrong; and this 
 is self-defense ! 
 
 But, gentlemen, I will detain you no longer upon the facts of 
 this case ; but as jurors, as citizens, as fathers, as brothers, 1 beg 
 you to consider the consequences of allowing such an outrage to 
 go unpunished. 1 need not say that no man can go beyond me in 
 abhorrence of a seducer. I agree that there have been and may 
 be cases where the enormity oi the crime is greater than human 
 nature can bear. 1 agree that where the fact is certain, and a 
 father or brother, upon its discovery, meets and kills the seducer 
 
G2 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 in a sudden transport of passion and without malice, the off 
 is manslaughter ami not murder. [ agree thai there is in our 
 E teno adequate law for the punishmenl of seduction ; bul I 
 is no reas in why yon should undertake to make a law upon that 
 subject, or refuse to execute the law thai does exist to punish 
 manslaughter and murder ; and especially it is no reason why you 
 should listen to an appeal in this case to make a law to gratify 
 what is called "the moral sentiment of the civilized world^" 
 (about a matter of fact of which you have not a particle of evi- 
 dence.) whereby you are to justify a man in assuming to be judge 
 in his own, or his sister's, or father's case, and to execute, by his 
 own hand, one o{' the highest prerogatives of human government — 
 that of taking human life. To do tins is to unsetl le all the foun- 
 dations of civil society, to abolish government, and resolve society 
 into a state of nature. 
 
 If what you are told yon may do was put into the form of law, 
 there is no court in the civilized world, presided over by judges 
 like Lord Hobart or Lord Coke, which would not pronounce it 
 null and void, for, when it is proposed in the form of law, its viola- 
 tion of common sense, common justice, and natural equity becomes 
 palpable. Enacted into the form of law it would read thus : 
 
 '■Every person, upon being informed that his wife, daughter, or 
 sister has been seduced into criminal intercourse with any man, 
 shall be, and he is hereby, constituted grand jury, court, petit 
 jury, sheriff, and executioner, fully authorized and empowered 
 upon such information as he may choose to believe, to condemn, 
 and a; his convience, and by any means or instrument or weapon 
 of death he may choose, to put such man to death without a mo- 
 ment's notice or warning, and this shall be deemed and held justi- 
 fiable homicide." 
 
 But I suppose such a law could not stop there. To prevent or 
 remedy the abuse of such license it would be necessary to add a 
 provision to this effect : 
 
 "But if any father or brother, or relative of the person slain, 
 shall be informed and believe that such person was innocent of 
 such charge, or that he had been the victim of an artful and lust- 
 ful woman, such father, brother, or other relative shall have like 
 power and authority to kill the slayer." 
 
 It certainly requires no argument to prove that if such laws had 
 been passed by any legislature, and introduced as law before a 
 court presided over by judges like Hobart and Coke, they would 
 be pronunced null and void. I adverted a few days ago to decis- 
 ions where-.n these judges held acts of Parliament void which were 
 against natural equity, and to the admiration excited by their in- 
 trepidity and powerful sense of justice in holding that acts of 
 Parliament are controlled by the common law, which adjudges 
 them void when against common right and reason. And the very 
 example given is an attempt to make a man a judge in his own 
 case. 
 
 It is true the moral sentiment of the civilized world justly exe- 
 crates the wanton destroyer of female virtue and domestic happi- 
 ness. But let the moral sentiment and the legislative wisdom of 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M*KAIG, JR. 03 
 
 the civilized world devise and enact a mode of trial whereby a 
 man maybe proved guilty before his lips are sealed in death. 
 When so tried and found guilty, whether the penalty be death or 
 the penitentiary for life, let the civilized world be notified by legis- 
 lative enactment. 
 
 Until that is done the law must be executed as it stands, and evi- 
 dence introduced to show provocation, great or small, be confined to 
 its well-known legal limits. At least, such is the view that impresses 
 itself upon my mind, and which, in addition to what Was so well 
 said and strongly argued by my young friend, the State's attor- 
 ney, I have felt it to be my duty to suggest for your consideration. 
 
 I shall leave the closing argument on behalf of the State to the 
 able and experienced counsel who is associated with us in this 
 prosecution. And thanking you for the patient attention with 
 which you have honored me, I leave the case, the prisoner, and 
 the consequences, in your hands. I have no doubt you will hon- 
 estly discharge your duty to the best of your judgment. 
 
ARGUMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 FEED. J. NELSON, Esq 
 
 May it please the Court and gentlemen of the Jury, tho 
 learned gentlemen with whom I have the honor of heing associated 
 in the trial of this case ha to me the duty of opening the 
 
 defense of this youthful prisoner at the bar. T have tried many cases, 
 
 el it would be affectation on my part were I to pretend that I 
 approach this case without more than ordinary gravity. The magni- 
 
 of the issue involved — the issue ojf life or death — the condition ol 
 the prisoner, v I nany hard si niggles v. ith ( he cold and selfish 
 
 I. is just entering the threshold of an honorable and successful 
 career; his youth, his intelligence, his spotless character, without 
 blemish, without a stain, the hushed silence of this vast multitude. 
 the presence here of this stricken father, the tears of this sorrowing 
 motiic]-, who. in {lie language of her heart',- own deep pathos, is "Oh, 
 so desolate !'t th iousness of my own weakness and inabil- 
 
 ity — are not all these, gentlemen, sufficient to oppress, nay, to over- 
 whelm one of far more power than ear, even he aspired to by the 
 humble advocate who has the honor ol' addressing you? Yet. gentle- 
 men, amidsl the weight of this responsibility, I have one hope, one 
 lonragement — that this case is to he tried by an 
 American jury. This one fad is the star (hat will guide the frail 
 
 ithfiil prisoner through the mad waves of malice and-' 
 revenge thai are surging around him, into the haven of rest and 
 security. Let m -e, to take a cursory glance a' 
 
 the character of tin .' >n. Why are we here at all? This 
 
 cause originated in Alleghany county. Why i- it tried before ajury 
 of Frederick county? It i< th ;e of the prisoner to be tried 
 
 where the a n place. !: Is his privi- 
 
 f he sees I'r. to wi i lii trial from thai place and submit it 
 
 tribunal. Gentlemen, this case was almo>t on trial' 
 
 . Ten jurors v II and truly try the issue, and 
 
 "in this •" - who 
 
 stepped in? The State. OVhy, gentlemen, those who are prosecut- 
 ing here are powerful, rich, am . | Their influence pervades all 
 the hills of the Alleghaney' a fair and impa 
 trial in Alleghany could the honest yeomen 
 who consti jurors of thai county? Gentlei I I pause 
 to answer? Doe- not the question itsoll ■ re- 
 ply to your own mind-'.- constitution of I, in 
 its Bill of Rights, is ; tion that ought to have secured to this 
 man a trial where li known ; where he has be 
 
66 TRIAL OF II. \K;, CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 from infancy up to young manhood; where his incomings and out- 
 goings are known to everybody, and where there could nol be supposed 
 to be any prejudices surrounding him, pro or eon. There, in the midst, 
 of the people who, it has been said in this cause, were outraged by 
 this transaction, he bad elected to cast his fortunes, and toabidethe 
 issue. You have been told, outside of the evidence, and in a cause 
 involving a human life, that all Cumberland was greatly incensed; 
 that the public heart beat with indignation at the outrage that was 
 perpetrated upon one of its eitizens. tfso, was there an> danger that 
 this young man would have received special favor from that commu- 
 nity? It boj was not the state in a condition to receive, net onlyia 
 fair and impartial trial, but was it not invited to a contest, with all 
 these predilictions thus formed in the mind of that coinmuuity 
 against the prisoner at the bar? 
 
 "The trial ol' tacts,*' says the constitution of your own State, 
 " where they arise, is one of the greatest securities of the lives, liber- 
 ties, and estates of the people.' 1 This is not the language of mere 
 declamation. It was not incorporated into this constitution bythe 
 convention — the learned attorney general himself penning this very 
 article, as one of the committee on the Bill of Rights — as a rhetorical 
 flourish; He did not write it there as mere empty sentiment. It had 
 been the usage in the times gone by, through which our revolutionary 
 fathers struggled, to take a prisoner from his place of residence, where 
 the facts surrounding the particular transaction were well known ; 
 from among those who knew his character and associations, and carry 
 him oil to distant parts for the purpose of having him tried among 
 strangers. This was the outrage, this was the violation of the sacred 
 privilege?, of the inalienable rights of the individual citizen that the 
 constitution of Maryland put its seal of condemnation upon ; this is the 
 reason Why, through its commit tee man, the attorney general, as though 
 it were written in letters of living light, it caused it to lie proclaimed 
 "that the trial of facts where they arise," — not elsewhere — " is one of 
 the greatest .securities of the lives, liberties, and estates of the people." 
 
 I might go so far, without risking my reputation as a lawyer, as to 
 declare that the removal of this cause by the State is in direct contra- 
 vention of the epiril of its fundamental Bill of Rights. Why was this 
 prisoner at the bar dragged from his home down into the midst of 
 Strangers, where he is unknown; where witnesses are unknown; 
 where not a. friendly countenance greets him from the jury-box? Was 
 it in order that he might have none of those very surroundings which 
 the law regards as his sacred right — the "greatest security of the. 
 lives, liberties, and estates of the people?" 1 will not dwell further, 
 gentlemen of the jury, on this question, though it is one that falls 
 properly within your province to answer. But, before I enter into the 
 argument proper of this case, let me glance at some of the views put 
 forth by the learned attorney general of the State, and let me direct 
 your minds somewhat to the character of this prosecution, as is illus- 
 trated thereby, that we may have the full benefit of the impartiality' .of 
 the one, and a, proper appreciation of the temper of the other. What 
 is the duty of the State in presenting a prisoner fortrial before a jury? 
 One man has been slain, lie was a citizen of the State. Another 
 man is charged with that slaying. He is also a citizen of the State. 
 Their lives are equally dear to the State, the one as the other. The 
 'State wills the death of no man. The State wills to punish no man ; 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. 07 
 
 and when one of her citizens is, therefore, brought to a trial, she sur- 
 rounds him with all those immunities, all those privileges which insure 
 him a lair, imparl ial investigation. To this end she bas selected her 
 officers — the attorney general, who is the prosecuting attorn y for all 
 the State, and the special attorney for this county. She says to them, 
 when she clothes them with this attribute of her power, proseci ; 
 not persecute; see that the Slate suffers no detriment; but also 
 see that the prisoner at the bar receives a fair, impartial trial. 
 She says to them, do your whole duty as public officers, but take 
 not the life of a citizen by the suppression of the truth, or by testi- 
 mony that is illegitimate. I say it is judicial murder for a prosecut;- 
 ing attorney to put one tittle of'UVtUeilCti before the jury not war- 
 ranted by the law. when that t ill le may send to eternity a prisoner at 
 the bar, just as much as il would he judicial murder in that, tribunal, 
 the Court, to sentence a, man to be hanged who was not convicted of a 
 capital crirae^ikgaitt, gentlemen, it is of the same character of crime 
 to comment on facts, to the injury of t he prisoner, which are no in 
 evidence. I announce this as a principle of morals ; 1 announce it as I 
 a principle of law. 
 
 Now, let us apply this principle as we go aloug. The learned at- 
 torney general opens a very able and very interesting address by dep- 
 recating an appeal to your sympathies. lie told you that you must 
 steel your hearts ; that you musl make of yourselves blocks of wood, 
 lumps of stone and iron. Gentlemen of the jury, why have we 
 institution of a trial hy jury ? Let? me ask you why am I not consti- 
 tuted a juror? Why are not the members of this bar constituted 
 jurors? Why is not that tribunal, the judges, learned in the law, con- 
 stituted the jury, the triers of your Bellow-citizens when they are put 
 upon trial for a criminal eharge? Why? For this reason, and tins' 
 alone — and this is the answer to the deprecation we have heard here 
 — because you come from the body of the people; because our pro-j 
 fession, in a manner, curs us off from the common feeling of the peo- 
 ple upon these subjects ; because our minds are educated in a particu- 
 lar line, and, 1 am Borry to say, too often in a school of very narrow 
 technical jurisprudence. Therefore, for the purpose of avoiding thi 
 very evil of education, for the purpose of easting to the winds this; 
 mere technical banging of a man, the, law selects from the body of the 
 people those whose hearts are, iii a peculiar manner, in sympathy with 
 their fellow-citizen upon all subjects ; who know his mode of thought; 
 w ho can appreciate his motives ; who can dive down into and fathom, 
 and feel wiih his feeling* Because, for the very reason the veryoppo-i 
 site to that given by the learned attorney for the state; because you! 
 are wit blocks of stooe ; because J on are not steel and iron, but living, 
 quivering flesh and blood, like the prisone r on tr ial. For thai rea 
 gentlemen ol the jury, you are selected, But'tKigtieprecation of sym- 
 pathy, of course, was perfectly fair upon the pari of the leamedat- 
 tomey general for the State. Was it? Mind, I charge him here with 
 in* unfair motive, but I do say that he has been carried away by the 
 zealot i he prosecutor. Honorable, learned, dignified, religious, con- 
 scientious, an know him to be, yethe has been carried away by the 
 mere zeal of th e advocate who struggles for victory. Why did he, 
 afterdeprecatiug-an appeal to your sympathies; paint a picture toyqu 
 that was enough lo awaken sympathy in every bo3om. Did be not 
 paint the family of the deceased here before you in all the habiliments 
 
08 TRIAL 07 HARRY C V.CK. 
 
 of woe.' Did he no our pity for !' •■. your 
 
 iathy for th" mourning brothers, yonr tears for the lamenting 
 .- Were you nol taken to the home of the hnsbandless mother, 
 and were you noi told that in every passing breeze there was'awail 
 from her widowed bosom, " Where, whore is my hnsl i 
 thai an appeal for your sympathy? Was it wrong in the de 
 Then, is it right in the prosecution? I ask you, was this deprecation 
 ir appeals t o j r our sympathy b • •■;! .'■;• tmin 
 
 re, or was it no ' alrhetOTica^H^insJves whic 
 
 might serve to roun 1 en : period of th" orator, in' >pardy 
 
 til'' safety of an innocent man ? 
 
 Gentlemen, let me pause here one moment, to make a 
 mark. I believe, if I have one characteristic above another, ii i- that 
 of kindliness of feeling. I reg for myown sake (i am 
 
 h enough to say so) 1 i adds to the pain fulness of rnj 
 
 ;re1 to find the father and the other members of the family of the 
 attending upon this trial, because i mayb c I, in the 
 
 =e of the remarks that I prop • I ■ ubmil to y some- 
 
 .■■ i hal will »vibrate thfcre : an I. as there 
 
 • me, to judge us all, il makes my Ii art bleed to think 
 that such is my necessity. 1 know not. gentlemen, why they are 
 h ';' i of W. W. McKaig ha to' a blissful home be- 
 
 yond ' liopeithas; if ii is there in eomm union with that 
 
 , ! i, think yon it will look down with pleasure 
 ■ young life. Xay. would ii 
 ling the in e pr isence in which ii stand . ■ 
 
 i »nes of son . •• let the sinner live and repent.' 1 Can it 
 
 i d of this young man will ea ■ -s to bloom 
 
 new-made grave, teach bereavement to pass 
 ved heart, or heal one bleeding wound of 
 I g fat! 
 
 I pass, gentlemen, from this theme, for it is equally painful lo me as 
 it must be to you. I come now to another point in t! 
 al's remarks. With all th" earnestness that belongs tb'him he de- 
 ; : to ; , bj r the 'a. her of Hi" prisoner at the h 
 
 fcKaig, Why was this? Itwi pi of pro- 
 
 his imp.- : ' itirig by fie fatli 
 
 some two mom . the shooting by young Black; t'l 
 
 . i I rhy anil the wherefore of t hat sho! 
 Now. that is an importan . in the- estimation of the learned pros- 
 
 It is par! i -y ofthe ■ I 
 
 McKaig in a phre-nzi ion of mind, occasioned bylearningof 
 
 the killing. They say ii' we can 
 show that the s I Mr. Black, which was for the a 
 
 two weeks or ■• tin' shooting by young 
 
 i :k, they ma; iviacl withtheirexc len they 
 
 this jury that he was unac :d v t\\ ' ; condition Of his sistur 
 
 until the night b< Away n goes the the&ryof 
 
 u phrenzy. That is the idea. Gentlemen, upon thatrriayhang 
 
 th'' life of this prisoner. Now, then, What are we to say when v., 
 
 ery testimony, intended for the pilr ig an infer- 
 
 ' may hang this man, the fabrication ofthe brain of attoi 
 
 outside of the evidence, with hoi one whisper bf truth in ii ? < ienfcle- 
 men, th" learned attorney for the Mai.' i- only excusable because he 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. 69 
 
 was nol here when the testimony was put before this court, and ruled 
 (.in. if he had bee,u presenl \yhen ir was sought to put in thai testi- 
 mony, and knew of its being ruled out, so help me God, i would b 
 
 an attempted murderer. I spare no man who attempts to take 
 fe of another by illegitimate testimony or by forcing infer 
 upon the jury which have been excluded by the honorable bench. Is 
 
 ie of prosecution, tli . : "itimate? I have two reasons w 
 refer i<> these things. < >ne is to show yon how easity the earnestness, 
 the overleaping anxiety thai actuates this prosecution in the pursuit of 
 the prisoner al the bar may clqud and warp the judgment. I have 
 another reason. If the officer of the law, he who is acting under the 
 sanction of his official oath, can so far allow that official dray to be 
 clouded, overcast, by the zeal pf his own advocacy, how much more 
 have we. not to fear from another of the learned counsel lor the S 
 
 ■ zeal and ingenuity may be inflamed and sharpened by the 
 stimulating influence of private reward? For we have here not only 
 ail the official sanction to this prosecution of the highest legal officer of 
 
 ate and of the regular attorney of the county, hut we have here 
 a private prosecutor, whose appointment, it is said, has beenconflrmed 
 by, the court. Iknownot who employs tJ tionaL supernumer- 
 
 aries, or who appoints them, or who confirms them, especially the 
 learned counsel who is put here, with all his ingenuity, all his I 
 criminal practice, to wind up this prosecution. I do notknow, n< 
 i. ■ i lo .knovy; tha,t, in another case of murder tried this ti 
 there was neither appointment nor confirmation ; but the leu 
 
 - attorney for the county was left to his own resources. I am 
 ue with the mod- in which this prosecution hasbeem 
 dueled, bytl lattorney general of the State. Do you remember 
 
 his detail of the conversation that occurred between Mr. Lowndes and 
 
 ; >ther of this prisoner? ih; became elocpient upon that. lie 
 told you that, in that conversation, ;when .Mr. L< vndes Was insis 
 that hi:- sistershould ret urn. for the purpose of being a witness in his 
 
 ir's ease, that 3ir>. Black declined lo have her return for t ha! 
 po.-e. He told you thai she had declared, her willingness to sact 
 iter own life, mi . :e Tier husband rot in the dung 
 
 of i ie peui . "And all for what?" he asked. The learned 
 
 attorney general found area-on. Because she knew thai the char 
 
 ion w.is false. She was afraid to have her daughter confront 
 alleged seducer, lie could give no higher reason for this mother's 
 
 d to have her daughter broughi here, into the witness box. 
 could dive no deeper into the female i .cart and discover i he true rea 
 Yy" iih as kindly a disposition as the learned at i on icy general is known 
 
 issess, 1 did not expeel so u igenerous a construction oJ an;. 
 ized mother's heart. But that is not all; that is the least. He 
 
 upon that an argument, without the establish menl of which 
 whole prosecution falls; for, from that conversation, he has Lie 
 the moiiveoi the crime, and the only motive, as 1 will endeavor to 
 show you. gentlemen, when 1 conic to that branch of i he case.. 
 
 Now, follow me closely, and ii d me if i am not righl w hen 1 saj that 
 this prosecution is carried on with an over-wroughi zeal, and thai 
 
 ,\ roughl zeal is supplying tacts where the evidence omits to sup- 
 ply them. What docs he tell you? He tells you that young Black -hot 
 McKaig. Why? For the purpose of getting rid of him as a wil 
 in th e, but in the case against his lather. Get 
 
TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 How? He was present When his mother refused to have 
 
 • ercomehome. The attorney general says that his ol etting 
 
 McKaig was in order that his sister mighi stand unconl radicted, 
 
 and thus clear the father. Gentlemen, -before you can arrive a! that 
 
 ision, what isnecessary? Ii is necessary for you to find this fact, 
 
 5 oung Black knew it ; that it had been communicated to him that 
 
 ister was coming home. Now, did he know. thai fact? The afc- 
 
 i v general tells you that the mother refused; upon any considera- 
 
 . to have her daughter return, and that young Black heard her so 
 
 ■. Now, when and how did lie learn that his sister was to return? 
 
 i, it is not shown in the evidence thai he did learn it, then these gen- 
 
 l men have overstepped the bounds of legitimate prosecution when 
 
 undertake to inter it. I announce as law, in the presence of the 
 
 learned gentlemen, that yon can infer no fact for the purpose of arriv- 
 
 ingat a conclusion, hut yon musl prove every step that brings yon 
 
 1 toward thai conclusion. Nothing must he inferred, because, if true, it. 
 
 ild account for the facts. Can yon arrive at the motive, attributed 
 
 to young Black by the learned attorney forthe State, without inferring 
 
 that young Black knew that his sister was to return home ? if, when 
 
 yon go to your jury box, one juror suggests to the other, "Why. of 
 
 iheknewit; the learned attorney for the State has shown-that 
 
 la- knew it," answer him thus : '• By the irresistible power of law ami 
 
 logic, find me in the evidence the 'fact that the sister's return was 
 
 municated to young Black." If yon do not so tind it it, is ridfca 
 
 fact in the cause. What I am now saying, gentlemen, is to pnl yen 
 
 on your guard against the style of tins prosecution; and to show 
 
 you that with all their professions of sympathy, and with all their 
 
 declarations of fairness and impartiality, these gentlemen, prose- 
 
 cutors, have allowed their judgment to be run away witii by their 
 
 zeal for their cause. 
 
 There isanotherassumption of the learned gentleman that might 
 as well lie noted here, because lie deemed it of sufficient import- 
 ance tdDe put to this jury. Gentlemen, if a. witness bad hen put 
 on that stand and asked this question: k ' Did you ever haveacon- 
 versation with William W. McKaig in his life time?" and he 
 should reply, " yes, " and he should he further asked, V did. you 
 ever hear William W. McKaig deny that he was the seducer of 
 Harry Black's sister?" lie would be stopped, and without argu- 
 ment, the learned Court would rule the answer inadmissible. That 
 is a clear proposition. Now, if that be so, if it he true that it 
 would be ruled out as incompetent evidence, is it admissible to 
 put that supposed fact in, in any way? If it is not competent to 
 have that fact spoken to, by a man who is under oath to speak the 
 truth, would it be legitimate or competent to put it in. from the 
 mouth of an unsworn attorney in the case? Clearly not. Yet, 
 that fact lias been laid before you. Why was it done ? We must 
 presume that the gentleman was In earnest. It was done for 
 the purpose of putting before the jury a supposed fact which could 
 not be put in before them in the legitimate course of the exami- 
 nation of witnesses, lie tells you that William XT. McKaig never 
 did seduce this girl, llowdoes he know it? Did he learn i Lin this 
 cause or out of this cause? If in the cause, what witness told him 
 so? Give us the evidence, Mr. Attorney General. If out of the. 
 cause, let me ask, does the State employ, appoint, or confirm its 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. MjKAKJ, JB, 71 
 
 prosecuting officers to convict a man of a capital offense by state- 
 ments made to them by irresponsible parties not sworn as wit- 
 nesses? [sthis' the kind of prosecution to deal with human life? I 
 may reply to this unsworn assertion, however, by saying, gentlemen 
 of the jury, that this testimony of seduction which we tried to in- 
 troduce, and which was fought against <> whoh day by the counsel for 
 the State was ruled out by the Court. If we were allowed to go 
 ■ into that testimony we would show you the seduction. We would 
 open up a Story here that would harrow your sonls. and make 
 leach particular hair stand on end. We would introduce the sedu- 
 cer into this lions:-; we would show yon how he carried her from 
 the hearthstone; aye. bow he tracked her after his own marriage 
 ■with an honorable woman, tracked her to the city of Baltimore, 
 jand in the public hotel prostituted her to his Inst. I say all this 
 is not in evidence, hut it is a legitimate reply to the non-evidence 
 testimony given by the unsworn officer of tin 1 State. This is a, 
 part of the paraphanalia of this prosecution. This is the style of 
 argument made, and in a ease where the life of a human being 
 may depend upon the impression made upon your minds by the 
 eloquence of counsel. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I must pass from the learned attorney gen- 
 eral of the Stale; turn from the line of argument of the prose- 
 cutor, to the prosecution, itself; to the facts and circumstance of 
 this >',{<■(• as they realy are; as theyare developed by I he tesl imony 
 and not as they exist m imagination of counsel or are painted by 
 the overwrought zeal of the advocate. 
 
 On the 17th day of October, ls70, there occurred in the streets 
 of Cumberland, a collision between two young gentlemen, each a 
 member of a, highly respectable family; one a wealthy .family; 
 the other a, family in ordinary — 1 was about to say comfortable 
 circumstances, but it would be more in accordance, perhaps, with 
 the truth, to say, uncomfortable circumstances. In that collision 
 one of the young men lost Ins life; and the inquiry here is. how 
 that lite was lost. It is charged iu the indictment that the taking 
 of that life was a malicious, premeditated murder. William W. 
 McKaig was t iie slain man; Harry Crawford Black was the slayer. 
 These facts are admitted. Biack is put on trial upon that indict- 
 ment; to this indictment the prisoner has pleader 1 not gui ty.and 
 has set up two defenses— self-defense and a phrenzied condition of 
 mind at the t inn' of t he killing. 
 
 JS'ow, let ns t ake the facts, and see whether or not this shooting 
 was done m self-defense. In the first place, t lie State must- prove! 
 what it alleges. 1 1 will not do to prove I he killing only, but they 
 must prove that it was a malicious killing, and with malice afore- 
 thought. We- will confine ourselves for tlie pivs nit to one branch 
 of this inquiry alone, and see whether fiom the facts there devel- 
 oped, if is possible for this jury to com • to the conclusion sought 
 by the State and necessary to lie proven by if. Who fired lie 
 shot? who was the first aggressor? How do weget at this fact? 
 Now , look at It, gentlemen, in the light of common reason. You 
 are put here because you are supposed to be besl able to judge of 
 the facts that ordinarily surround human transactions. VVhere do 
 you find who fired the first shot? There are but two witnesses in 
 chief for the si ate; you do not find it from the testimony of Dr. 
 
I'l TRIAL OF BARRY CRAWFORD BLA< 
 
 Healy. and you do nol find it from the testimony of Mr. Gross; 
 but it is said that Dr. Healy witnessed the first shot. 
 
 Mr. Syester. No. sir; Dr. Healy did nol seethe firsl shot. 
 
 Mr. ' ted by ray colleague, who reminds me 
 
 that Dr. Healy did not see the firsl shot. 'Puis makes this view 
 of the cisc still stronger, [f neither Dr. Healy nor Mr. Gross wit- 
 nessed H. who, thru, did? \' > line. Every witness who has been 
 examined testifies that the first shot was Bred, and then all that 
 was seen was observed after that first shot. 
 
 Now, William W. McKaig was killed, and by Black: that is 
 true. But is it a, fair, logical deduction from that fact that, be- 
 cause he was killed by Black, therefore Black was the first 
 sssor; that he fired the first shot. That would be a most irn- 
 pot ut. conclusion, gentlemen, because we frequently see the first 
 assailant get the worse of the encounter. How, then, I ask again, 
 do you arrive at the fact of who was the first assailant? !f you 
 no witness here to prove that fact distinctly, how are you to 
 get at it r Save and except by the illogical inference that because 
 McKaig waskillvdand Black killed him, thai , therefore, Black was 
 the first assailant. But if we admit that Black did fire the first 
 shot, still this does not suffice, but only brings us to this inquiry, 
 did .McKaig have in his hands at the time of that encounter, a 
 pistol? Let us examine this matter, gentlemen; eveu upon its 
 probabilities alone. Dr. Healy says, "No, McKaig had no pistol," 
 Mr. Gross says, "No, he had no pistol." In other words, each of 
 these gentlemen say this: "1 did not see a pistol." That is all 
 that they could mean, when they say that lie had no pistol. 
 
 We are now upon the probabilities. Admit that Healyand Gross— * 
 two men — did not see the pistol; there are Six men who testify 
 that they did see a pistol in the hands of the deceased. First, 
 Charles Medore; he was standing in the window, it is not pre- 
 tended that he had not just as fair a, view, and just as good ari 
 opportunity as Dr. Healy of observing all that was going on lie 
 stands upon an equality with Healy. It there is one thing in favor 
 of one or the other, it would be the youthful vision of Mr. Medore. 
 lie is just as honest a man as Dr. Healy; he stands, in the city of 
 Cumberland, in his sphere in life, quite as honorably as Dr. Ilealy 
 in his sphere of life; he exhibited no anxiety on this point; if a. 
 partisan he failed to show it, and in this particular he wiil com- 
 pare most favorably with Dr. ilealy. Yet, lie saw the transaction 
 in and about the same time that ilealy saw it. Ilealy did nol 
 the pistol, Medore did; who is to lie believed? Jurors somel Lines 
 in a civil case, where the proof is about evenly balanced, will toss 
 up a penny, and decide the case by heads or tads, and in such a 
 Case parties may be willing to risk a verdict in that way. But in 
 a criminal case where the testimony is nearly evenly balanced; 
 where both witnesses are equally worthy of credit, not only are 
 you not at liberty to toss the pennj to decide the question, but you 
 are bound under your oath, as laid down even in the musty books 
 of the prosecution, to give your verdict in behalf of the prisoner, 
 upon the doubt that is engendered under such circumstances. 
 
 Qo another step — Charles Clark saw this matter, lie was in 
 Medore's store; does he contradict him? It will not do to reflect 
 upon Charles Clark, because Clark comes here, signed, sealed, and 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. i.3 
 
 endorsed "good," by fclie pro They summoned Ijjm 
 
 and accredited hinx to this jury as worthy of all belief, 
 from the credit which their summons gives him, he bore upon 
 his front the simple truth of childhood's . id 1 stood 
 
 in that box, ami witli a simple, unsophisticated face of inno- 
 cence, told you the truth, as it was in him. tie said he saw 
 the pistol. Why should he say so, if it were nol true? Has he 1 
 bought? Men do not buy children when they al tempt to make up 
 a defi i lie force of gold. They buy astute, cunning, shrewd 
 
 scoundrels. You do not go and take the young sprouts tha 
 as yet unlearned in the iniquities of the world, and are. ant to 
 trip and fail in their first efforts at villainy. 
 
 Was this boy mistaken? Wherefore mistaken more than Dr. 
 Healy? Was he of defect ive vision? Fully would he compare with 
 Dr. Elealy in that particular. Is he an honest bpyV Surely his 
 character stands as high in his sphere as Dr. Healy 's does in his 
 sphere. Why, they both have sworn to the truth as it was iu each 
 of them. Both may go this instant before the Throne of all Truth., 
 though they have given contra , and yel 
 
 equally pure in the pres< teDeity. Why? Because they have 
 
 sworn to what they supposed to be true. It is all i ii, . 
 
 But you, gentlemen are to find positive, not relative truth, and 
 that beyond, a reasonable doubt. \ you to do so from 
 
 testimony without the power of Omniscience? Wolf swore to the 
 same thing 
 
 An effort has been made to break down h tony of ' 
 
 Why? Because it. is said by < irneys of the Mate, that 
 
 while he was testifying he stood with large drops of sweat foi 
 themselves down his cheeks. Gentlemen, it is not every man 
 
 sufficient nerve to appear upon the witness stand unmoved. 
 No damaging infereuce can be drawn from that; no inference, o- 
 if inieivi! ii, it is more frequent >f honesty 
 
 and truth than it is of hardihood and villainy. Wolf saw I 
 
 observation was just as unobstructed as D'\ Ileal;,'.-.. Dr. 
 tion to these two appro iiung men; 
 
 and he observed ti»em; . his statement of facts, aud Dr. 
 
 Healy gives his. Who is right, and who is wrong? We 
 wiiii- i is i i right, which really wrong; only give us tins , 
 it is all we ask, that tin aringtowhat< 
 
 supposes that he saw, or did uot si that is all • will 
 
 decide between them beyond a reasonable doubt of deciding' erro- 
 neously t 
 
 William Wolf could | :, i if he was swearing to that 
 
 winch was false; he is op. mi to impeachment. We would 
 to have seen the effort made to impeach him; we would have 
 made the fortune of the telegraph by summonin 
 Cumberland here to vindicate his Garner saw 
 
 i] in the hands i.i witnesses 
 
 saw it; Dr. Etumelshiue saw something fall near the curb wl 
 he supposed to be u pistol. Nowhere, are allot these witue 
 Medore, Clark, Wolf, Hipp, Garner, and Dr. llumelshine, i 
 
 : them swearing to the pistol eithet 
 sion, in tl I of McKaig, or failing from his hand. 
 
7-A TRIAL OF HARRY. CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 This is the great I ►wiTtg facl in tins brai 
 
 What now are you to (Jo? You are to find the malicious shoot- 
 ing, if it exists, and discard the theory of sfllf-defense; you; 
 find it upon a Legal certainty; that is, without: any reasonable, 
 national doubt. Can you find it under the circumstances of this 
 testimony without doing— what? Sup vo witnesses testi 
 
 Beeing a pistol, and two testify to not seeing it. That is toler- 
 ably equal balance. But in order i i n noli t hat position, even, you 
 must e mvict of perjury four others, ( Ian yon do it without this? 
 Arc you prepared to find from t he evidence t hat t hese four men- 
 select either four you please — that these four men are perjured? 
 Be it so; then, al least, yon have got two honest men left stand- 
 ing equally with the two upon the pari of the prosecution; now, 
 wUlyou give credence to the pro ttor's two witnesses, and not 
 to the prisoner's? Why? Do so; if you think it right, do so. But 
 let us have the reason why; and let that reason satisfy your con- 
 sciences that it is what i 3 meant by the law when it declares I bat 
 the probabilities shall be given in favor of the accused. 1 1 won't 
 do to say with Dr. Healy, "nobody ever heard of this self-defense 
 until your came into the court-house." It is not true; il is false; 
 as .other things in this case are false. The public newspapers in 
 Cumberland proclaimed the fact that a pistol hud been found in 
 the street; but it was not known to whom that pistol belonged. 
 
 Mr. WHITNEY. Have you the paper to refer to? 
 
 Mr. Nelson. I think I have (reaching toward the table;) here 
 it is. Mr. Nelson then read from the paper, the testimony b 
 the coroner's jury, as to the finding of a pistol in the strict. 
 
 All 1 adduce this for is that I may b s abl ■ to denoun ;e I he si 
 ment which has been made, and maybe again, that this plea of 
 self-defense is a gotten-up, or pretended plea, as untrue. The 
 facts of this case are the foundation of this defense, and we have 
 all along contemplated showing to this jury, and we think- we 
 have done so successfully, that this defense is a good one. Why, 
 gentlemen, what are we talking about? Suppose Mclvaig were 
 on trial here for his life instead of Harry Black, what evidence 
 would you have to convicthim? Six men seeing. him with a pistol 
 in his hand; only two swearing to seeing the pistol in Black's 
 hand? Nay, Dr. llealydoes not even swear to that, but expressly 
 statesthat hesawa pistol in the hand of neither. Suppose McKaig 
 were on trial here for his life for the murder of Black? What 
 stronger case could you have against him? Why they would 
 trace him from his home over the bridge; they would show him 
 crossing the street at an unusual place; they would show him 
 changing his cane from his right to his left hand; they would show 
 him reaching back his hand as if for a pistol; they would place 
 him upon the street; they would show the encounter; they would 
 find a pistol on the street, the same as found here; they would 
 have Six witnesses to the pistol being in his hand; there would be 
 a case as six to two stronger against William \V. McKaigthan there 
 is against the young prisoner at the bar. And yet, With circum- 
 stances that would work this result, if the parties' places were 
 changed, you are asked to find that, beyond a doubt, Harry Black, 
 with malignity and depravity of heart, slew and killed William 
 I 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. i ■) 
 
 W. McKaig; that the plea of self-defense is a subterfuge and a 
 
 fraud. Are you satisfied of this fact? Is this the reA] conviction 
 of your minds? Lord Chief Baron MacdOnald says that "the 
 jury must be satisfied that there is no rational mode of account- 
 ing for the circumstances, but upon the supposition that the pris- 
 oner is guilty." 
 
 And Mr. Baron Alderson said in another case with more com- 
 plete exactness: "To enable the jury to bring in a verdict of 
 guilty, it was necessary, hot only that it should be a rational con- 
 viction, but that it should be the only rational Conviction which 
 those circrtm stances would enable them to draw.'' 
 
 Gentlemen, is it a rational convict ion that McKaig was killed by 
 Black maliciously and will out provocation or self-defense? Esita 
 rational conviction from all these circumstances? [f so, still it is 
 not sufficient. In the language of Baron Alderson: "Not only 
 must it be a rational conviction from all the circumstances, but 
 it must be the only rational conviction that the mind can reach." 
 
 Tell me that the only rational conviction that the mind can 
 reach from these circumstances is one of the guilt of the party 
 when the circumstances disclose, upon the part of the State two 
 witnesses to the negative fact of not seeing a certain thingand 
 upon the part of the defense six witnesses to an affirmative fact 
 of seeing t lie same thing? 
 
 Now let me <j;o a little further. Wills on Circumstantial Evi- 
 dence, page 175. says: "If there be any reasonable dottbi . 
 the reality of the connection of the circumstances of evidence, 
 with the fact to be proved, or as to i he complet i ness of t he 
 of the Gorpus delicti, Or as to the proper conclusions to be drawn 
 from the evidence, it is safer to err in acquitting than in convict- 
 ing, or as the maxim is more popularly expressed, 'it is better that 
 ten guilty persons should escape rather than one innocent man 
 should suffer.' ,- This rule follows irresistibly as a deduction from 
 the consideration of the numerous fallacies necessarily incidental 
 to the formation of the judgment, on indirect evidence, and con- 
 tingent probabilities, and from the impossibility in all cases of 
 drawing the line between moral certainty and doubt. In ques- 
 tions of civil right the magistrate is obliged to decide aci ordirtg 
 
 the greatest account of probability in favor of the on 
 
 other <d' the litigant parties; but where life or liberfy are in tic 
 balance, it is neither just, nor necessary that the accused should 
 be convicted or punished, but upon conclusive evidence, while it 
 is certain that circumstantial evidence is frequently most con- 
 vincing and satisfactory, "and this is circumstantial evidence." 
 it must never be forgotten, as was remarked by that wise and 
 upright magistrate, sir Matthew 11 ale. that " persons really in no- 
 may be entangled under such presumptions that many times 
 carry very gre^tt probabilit iesof guilt," wherefore as he remai ks 
 "tins kind of evidence must be very warily pressed." 
 
 How do you view t his case? These humanejudges tell us that 
 
 we should he very caret ill how I his test iinoiiy is I o be pressed, and 
 
 yet we find all the vigor of the state in the person of its highest 
 Legal officer, pressing with all theweightof his personal chi 
 ter, all the weight of lib great intellect; we find the attorney for 
 
7(3 TRIAL OF HAKRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 uinty, with all the vigor of Lis mind, and all the zeal of his 
 
 : we find t he private prosecutor urging with Still more vi 
 this \ imony which these humane judges tell us shoui 
 
 very -• warily pressed." "Many adverse appearances may ben 
 weighed by a single favorable one. an ! all the probability s of thfi 
 
 may uol be before the jury.?' Such is the lawof theland 
 upon the subject of this class of testimony, [now put it toyoi \ 
 
 emen, whether taking the evidence just as it is on tl i one 
 subject of the shooting, whether you can, as rational nun, (anno 
 to the conclusion that this crime was committed beyond a rational 
 doubt. That it is not only the conviction deducible from i lie i ir- 
 cumstances, but that it is only conviction which a reasoi 
 mind can reach. Let me ask: arc all the probabilities of the i 
 ■i [s there nothing suppressed? No cireumstai 
 
 back by the State capable of giving the jury lighl upon this 
 important subject? Now, hear with me one moment, and 
 let us see if that he so. Answer me, gentlemen, why, in all fair- 
 ness, why, in justice to the young life that is now in \< 
 
 in justice to the State to which the life of every citizen is (her. 
 were not all the State's witnesses placed upon the stand to tell 
 you not part; but; the whole truth? Were the counsel afraid that 
 something might drop from those witnesses unfavorable to j the 
 
 : of the prosecution? They summoned these witnesses— why 
 were they not examined? 
 
 State, as [ have said, is chary of the lives of hex citizens. 
 It is a false theory that the State is any more the prosecu- 
 tor of her people than their defender. In the morals of 
 
 ;s, in the- Very theory of our free government she in- 
 structs her ministers to give the prisoner the benefit of all 
 evidence. Hence, I say that all who witnessed this transa< 
 should have been placed on the stand. Was it done? of all the 
 multitude of people who were preseni upon that fatal occasion 
 
 ■ were Offered to you 'mi! two in chief. Can it he said, then, 
 that all the probabilities of the case were before the jury? Why 
 v as the fact that McKaig had a pistol at all is studiously con- 
 
 : by the prosecution until forced out by the eross-examina- 
 
 of l he defense? Was it. not a suppression of the material 
 fact which the j iry ought to know? ts this the fair investigation 
 that the prisoner is entitled to, and that an honorable and just- 
 minded jury will insist upon having before they will consent to 
 lay thai hetid upon the block 'and chop it off wit!) t lie axe of the 
 law? There have been suppressions of material evidence all 
 through the case. There has been much said about McKaig's 
 pistols. How many had he V One, two, or three':' When the 
 prisoner is charged with killing a man in the peace*.of fcli 
 ought not the jury to know if the charge he t rue, or whether the 
 
 who was killed was not rather a walking bat&ery? IDoyon 
 observe but one thing, gentlemen of the jury, one pistol was found 
 on the' body of McKaig; one was picked up by Turney, near the 
 curb, and one was found near where thi body fell, and was picked 
 up by a man other than Turney. Now, the prosecution must 
 know the true history of these pistols. They seek to impress the 
 jury with the belief that the pistol picked up by Turney, and tb.f 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. ', < 
 
 one picked up by the other man near the body were one and the 
 same. Would not Tunieysettle tins question? And yet while 
 lie has been here all this time upon their summons, they close 
 their ease — in chief and in rebuttal— and refuse t<> call him. 
 What, faith can yon have in a prosecution which acts thus? Why 
 produce a witness to swear that he saw Turney pick up I 
 
 near the b dv? Might not. this witness be mistaken? But Tur- 
 ner, the man whom they say picked up this pistol, could not be 
 mistaken. Why did they not call him? The nervous ojd gentle- 
 man, Dr. Smith, saw the bell unbuckled by Mervin McKaig. Do 
 you recollect that, he was brought here to contradict Charles Me- 
 dore ou that subject. Now, mind, gentlemen, here is an old man 
 whose mind is a, perfect chaos of bewilderment, who was flutter- 
 ing like a wounded bint amidst the excitement. lie is brought 
 here to prove what? That Charles Medore swore to a 
 when he testified to the unbuttoning of this pistol belt by him- 
 self. Why, Charles Medore is just as honest as Dr. Smith. Upon 
 what meat hath this ourCaesar Eed, I hat he is brought here to put 
 the stain of perjury upon an honest mechanic. No. sir! Why 
 bringDr. Smithatall, if Mr.Medprewastobe contradict, d? Where 
 is Mervin McKaig? lie has an interest in this matter. I 
 herepromptingthisprosecui ion day in and day out. Here he has 
 sat ready at any moment to contradict Medore if the f. 
 Dr. Smith supposes. Instead of him, however, this flutterin 
 bird, with Ids nerves unstrung, is brought here to su 
 tact; when the young, vigorous manhood of Mervin Mel 
 the very man who, according to Dr. Smith, unbuckled 
 left without his face being shown to this jury. There, is a re 
 for it. It is the suppression of troth. A suppression of the 
 truth for the purpose of taking human life. I do deprecate; I de- 
 nounce it; and so do the law hooks, as I will take occasion to 
 show to \ou, gentlemen. "In the endeavor to discover trutl 
 
 mce should be excluded." 1 read from the great authority 
 on this subject. Wills on Circumstantial Evidence, "in the en- 
 deavor to discover truth, no evidence should be excluded," and 
 yet we have the evidence of Turney excluded. We have the evi- 
 dence of the pistol excluded. We have the ev of Mervin 
 tig excluded. 
 
 It is a maxim of the law "that all things arc 1 presumed against 
 the destroyer of evidence, " and thesijp] resion or destruction of 
 pertinent i is always therefore deemed a prejudicial cir- 
 
 cumstance ot greatweight. The destruction or the suppres 
 of evidence is always considered a circumstance of great we 
 Do you mark that ? And yet, with this! uni 
 tins' wind" t ransacl ion, with the suppression of these three f; 
 winch were well calculated to throwsome light tipon the me] i 
 the case to the jury in reference to this matter; with all this you 
 are asked to saj that the conviction is sovstron; ; that it is 
 
 theonlyco i that a reasonable minn can draw. Is this all? 
 
 Xo! gentlemen of the jury, there is another suppresion of 
 deuce.' This case is Cull of qiiipsand quirks. It IS lull of turnings 
 and shirtings suggested by the paid ingenuity of counsel. V, 
 are the pantaloons of this dying many II is coal was exhibited 
 here to parade the holes made by the bulled. Wherean 
 
7b TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 pantaloons? Would they, too, tend to supply a link in this chain 
 of testimony favorable to the prisoner? I ask you, gentlem< n, is 
 sapistol holster in those pants? is there a Docket here 
 where a pistol might be carried as welJ as in the holster? What 
 is the condition of that pocket? Is it sonnd or torn? Docs it 
 give evidence of a pistol having been drawn from it? or of some 
 force having been exerted uponit? The pantaloons would have 
 answered all thest questions, and without reason— without any 
 3e for their suppression — they have been suppressed and we are 
 left to conjecture where they might have supplied facts. Am I 
 nor right that this is not a prosecution of a character to commend 
 itself to your confidence. Is there not a suppression of the truth? 
 Are all t he probabilities of the case before the jurj ? Arc not the 
 probabilities that arc before the jury all in favor of the prisoner? 
 Is there no doubt to satisfy a reasonable mind. 
 
 Now, let me come to another branch of this case. I beg you 
 willnot be wearied with me. for the obligation of duty is such 
 that while I regret to weary. I cannot forget thediseharge of that 
 duty. Let us come then to another branch. Do you know, gen- 
 tlemen, that before you can convict a man of > willful and mali- 
 cious murder, that you must show a motive for the killing? 
 There must lie a motive, a rational motive. There must be a, 
 mot ive commensurate with the act done. Now, that question of 
 motive lias so far heen entirely kept out of view here, as I will 
 show you in the very few remarks upon the subject that I propose 
 to submit. 
 
 In the same book to which I have referred I read this: 
 
 "As an action without a motive would he an effect without a 
 cause, an ! as the particulars of external situation and conduct 
 will in general correctly denote the motive tor a, criminal action, 
 the absence of all evidence of an inducing cause is reasonably re- 
 garded, where the fact is doubtful, as affording a strong presump- 
 tion of innocence." 
 
 Now, wha 1 was the motive for this supposed murder? The 
 learned attorney general says that it was not self-defense. Let us 
 put, that aside. lie says that it was not frenzy of this boy's mind 
 occasioned by the intelligence of his sister's seduction. Let us put 
 that aside. Then, what was it? Is there any unkindly disposition 
 shown by young Black toward McKaig? Norn-. Has there ever 
 been a sb.igle threat? Not one. What, then, I repeat, was the 
 motive? When; is the cause for this effect? The attorney gene- 
 ral gives one. Now, let us see. With all his knowledge of human 
 ire, with all his astuteness of argument, with all his profun- 
 dity of legal knowledge, he has from the depths of this case brought 
 to light but one motive. It is fair to suppose, therefore, that this 
 is the leal motive which will be insisted on in this prosecution. 
 What is this motive? I adverted to it a moment ago casually. 
 The single motive — now, mind you, he has discarded the frenzy of 
 the mind and self-defense. He has shown nothing looking toward 
 personal revenge ; no threat; no unkind or hostile feeling. The 
 single motive is this : That young Black killed young McKaig to 
 prevent him being a witness to break down the testimony of his 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 79 
 
 sister in the case against the father; that for the purpose of get- 
 ting him out of the way he slew him. Only this and nothing more. 
 Now, will you pardon me if I go over the line of argument I as- 
 sumed a moment ago, to show you that before yon can get at that 
 mot i\ e you must find the fact — not the inference, but the fact thai 
 young Black knewtfiat his sister was tacome back for thai purpose; 
 not the inference, I repeat, upon the authority of the law books — 
 ^'nothing must 1 e inferred because, if true, it would account for 
 the facts 1 ' — but the sworn, proved fact itself. Mow, this very 
 fact was ruled out by the Court when the prosecution sought to 
 put it in. What, then, becomes of this motive? But, perhaps, you 
 will hear the learned counsel as you heard them in their opening 
 suggestions on this case, declaring " we have proved the killing, 
 and we will rest upon the presumptions of the law. The killing 
 proved, the presumption of malice follows from that killing." 
 This line, you will observe, is an abandonment of the astute mo- 
 tive of the attorney general. No matter, let us test this ni n- motive. 
 The new motive, then, is that of a depraved and malignant heart, 
 based upon the presumptions of the law. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, a presumption can never be used in any case ' 
 save and except for the purpose of supplying the want of a fact, 
 for if the fact is there then there is no place for presumption. You 
 must presume that the prisoner at the bar is of a depraved and 
 malignant disposition, and that from that depravity and from that 
 malignity has followed the death of his victim. Is this true? 
 Mind you, presumpt ion is always capable of being rebutted in law. 
 Is this true? Is Black of a depraved and malignant heart? Does 
 not the whole course of t his case rebut such presumpt ion? Take 
 him, gentlemen, from his first infancy; take him at his mother's 
 knee, a prattling babe; from there go wit!) him through the com- 
 munity as a boy; scan his character; see if you can find any of 
 the traits that were attributed to Julian the Apostate — cruelty to 
 the smaller animals of creation; the spiteful disposition toward 
 his fellow mortals, and the malignity that would cause him to 
 Commit wrongs against his schoolmates. None at all. Go with 
 him from his home into the army of the Confederate States; 
 fighting, as he supposed, for a, just cause. Whatdo you find t here? 
 Charles Taylor tells you that he was well spoken of everywhere; 
 that he maintained a good character, and good characters are the 
 exception in the ranks of all armies. Go with him after the close 
 of the struggle for the lost cause back again with him to his 
 mother's home, and see him sharing there with her the pittance of 
 his daily earnings. Where find you the malignity of his heart? 
 Is he not, kind to his father? Is not, he a doting son, supporting, 
 to the best of his ability, an impoverished mother? Is not, he a 
 fond brother to an only sister? Is he not kind 1 all who conic 
 within his range in thai community? Yet you are to find that he 
 was of a depraved and malignant heart, follow him away from 
 home again— put upon the broad prairies of the west, bind him 
 seated at the desk of t he accountant in the office of the honorable 
 Mr. (Mr. one year be was with him. Bid he testify to any de- 
 pravity; any badness of heart ? No. But Mr. Orr comes here vol- 
 untarily to give his tribute to the prisoner at the bar of good gen 
 
' TRIAL OF HARRY C; 
 
 I ha1 he was with him in \h^ 
 land of strangers. Trace bira still fuifther, even out upon the 
 borders of the west, in the city of s hnaha, from the to the 
 
 E onr civilization; go wil h liim down into the b 
 
 i rude i tine of A lleghany. was l>e not be- 
 Behold the women and children even now offering 
 up prayers for his return to them. Everywhei 
 , and i hal a voice of commendal 
 
 i: y of Lis : , the kindness an of hi 3 di 
 
 tion. Where, then, gei . do you find that depi 
 
 malignant heart which now forms the only motive for crime relied 
 uiion by the State? A.nd without that, uo other mol ive appea 
 you cannot convict in t his cause. 
 
 We hav through all these stages of his career 1 . 
 
 T'i the place of hatred we find love; in the place of drunken 
 
 : in the place of .' srocity, gentleness; in the place of moan- 
 y; in the place of malignancy and depravity, a life 
 tied with every virtue 1 hat can adorn t tie character of a spot- 
 youth. Oh, virtue, thou art indeed sublime if this be thy op- 
 ■! How is if'? We are now testing this proposition of a 
 malignant and depravi d heart in order to discover who in all prob- 
 ability was the aggressor in this matter. Lei us test the other 
 in this tragedy by the same rule by which we ' id 1 he 
 
 e bar. We have seen who is Harry Crawford Bl 
 let us inquire who was W. W. McKaig. He was the scion of an 
 honorable, wealthy house ; : If a young man of magnifii 
 
 physique — handsome, intelligent, and ; i of all those fatal 
 
 accomplishments that wrought his ruin. Was henol :; cal- 
 
 culated to sel on fire the female heart. As lie enters the humble 
 dwelling of this unfortunate family, an honored and it welcome 
 . conciliating their good will, and day after day. perhaps 
 er night, insinuating himself into 1 he affect ions of her who 
 was the jewel of the. household. 1^ it any wonder that he wen her 
 love? ! le, so kind, so attentive; he smiledupon her, 
 
 audi' ir smile again as though it were the very sunlight 
 
 of his lite. 
 
 Mr. Bren '•, ;. [f your honor please. T desire to interrupt the 
 gentleman. I must object to his arguing before the jury what is 
 not in evidence ia i lie cause. The gentlemen proceeds in this way: 
 , he d i the character of the traverser, then he goes on 
 
 to say, "Let us now turn to thecharacter of W. W. McKaig? Who 
 was he? Handsome, and possessed ot all these fatal accomplish- 
 1 s that wo ild he apt to take possession of a young girl's hearl ; 
 I welcome visitor at the hou.se of her family, a 'el dis- 
 stdevotion." We submit that that is not testi- 
 ni mi;, in th j case at all. In the first place, that there is not a par- 
 of proof that has be< I showing that McKaig visited 
 
 this girl's house, or that he was | (fatal accom- 
 
 plishments that, have been spoken Of. 
 Mr. Nelson. 1 have a, right to argue that as far as the question 
 .1 iction is concerned. It was a fact, so far as belief therein, 
 impressed itself on the mind of the prisoner. We could nol | 
 into the truth or the untruth of the fact of seduction, bill 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W L . M 7 KAIG, JR. 81 
 
 were allowed by the Court to show that it was a fact to him, and 
 so communicated; and that from a belief in such fact certain things 
 resulted. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. But the gentlemen has not confined himself to 
 that. 
 
 Mr. Nelson. Will the gentleman please lay out a line of argu- 
 ment for me. 
 
 The Cotjut. An objection is made, and the question submitted 
 to the Court. Whenever a question is presented to the Court, it 
 is presented as a question of law, and of course it must be deter- 
 mined. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. I have made no objection, and neither did I in- 
 tend to makeany through the course of the argument. The State's 
 attorney, however, has made an objection, and the objection goes 
 to the point that he is speaking upon what there is no evidence 
 whatever in the cause to sustain. 
 
 Now, if the gentleman who desires to speak upon the effect the 
 communication would make upon the mind of the prisoner, that 
 is another question; but when he states to this jury that if they 
 had been allowed they wouhhhave done so and so, and would have 
 proved so and so, it is not proper. He is going on to state that he 
 visited this house, when there is not a particle of testimony in ref- 
 erence to tli at point. My brother Brengle has made the objection 
 to the Court, and we insist upon that objection. 
 
 Mr. Nelson. Are we allowed to draw no inferences from the 
 testimony, or are we bound to take up these notes and read this 
 fact and that fact, and say at every step that it is a fact? Is the 
 prosecution to lay out our line of argument? Have they not suffi- 
 ciently succeeded in the object of their interruption, and may I not 
 goon? 
 
 The COURT. Gentlemen, the Court does not think that upon the 
 question now presented it can properly do more than say this: 
 That we have decided that the fact of seduction as a fact has been 
 excluded; that is to say, that testimony to prove the fact, that the 
 fact was a fact, lias been excluded. Of course, in that exclusion 
 was involved of necessity the exclusion of testimony to prove that 
 it was not a fact. A refusal of testimony on the one side of the 
 question of necessity involves the exclusion of testimony on 
 another side of the question. The Court thought their ruling was 
 perfectly understood. 
 
 Now, "as to the next item. The Court decides that the xubjectot 
 seduction, if that can be understood as distinguishing it from the 
 fact of seduction, that the subject of seduction only entered into 
 I he case to the extent of which it might be si i own by the evidence 
 that it entered into and opes ited on the mind of the prisoner; that 
 is the, clear ruling of the Court now. 
 
 Of course, argument ought to be confined to the evidence. Don't 
 let us be misunderstood by this statement as being anything else 
 than announcing the general proposition. That is all the Court 
 can say. Arguments on both sides ought to be confined to the 
 
 law and tin; evidence in the cause; and such deductions from the 
 evidence in, pertaining to the issue involved as a matter of law, 
 such deductions as are reasonably deducihle from that evidence. 
 
82 TRIAL OF ITARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Any deduction to establish the particular view which the counsel 
 
 may entertain, provided that view pertain to the issue in the 
 cause as announced by the Court. 
 
 Mr. Nelson. I suppose, sir, that the objecl of the prosecution 
 has been accomplished, which was, as I take it. to interrupl 
 thread of my remark. If that is of any advantage to them, gen- 
 tlemen of the .i'n'y, why they are entitled to ir. as they are to all 
 the other matters that arc i in-own into this case. 
 
 I was making a, line of remark that I regard as legitimate. I do 
 not now understand the Court, to say it was not a. legitimate line 
 of argument. I hold in my had a document thai might well have 
 impressed upon any man's mind certain convictions. T was endeav- 
 oring to show you, if not in the gradgrind manner in which the 
 gentleman does things, yet in my own feeble manner the thoughts 
 that must have coursed through the brain of this young man, and 
 that frenzied him, and resulted in the commission of tins deed. 
 This letter shows the depraved heart. 
 
 [Mr. Nelson then read the letter, which appears in preceding 
 pages of evidence.] 
 
 This letter, I say, shows the life-tie of intercourse between this 
 man and this woman. It shows this. Read it for yourselves. I 
 was showing how the man who could write this let! er could win the 
 love of this woman; that in his approaches there was nothing bold, 
 nothing forward; oh, no! your genuine seducer is never this. He 
 glides toward his prey; and, like the fabled serpent, charms into 
 false security his poor, trembling victim. I say tins letter shows 
 that it was too late now for her to escape; he bad won her all to 
 himself; she was all his, heart and soul, mind and body; he bad 
 Wound the delicate tendrilsof her heart about him, and they clung 
 to him as the ivy clings to the oak. I say this letter shows ail 
 this. She had forgotten all else in the world, all except him. He 
 was the soul of her existence. Father, mother, brother, and home, 
 all forgotten! Yes, and on whom had she bestowed all this affec- 
 tion? On one who was to use her for a moment for the gratification 
 of his lusts, and then to fling her aside like a worthless garment. 
 But, perhaps, he would marry her? What! William W. McKaig 
 marry a prostitute? But he bad made her what she was! True, 
 but are not some men's wives and daughters made to feed the lust 
 of such as he? Oh, shame! Call him from his grave; seat him 
 by the side of the prisoner at the bar, tear open their bosoms, and 
 expose their hearts to tins jury, and tell me upon "which is written 
 depravity and malignity? Yea, by that test we will stand or fall; 
 go free or be hanged. With those two hearts thus exposed before 
 you, tell me, then, in which heart do you hud malignity, in which 
 do you find depravity? 
 
 That is not all this letter discloses; that is not all the record of 
 the heart that has gone, that this letter exposes. It shows a crim- 
 inal intimacy that had been going on for along time. It shoiws 
 that the writer of it was not afraid to use language of any kind to 
 the woman he had wronged, but who loved him. He knew that a 
 woman who loves, though wronged, is — 
 
 Like a waxen image 'gainst a fire. 
 Bears no impression oi the thing she was. 
 
FOB KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIO, JR. 83 
 
 The prisoner at the bar had a right to road this letter in that 
 light, and if hebea man, as he is, if he be what he is represented in 
 this case to be by t he evidence, his heart must have burned, burned 
 even to eon sumption, when he saw and appreciated what that let- 
 ter itself suggests to any mind. And is the burning shame', the 
 fierce phrenzy that must have overwhelmed and crazed his heart 
 and brain, to be nick-named malignity and depravity? 
 
 But to return. Not only does this letter show the depravity of 
 the writer in this criminal intimacy, but if shows that which is 
 more damning still. Tt shows that the man who stood before 
 God\s altar, and pledged his troth to a virtuous woman, was will- 
 ing to pollute her bed by the presence of a. prostitute. Directions 
 are .-riven in that letter how to get in and out; how to loop the 
 dress: how to conceal herself from the world while she played the 
 harlot in his wife's bed-chamber. 1 say here is the evidence of the 
 malignity which is sought to be fastened upon the young prisoni r 
 at the bar. It is said the, letter is not his. Whoever says so 
 charges General Kesley with that which is not true, for General 
 Resley says that it was and is his letter in his own proper hand- 
 writing - . The attorney general tells yon that no woman would 
 have received snch a, letter without spurning the writer; that it is 
 a forgery of the defense. This view may do credit to the purity 
 of heart of the learned gentleman, but it is not complimentary to 
 his knowledge of woman's heart. 
 
 Knowesf thou not yet, when love in varies the soul. 
 That all her faculties receive his chains ; 
 Thai reason gives Iter sceptre to his hand. 
 Or only struggles to he more enslaved? 
 
 The gentleman says that its intrinsic evidence shows that it was 
 written, not by the cultivated gentleman who .ornamented society, 
 Imt by a person of low, vulgar habits and tastes. Yon know why 
 its intrinsic evidences are not those belonging to a highly culti- 
 vated gentleman. Why, it tells you itself. I told yon, gentlemen, 
 and I repeat it, that it gives me no pleasure to say these harsh 
 things in the presence of the friends of this dead man. On my 
 honor it does not, but the necessities of this case require that it 
 shall be gone through, bleed whose heart may bleed. It shows 
 Why it contains inaccuracies in spelling; why it contains expres- 
 sions that otherwise, might not come from bis lips — he was drunk! 
 He says so. The letter discloses the fact that he had been down 
 town in u debauch, that he was at the gambling table, and that 
 he continued drinking liquor until he got too much. The letter 
 itself says so, and if the letter says so, who may gainsay the fact? 
 How otherwise do you account for the postscript? "If you can 
 read t his yon can do more t ban L can." 
 
 Now, gentlemen of the jury, you have my views upon this branch 
 of the case. The prosecution require yon, under the law, to con- 
 vict Crawford Black of the murder of MeKaig upon the presump- 
 tion of a malicious motive, and that presumption rests upon the 
 theory that he, is of depraved and malignant disposition. 1 have 
 shown you that it is doubtful which of these young men began t lie 
 assault which tern. mated in death. I have 'shown you that the 
 
 probabilities of the question are as six to one in favor of Black. 
 
84 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 If neither of these reasons be sufficient to warrant you in your 
 judgment in a verdict of acquittal, then I rest his life upon bis 
 character as contrasted with that of McKaig. Look upon the two, 
 
 and then say by your verdict which was the more likely to com- 
 mit murder, which life exhales the sweeter perfume? 
 
 I have thus far, gentlemen, with some degree of warmth, and 
 with much feeling, but I trust without bitterness, endeavored to 
 impress upon you this one, but, in my judgment, important view 
 of this case. As you have observed, [have not stopped to seize 
 this piece of evidence and that piece of evidence. \ have not 
 stopped to trace young Black to see whether he was hunt ins' young 
 McKaig. The testimony on this point is of that flimsy light char- 
 acter that really I have not given it a passing thought. We have 
 shown you that he went his usual way with one single purpose. 
 He was an inveterate cigar smoker. 
 
 I suppose I will be here interrupted for the proof that some wit- 
 ness said that he was an inveterate cigar smoker. I await to see 
 whether I am to be subjected to such interruption. 
 
 lie was scarcely seen anywhere that he was not smoking. The 
 only deviation from his course on this morning was to go down by 
 way of Washington street, a short distance out of his way, to pro- 
 cure a cigar. He returned by the alley which led him to Centre 
 street. Upon Centre street was the office of Mr. McKaig, and as 
 he passed that office he looked in the window with the casual 
 glance of a passer by. Upon that evidence you are to base what? 
 The fact that he was hunting for McKaig. This fact 'must be 
 proved equally with the main fact beyond a reasonable doubt, and 
 you are, therefore, asked that when be cast his eye towards that 
 office of McKaig's that he was the creeping assassin, hunting for 
 his victim. We have shown you that he came up that street, and 
 that it was the nearest way to reach Mr. Shriver's store, to which 
 he went. 
 
 Now, all this testimony about standing upon this corner, and 
 standing upon that corner, depends upon a man's appreciation of 
 passing time, for his being in one place or another is only import- 
 ant as it has reference to time. If a man were to ask me now 
 how long I had been talking to you, based upon any knowledge of 
 the time passing in my own miniK 1 would not have the faintest 
 conception. Five minutes, ten nrinutqp^ twentygminutes. Upon 
 live minutes, ten minutes, or twenty minutes may hang the life 
 of an individual ; and yet, gentlemen of the jury, when you come 
 to speak of some past event depending upon an inconsiderable 
 point of time, which of you would risk, not a life, as m this case, 
 but even a moderate wager? And yet you are to take these 
 corner pieces of evidences, all based upon some supposed half 
 hour, twenty minutes, ten minutes, or live minutes as solid evi- 
 dence upon which to hang a man. 
 
 Again, gentlemen, glance a moment at another piece of evidence 
 of the same airy character. There was an offer here, with great 
 parade, of an overcoat, an immense overcoat, which Harry Black 
 wore on the fatal morning, which was to conceal the pistol of the 
 assassin. He was described with his hands in Ids pockets. He 
 was brought to speak with a man, and would you believe it— 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIO, JR. 85 
 
 greeted him with his left hand. Of course, his right hand was 
 concealing the pistol. Now this coat is not immense at all, but 
 a very lignt summer overcoat. Its pockets are not deeper than 
 mine. The pistol you saw presented before you was a pistol of 
 great length, one of the largest sized revolvers. Tt was put, in 
 evidence that the weather was warm, pleasant, mild, therefore it 
 was notnecessary for him to wear an overcoat. But you see the sim- 
 ple production of the coat by us scatters all these inferences to 
 the winds. If the State, then, is driven to these necessities, and 
 we break down this kind of evidence so easily, we ask you to ex- 
 amine with scrutinizing glance all the other pieces of evidence 
 that are brought in of this confirmatory character and see whether 
 they hold any better together. 
 
 So, gentlemen, we might go over all these little outside scraps 
 of testimony that have been brought in here as a sort of make- 
 weight, but it would be consuming too much of your time. 
 
 I will hurry on. The gentlemen will read to you law books, and 
 they will ask you to take those law books, witli their worn out 
 maxims, and apply them with the rigidity of the old English 
 common law to the questions of fact involved. They claim 
 that this case is to be governed by the common law, so do we. 
 Heartily we concur with the prosecution in this general view, 
 that of all the creations of man, of all his inventions, prob- 
 ably there is none that does more honor to his intellect than 
 the establishment of that great system of law known as the 
 English common law. Now the English common law, so highly 
 prized, has been but the accreation of ages. It is not the written 
 law of the land. It is the unwritten law. It is the crystaliza- 
 tion of the habits, the customs, the usages, of the people of Great 
 Britain into judicial decisions. It is, therefore, a system of law 
 that has sprung emphatically from the people. The common 
 law of England is well-named, for it springs from the common 
 heart of the nation. It has been added to and it has been de- 
 tracted from, from time to time, as civilization has advanced or 
 the habits of the people changed. It is being added to now as the 
 habits of the people change. It changes with the people. 8(6 
 that where you find a maxim of the common law, and you find that 
 it is not in harmony with the civilization of the day, the thought and 
 moral sentiment of the age, you have found a maxim of the common 
 law that has been virtually and actually repealed. It is no longer 
 common law, but common error. Now let me illustrate. I am 
 not indulging in rhetoric, lam telling you what I regard as the 
 truth. Let me illustrate. Years ago, under the English com- 
 mon law, a man surd another for the seduction of his daughter. 
 What did he have to charge in his declaration? Not that the de- 
 fendant seduced his daughter, and there .stop. Eur upon that he 
 could not recover, but the suit was brought and the plaintiff laid 
 the allegation in his declaration that the defendant seduced his 
 daughter — servitium amisii — by reason of which he lost her ser- 
 vices. Not by reason of which he lost the honor of his family; by 
 reason Of which a stain and disgrace was brought upon his name, 
 but by reason of which he lost her services. 
 
 .Now, 1 am illustrating that the English common law, whiclv 
 
86 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 has been cited on in this character of fuses, gave a man damages, 
 not for the honor of liis violated family, but because he had lost 
 the services of his servant. She was no longer there to do his 
 household drudgery. That was the idea. That was the only ground 
 
 upon which he could recover. Why? Because the common law 
 to »k no cognizance of female virtue. Woman was not the 
 "noblest, best gift of (rod to man." she was his servant — his 
 slave — nothing more. Time goes by. There is no statute repeal- 
 ing this law. Will anybody tell yon that such is the law to-day? 
 If not, when and how was it repealed? It was repealed by 
 that statute which is written on men's hearts and is illus- 
 trated in their habits. The common law advances with the 
 advancing ideas of the people. I am going along and coming 
 down to the present day. Even now-, it is necessary to lay in your 
 declaration, your per. quod, yet it is now regarded, and the books 
 tell you, that it is a fiction. It is a fiction of the law and the 
 juries are instructed to disregard it, and to give damages commen- 
 surate with the injury done to the reputation of the female and 
 her surroundings, I say. gentlemen, that if yon are to take the 
 argument of counsel on the other side, that the letter of the law is 
 to be complied with as though a written statute, that you will lie 
 asked to do that wdiich is not consonant with the common law 
 as it at present stands. Under the old common law a man was 
 burned in the hand for manslaughter, while a woman was bung. 
 No, she was not hung, she was quartered and burnt. Female virtue 
 had no value. Females themselves were only looked uponasof any 
 value, insomuch as they servedthe interests of their lords and mas- 
 ters, and yielded to his pleasures. And the written law has not 
 changed this state of affairs. It is as much the common law of to- 
 day on the theory of this prosecution as it was two hundred years 
 ago. And yet they will tell you of the common law as recognized 
 by the authorities of that day. I will show you, gentlemen, for I 
 do not like these things to be taken on my assertion, what these 
 authorities say. 
 
 "•The husband, also," says Blackstone, "might give his wife 
 moderate correction." That is the English common law, where 
 females were concerned, to which our learned brothers appeal. 
 By the common law women received sentence of death and might 
 be executed for the first offense in simple larceny; while lor the 
 same, offense a man, who could read, was subject only to burning 
 / in the hand and a few months imprisonment; female virtue was 
 exposed to the slanders of malignity and falsehood; the purest 
 maid or the chastest matron was no more protected than the most 
 meretricious and incontinent of women, and thus female honor, 
 which is dearer to the sex than their lives, was left by the com- 
 mon law to be the sport of every abandoned calumniator. 
 
 "Oh. wretched woman! Oh, defenceless six! 
 Of the whole animated race, most helpless. 
 
 Much of this law has been changed by statute — all of it by pub- 
 lic sentiment. No, except by the fatbits of our people ; except by 
 the usages that civilization has introduced this law remains in 
 almost its full vigor. 
 
 But we have an American common law, as well as an English 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'kAIG, JR. 87 
 
 common law. Understand me, gentlemen^ it is now tlio Ameri- 
 can common law that a man may recover for the seduction of his 
 daughter although lie docs not prove that the daughter was hiB 
 servant. Yet the English common law requires that he should 
 prove the servitude. I say thai has been brought about by Ameri- 
 can usage and by the advance of civilization which recognizes 
 the dignity of your mother; which recognizes and cherishes the 
 honor and virginity of your daughter. It recognizes the fact that 
 she is no longer a slave, or a servant, hut that she is as a help- 
 mate to the man, and not unfrequently a protector ; and not as 
 the dog that follows his master at a whistle ; but that she is the 
 fairest and loveliest of created things by our great Author in the 
 image formed of His celestial glory, and designed to be man's so- 
 lace. This is due to the advance of American civilization, and 
 you will find that this advance has been made in other respects, 
 lis well as this. 
 
 I say this, gentlemen, that in the United States of America no 
 man under God's canopy has ever died by the hand of the law for 
 having vindicated the honor of his family by the death of the 
 seducer. Fiction, if you please, call it fiction; yea,, it is a fiction. 
 The Court decided in the Sickles case — what? Why, the English 
 common law says in order to reduce the killing to manslaughter 
 you should find the man in the act of adultery. The Court in the 
 Sickles case said: "The waving of the handkerchief, the signal 
 given, is equivalent to finding him in the act." This may be fic- 
 tion, but it is now the law. 
 
 These legal reformations have not been suddenly brought about. 
 They have advanced to this height step by step. Judges do not 
 discard an old principle of the law all at once; but they set up a 
 fiction here and a fiction there, until by fiction they have practi- 
 cally abrogated the whole of it. 
 
 This, gen tlemen, is no mere advocate's plea for his client; but 
 the calm, deliberate utterance of a well-considered sentiment. 
 Fathers and husbands and brothers must be taught that the 
 hearthstone, around which gather their wives and daughters and 
 sisters, is a charmed, sacred circle; and that he who dares invade 
 it must pay the penalty of his life. (.You may kill in self-defense, 
 this is sell-defense in its sublimest form. What is a mans self? 
 Is it his mere living, breathing anatomy? A thing of flesh and 
 blood and bone and sinew? No I A man's self is more than this 
 — it is his honor. 
 
 "Mino honor [9 111 v life, nofh crow in one; 
 Take honor trom me, and my life is done." 
 
 Who plays a game to rob him of this prize should stake all he 
 has upon the hazard of the die — his life. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I feel that I have done, however imperfectly, 
 all that can be reasonably expected of me in this cause. lam 
 disposed, therefore, to leave it in the hands of those who are as- 
 sociated with me. The time is come toward which allot us — you. 
 the honorable bench, my distinguished colleagues, my learned 
 brothers of the prosecution, and myself— have been struggling 
 through all these anxious days. In a few hours more there, will 
 be committed to your keeping that which is the most precious 
 
88 TRIAL OF ITAItRY CRAWFORD BLACK. 
 
 charge that can bo given to it, the destinies of a human being. 
 When your verdict is recorded, and you have gone forth from the 
 
 court-house; gone back to the cherished i ircle of your loved ones 
 at home, to your mothers and sisters, to your wives and daugh- 
 ters — what then ? Shall we, in the no distant future, behold a 
 morbid crowd, hurrying, some bright day, into the town of 
 Cumberland, and standing with them beneath the gallows, shall 
 we gaze upon a shrouded figure, hear the dull thud as a lifeless 
 body falls through the scaffold drop? Shall we stand bowed and 
 uncovered around an open grave, and hear the solemn voice of 
 the minister of God as he pronounces dust to dust, ashes to ashes; 
 witness the strong agony of the stricken father, and hear the 
 heart-rending shrieks from the sorrowing mother as the cold 
 clods fall on the coffined breast of an only darling son? And if 
 some curious stranger should inquire "whose grave is this?" shall 
 he l;e told that it is the grave of Harry Crawford Black, who was 
 hung — yes, hung — by a Frederick county jury as a felon, as a 
 murderer because he slew the seducer of his sister? God forbid 
 that such shall be the consequence of your verdict. Rather let it 
 be said, gentlemen, that a youth in the vigor of manhood entered 
 an humble dwelling, won the affections of her who was its dear- 
 est treasure; that he betrayed her, that he seduced her, that he 
 polluted her, that he afterward vilified her, and branded her in 
 the face of the world as a strumpet; that for this crime her 
 brother killed him, that he was tried and acquitted by a Freder- 
 ick county jury, who thus proclaimed to the world that they 
 cherished the honor and chastity of their wives and daughters 
 more than life itself. 
 
 Apologizing, gentlemen, for the time I have occupied, and 
 thanking you for the very marked attention you have given me, I 
 leave this case in the hands of those who are better able to take 
 charge of it. 
 
SYNOPSIS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ARGUMENT OF WILLIAM M. PRICE. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury: I feel much embarrassed in coming 
 before you after having beard the able and eloquent argument that 
 lias already been delivered, more, perhaps, than I would feel if 1 had 
 opened the ease. I am here a stranger among you, as is also the pris- 
 oner at the bar; away from his native place, his home, the scenes 
 with which he is familiar, the community in which he is loved and 
 respected, he sits among strangers, not. through any wish of his own, 
 but at the instance of the State of Maryland, at the suggestion and 
 upon the oath of the State's attorney for Alleghany county. It is not 
 Ids fault that he is here; but he has no fears to trust his rights, his 
 honor, his life in the hands of a Frederick county jury. The learned 
 counsel for the State had said that the whole city of Cumberland was 
 thrown into mourning by the death of the victim of this unhappy 
 tragedy. If that be the fact, if such was the grief of the community, 
 if such was the esteem in which the deceased was held, why was not 
 the State willing to go to trial before a .jury in that county? McKaig 
 had wealthy ami influential friends, who were able to take this case. 
 out of the hands of the State, or at least to give it the semblance of a 
 private rather than a public prosecution, and, as you have no doubt 
 observed that which has been patent, to all who have attended lliis 
 trial, siich has been the case. With all such influences on the side of 
 the State, the position and wealth of the friends of the deceased, and 
 the alleged sympathy of the community, it is singular that the prose- 
 cution has tied to another county for justice. And who are prosecuting 
 here? The learned attorney general says he has no interest in this 
 case, the Stale's attorney of this county says he has no interest in it. 
 We have the remarkable anomoly of a hired prosecutor for private 
 Vengeance, seeking the blood of this hoy to sat iate their unholy desires, 
 for revenge. Why I hey tied from Ibis mourning and outraged com- 
 munity I. Leave you to answer. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, ifyou will give me your attention for a few 
 moments 1 shall endeavor to present you this cast: as it has struck me 
 during its progress. 
 
 Mr. Price then called the attention of the jury to the condition and 
 position of the parties on the fatal morning. 
 
 The sister was absent from home at a place unknown to the prisoner. 
 The fact had been told him of the difficulty between his father and 
 deceased, but the true reason of that difficulty he bad not learned until 
 
90 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 on tli<' Sunday before the shooting. That he did know, anything about 
 i< before is only an inference or assumption ; there is no proof of ii. 
 ( »:i Sunday he is told :i 1 about it, he is shown the letter of McKaig to 
 Myra, appointing a meeting at his (McKaig's) house in the absence of 
 his wife ; he is told thatVMyTa lias a child four months old ; he is told 
 by his loving and blessed mother the harrowing facts : he beholds the 
 shame, the deep, dark, and damning outrage that had been brought 
 upoq his sister and the family by McKaig; heia told of the threats 
 that McKaig had made against him ; he sees the ruin of all his cheiv 
 ished hopes in life through the wiles and arts of the seducer. Gri 
 God ! ( !an the heart of man pulsate as usual under the fiery ordeal he 
 was then passing through ? Kuowingall this, feeling and seeing all 
 tliH. is it any wonder the seducer fell before his unerring aim ? 
 
 Mr. Price then gave a detailed account of what had been told the 
 prisoner by Lowndes, Mrs. Black. Hen'shaw, Long, and others, as to 
 McKaig being the seducer of his (Black's) sister, &c. He argued that 
 Dougherty and Johnson had no position in court as witnesses as against 
 Long, as Long had told what he had seen, and what they ha 1 not ; he 
 stands before you, as jurors, a> fair as they did, and as worthy of belief. 
 
 He then explained the position of the witnesses about the Revere 
 House. 
 
 The counsel then proceeded to develop the theory of self-defense. 
 Black shot McKaig in time to save his own life. Six witnesses swear 
 that they saw McKaig draw his pistol first. Two men, Dr. Healey and 
 Dr. Smith, have sworn that they did not see a pistol in McKaig's 
 hand. I>nt. on the other hand, Six reputable witnesses have sworn 
 that they did see a pistol, and, after hearing the ruling of the Court 
 the other day as to the value of negative testimony, there should be no 
 difficulty as to which statement should be believed. It has been testi- 
 fied by two witnesses that when the body of McKaigwas lifted up that 
 a revolver dropped from his person, which Mr. Tearney picked up. 
 Tearney himself has been here all the time, and yet he has never been 
 put upon the stand to say whether he did or did not pick up a pistol, as 
 the other witnessss had testified. There was another pistol, which 
 Tearney did not see. Two pistols were exhibited here which were 
 admitted to have been taken from McKaig's person. Mr. Price said 
 one witness says McKaig was shot in the hack, and another says in 
 front. As to where Black shot him is not an issue here. He shot him 
 in self-defense. Igo no further than that, gentlemen of the jury. I 
 say that Crawford Black having heard what he did on Saturday even- 
 ing, having heard what he did on Sunday, and believing, as lie did, 
 what his poor broken-hearted mother told him, believing that McKaig 
 was the seducer of his sister, I say that the prisoner, or his father, had 
 the right, the God-given right, to slay that man who had thus treated 
 them wherever they met him. 
 
 We have no statute in Maryland to punish the crime of seduction — 
 the Avorst of all crimes. And why have we not? Because God, in his 
 wisdom, knowing the enormit3 r of the crime, the blackness of darkness 
 that surrounds the, victim of the lust of the seducer, hath retained the 
 power in his own hands to punish it, and appoints his instruments to 
 slay the seducer. And I say God strengthen the heart and steady the 
 hand that speed the bullet to the vitals of such men. And who had a 
 better right to redress the wrongs of that sister, to avenge the ruin 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'kAIG, JR. 01 
 
 brought upon that household than the brother? You cannot, gentle- 
 men, under any circumstances, weigh these facts :iu<l then give dam- 
 age in the parlies who claim to be aggrieved in this case. 
 The counsel then went into a very close and searching review of all 
 
 the testimony in the rase, and Ik ire down very hard at times upon some 
 of the State's witnesses, hired counsel, &c, and stated thai we stand 
 here declaring that Black shot McKaig to save his own life: .We stand 
 on broader ground than this. Hehad the right to kill the seducer of 
 
 his sister — to redress the wrongs inflicted upon his family, he was t l»o 
 instrument in the hands of God to satisfy the demands of an offended 
 justice. 
 
 In conclusion, Mr. Price appealed to the jury as men, as fathers, as 
 brothers, as upholders of female virtue, to find such a verdict as would 
 reflect the sentiment of Frederick county on the crime of seduction, 
 as would send this boy back to bis anxious father, mother, and friends, 
 as would restore him to those who loved him so well, as would say to 
 seducers and libertines in Alleghany count}', we applaud and justify 
 any father, husband, or brother who will rid this beautiful earth of 
 their baleful presence. Your wives, daughters, and sisters look to you, 
 gentlemen, to render such a verdict in this case as will protect them 
 from such insidious foes. 
 
Won. fa.. K- ^yester 
 
ARGUMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. A. K. SYESTER. 
 
 May it plea.se tiie Cotttct, Gentlemen of the Jury, in 
 dealing with a case on which the life or death of a human being is 
 embarked, I desire to treat of the facts and the law of the case, 
 and of those alone. 
 
 I shall find no time, and I entertain no inclination whatever to 
 indulge in any remarks having reference to the relations which 
 any persons bear to this case. The motives which may actuate 
 others in the prosecution of my client, and their purposes have 
 nothing to do with the real cause before you, except so far as 
 they have fashioned and given tone and temper to the prosecution 
 itself. 
 
 But while I may with entire propriety withhold the expression 
 of any opinion on the subjects just alluded to, my duty compels me 
 to advert (and my feelings may lead me to do so with emphasis) to 
 some of the circumstances that have marked this prosecution, and 
 have distinguished it for bitterness, above anything of the kind 
 that has ever faHen under my notice in the course of a prac- 
 tice of over seventeen years. Gentlemen, the importance of this 
 case to the prisoner at your bar, to his afflicted and heart-broken 
 parents, and to all those who are near and dear to him by the ties 
 of nature and blood cannot be magnified. 
 
 To him it involves nothing less than his life — to them the 
 crushing sorrows and painful griefs, which must be expressed in 
 tears and wretchedness over his early grave, or the smiles and 
 joys which will welcome him once more to the arms of a family 
 whose name he has not dishonored, and to the bosom of a society 
 whose peace and order he has not unlawfully broken. 
 
 You find him, hiscouusel, and witnesses all strangers before you, 
 and the prosecution for his life fortified by gentlemen conspicuous 
 for their ability, learning, and experience. 
 
 I pass over the circumstances of the removal of this case at the 
 instance of the prosecution, and the draging of the prisoner over 
 a hundred miles away from his home to be tried before strangers. 
 All that I have adverted to in my opening state of facts a few days 
 ago. 
 
 I pass over other circumstances, prominent in this case, which 
 have occurred to me as unusual and unprecedented, and call your 
 attention to some of the things that have transpired before you, 
 and which are full of significance. 
 
 Look, in the first place, to the remarkable fact that we have 
 been engaged now for nine days in inquiring into a transaction that 
 
9,4 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Occurred in the presence and also under the eyes of no less than 
 twelve or thirteen persons. And when the prosecution under- 
 took to develop the facts of that transaction it contented itself 
 with calling but three witnesses out of the twelve, in order to lay 
 the truth before you. 
 
 One of those witnesses (Mr. Conner) saw nothing of it, except 
 the very last moment of the scene of that tragedy— he saw only 
 the dead hody of McKaig. Two others, Dr. Healy andMr. Gross, 
 saw some part of the transaction. Indeed, it is quite plain that 
 Gross saw no part of the beginning of the transaction at all. He 
 saw nothing of that part of the affair which is the turning point 
 in the whole case, and which is the one great controlling central 
 fact in this whole transaction. He tells you lie was looking from 
 a window, and seeing people looking up street, looked up also, and 
 then saw McKaig off the pavement retreating toward the north 
 side of Baltimore street, Black following him. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that part of the affair is what a dozen other 
 witnesses saw, and eight of them saw more. Eight others saw 
 what this prosecutionhas openly endeavored to suppress; they 
 saw what occurred before Mr. Gross looked at all, and it is just 
 here, around what occurred before Gross saw anything, that the 
 whole interest of this case centers. It is around what transpired 
 before a shot was fired that the contest in this case rages, and 
 there centers and concentrates the momentous facts of this trial, 
 and it is just there, as to what took place, what was done by 
 these parties before any shot was fired at all that I invite your 
 attention, for on a proper and and clear view of that depends the 
 issues of life and death here as they were made up and staked on 
 that fatal, bloody morning. 
 
 Gentlemen, Mr. Gross tells you he was looking at the men load- 
 ing a stove, and when I asked him why he should have put him- 
 self to so much trouble as to leave his work, get on his knees, and 
 crawl over his work-bench to look at an occurrence which he must 
 have witnessed a hundred times in his life, he told you that the 
 reason why he did that was because the men were "straining" 
 themselves lifting in the stove; and it was while they were thus 
 " straining themselves " he saw a commotion and heard the report 
 of a pistol. He looked, and McKaig was near the middle of the 
 street. Now, in the subsequent stages of the case, Mr. Moore- 
 head is called by the prosecution, and he swears he was proprietor 
 of that store; that he had been engaged in loading that stove; 
 that the stove was on the wagon, and all hands had retired into 
 the store-room, looking for the furniture of the stove; and it was 
 then, after they had leftthe street, and were inside that he heard the 
 report of a pistol, went out, and saw McKaig in the middle of the 
 street, with Black at his back or side, and then a second fire or 
 report of a pistol. 
 
 Nov/, that is plainly the report which our good friend Gross called 
 the first report, and this prosecution in the face of all this was 
 willing to send the soul of this boy at your bar to eternity, consign 
 his body to an ignominious grave, and couple his name and mem- 
 ory with the crime of a murderous assassin by laying before you 
 only a partial view of the matter into which it professed to be 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. 95 
 
 inquiring with the sole and only purpose of testing its truth, its 
 whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 
 
 You will not Jail to remember that the prosecution rested itscase 
 on the testimony of Dr. Ilealy, Mr. Gross, and Cornelius Conner, 
 and that Moorehead was not called until the defense opened up 
 the whole transaction, which T here declare was the duty of the 
 prosecution to have done in the first place. 
 
 Mr. Gross was called on to testify to what this prosecution knew 
 was but a partial view of the case, and on his testimony, revealing 
 only part of the case, with full knowledge of all the. other facts, i 
 the gentlemen conducting this determined and energetic prosecu- 
 tion were willing to rest this cause, freighted as it is with the 
 life of a young man whose name and character has been main- 
 tained and upheld for all thai is orderly, peaceful, and gentle by 
 the unanimous voice of the entire people before whom he has 
 gone in and out from his childhood. 
 
 Was this prosecution dealing fairly and candidly with you? Are 
 gentlemen entitled to the confidences of a jury when found resort- 
 ing to practices like that, and that, too, in a case like this? Mr. 
 Gross saw no pistol in McKaig's hands; neither did Dr. Ilealy or 
 any other witnesses called by the State. Those alone who saw 
 least of this affair have been relied on by the prosecution, and they 
 now have the boldness to look astonished and profess wonder at 
 the idea of the prisoner setting up the doctrine that McKaig was 
 armed with deadly weapons that morning, and would have you 
 believe that they participate in the astonishment of Dr. Ilealy, 
 who declared on his oath that he first heard of McKaig being 
 armed and ready to tight when I made the prisoners statement 
 the other day. Why, gentlemen, the street that morning was 
 strewn with pistols, and McKaig, who left his home that morn- 
 ing '"in the peace of God and the State of Maryland," was a walk- 
 ing battery, armed to the teetli with not less tii an eighteen deadly 
 shots. The developments of the entire case show this, and show 
 it, too, from the lips of witnesses for the State, and yet in the pres- 
 ence of all this you have been gravely told that nothing was ever 
 heard of the theory of self-defense until it was disclosed by me in 
 my opening statement. 
 
 Follow this thing one step further, and see how far this prose- 
 cution has been dealing candidly with the jury, and fairly with 
 the life of the prisoner. I hold in my hand the indictment found 
 by the grand jury of Alleghany county. You will remember that 
 we, the defense, called a witness, Dr. Hummelshine, who proved 
 that immediately after the first lire he saw McKaig witli his hands 
 slightly elevated just as he was leaving or had left the curb, and 
 that a dark object fell as if from his hand, and which the witness 
 thought was a pistol. .Now, gentlemen, will you believe me when 
 I tell you that this witness Dr. Hummelshine was the only witness 
 on whose testimony this very indictment was found? And can it 
 be believed by any candid mind that all he would say was not 
 known to this prosecution, and that our friends refused to call 
 him because they knew what he would detail, and knew that his 
 evidence would go to establish the very defense of which tbeyhave 
 declared to you and this court they were in profound iguorance 
 
Of) TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 until tb is case opened? Tn the face of a fact like that what be- 
 comes of all the affected astonishment of the gentlemen at what 
 they have denominated the "pretended theory of self-defense? "' 
 And is not this worse than trifling with the lives of the people? 
 Is it anything else than a barefaced, unblushing, unscrupulous 
 attempt to drag thiw prisoner tO the gallows; to hurry him to an 
 earl; and horrible death by suppressing evidences that establish 
 his innocence, and depriving him of the means of salvation from 
 a doom at the bare contemplation of which the very blood runs 
 cold? 
 
 In a suit for property, in a conflict for dollars and cents, you 
 may not and do not call a witness whose testimony may ruin your 
 cause; but the spirit which pervades actions of that kind never 
 before obtruded itself in a capital case, except in the hands and at 
 the bidding of those whose names and memories are linked forever 
 with the universal horror and destestation of mankind, because 
 they prostituted the forms and privileges of legal procedures into 
 • the instruments of torment and death. And are not such prac- 
 tices as these against the honor, "government, and dignity of the 
 State?" 
 
 It is true the State has a profound interest in the preservation 
 of order in society, and in protecting the body politic against vio- 
 lence, but its policy, mercy, and humanity requires that when one 
 of its citizens stands charged with a crime, against which it has 
 denounced the forfeiture of liberty or life, every fact, every cir- 
 cumstance connected with the transaction which forms the sub- 
 ject of inquiry shall he fully disclosed and impartially unfolded, 
 it takes no pleasure in the death of its citizens; delights not in 
 the misery and sorrow of its people. When it assumes to drag any 
 of the people before its tribunals charged with a crime, the conse- 
 quences of which are so fearful and revolting as those denounced 
 against that with which my client is charged, it does not assume 
 the character of a mere bandying, party litigant, gloating over 
 the prospect of a success that will lay an adversary low in the 
 grave, and dishonor his name and memory among men. 
 
 If it frowns on crime it ever turns witli benignity and mercy to 
 the accused. It wages no war of tricks, devices, and artifices upon 
 the people, it requires that before a hair of the head of one of its 
 people shall be injured under a criminal charge every fact, every 
 circumstance connected with the transaction, shall be rigorously 
 ami impartially explored and scrupulously eliminated. 
 
 While it employs all its power to bring offenders to justice, at 
 the same tune, m consideration of the liberty, the honor, and 
 lives of the people, and the warm living affection that cluster 
 around the accused, it demands that every thing shall be fair, 
 clear, manifest, and certain; and that before a feather's weight 
 shall be added to tiie perilous state of the accused; before a, single 
 trace of anguish shall pierce the hearts of those who love him, or 
 a single hair of his head shall fall, the very last syllable of legal 
 proof shall be supplied, so that nothing dark, nothing oblique, 
 nothing unknown or unexplained shall remain. It requires that 
 everything shall be fully and faithfully unfolded, nothing with- 
 held, nothing suppressed. Its policy, laws, and legal procedures 
 
"FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. 97 
 
 areall impregnated with that Divine sentiment which takes noplea- 
 sure in the destruction of the people, but would rather all should 
 live, and none perish. 
 
 Sirs, if I am right in this, how fearfully and fatally at war with \ 
 the genius and spirit of law and justice, lias been the conduct of 
 those prosecutors, in attempting to lay before you a partial reve- 
 lation of the fads you are sworn to inquire into, and in suppress- 
 ing the testimony of Dr. Ilummolshine. 
 
 Gentlemen, you may now begin to discover something of the 
 temper and purposes of this prosecul ion. 
 
 Before f pass to the facts of this case, there is one other circum- 
 stance T must advert to: You will remember that we offered to 
 show the seduction and ruin of Myra Black, the prisoner's sister, 
 by the deceased. When that offer was made the prosecution 
 resisted and objected to it as not competent evidence for any pur- 
 pose in this cause; and upon the motion, and at the instance of our 
 learned brothers for the State, the Court refused to allow us to 
 prove 1 hat fact. Therefore, Miss Myra Black was out of the case. 
 No testimony of hers, and nothing relating to her history, con- 
 duct, or character was, or has been before you; all excluded at the 
 instance of the State. 
 
 The opinion of the Court, ruling out all that evidence, was yet 
 ringing in our ears, when the gentlemen for the State called a 
 witness to testify to the. general character of that lady, to degrade 
 and dishonor the very name and character of her, whose evidence 
 the prosecution had just objected to, and excluded from the jury. 
 
 Can you conceive the motive that prompted such an offer after 
 what had occurred? Do you believe that these gentlemen called 
 that witness and propounded such a question, under a conviction, 
 or even an impression on their minds that such an inquiry would 
 be tolerated for one moment? Do you suppose that our friends 
 really thought that the general character of that ruined and 
 unhappy lady had anything to do with this case? especially after 
 they themselves had objected to the only circumstance connected 
 with her ruined state, which would have given even ashadowto 
 the relevancy of such testimony? 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, that was a plain, open, undisguised 
 attempt to trifle with your intelligence, and wantonly to mortify 
 the prisoner, Ids parents, and relatives, not by proving any fact 
 of hi r life, but by laying before you the idle gossips and slanderous 
 conversations of ot hers. 
 
 I. have no doubt the witness called (God help him, I can not 
 recall the creature's name) would have sworn to all that this pros- 
 ecution required, i doubt not he would have told us that he was 
 sifting down somewhere, perhaps on a store box, in an office, or 
 on a tombstone, wil h somebody no l letter than himself, discussing 
 and dissecting, destroying and degrading the character of this, 
 and other young girls. 
 
 It is an easy matter for young gentlemen to do such things as 
 that, especially when the girl herself may never hear of it, and 
 when her parents are old and infirm, and her brothers far away, 
 engrossed in the stern battle of life. 
 
 It is a safe occupation, too, because young girls are not often 
 
93 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 dangerous, ami when you have no more property than character 
 or honor, you way hid defiance to the law, which denounces its 
 heaviest judgments against the slandererin pecuniary damages. 
 
 But, oil. how many pure names have been blighted, how many 
 blameless characters have been tarnished by just such persons as 
 these? How many pure, bat si ricken hearts have felt the stings 
 of a social attainder tingling in the warm currents that are 
 throbbing there, all unconscious, that perhaps the very lips that 
 ilatteved most, had whispered the lie that grew and grewunial it 
 overshadowed hope and life itself. The only wonder is, thai the 
 swift vengeance of Heaven can slumber while these ministers of 
 hell are dragging the purest, fairest, and bestof God's creation 
 from honor, peace, and respectability, to shame and misery. 
 
 Outcasts from Heaven and from prayer, as such men are, r 
 know that society sometimes compounds with their low transgres- 
 sions; but what do you think, gentlemen, of a prosecul ion against 
 the life of a fellow-citizen that will lay its hands on a thing 
 so unclean, and make it the channel through which the undi- 
 luted stream of evidence shall flow to a jury? 
 
 Let us now address ourselves to the lawand facts of the case, of 
 which you, gentlemen, are the sole judges under the constitution 
 of this State. With the law as well as the facts you and you alone 
 must deal in making up the verdict here. You cannot receive a 
 binding instruction on either from the Court. 
 
 In criminal cases the jury, not their honors on the bench, but 
 the jury are to judge the law. and a more solemn and responsible 
 obligation cannot be imposed on men. You must not only And 
 what is true in point of fact, as connected with this transaction, 
 but having found what is true, you must apply the law to those 
 facts, and determine whether the prisoner be guilty or not guilty. 
 This is your exclusive duty. You will see at a glance the high 
 and delicate grounds you occupy. From your decision there lies 
 no appeal; what you shall determine is fixed, and there is no power 
 under the laws of this State to revise your judgment or review 
 the grounds of your determination. 
 
 A mistake here, a hasty ill-advised conclusion, an erroneous 
 judgment, an omission to give due weight to any principle of law, 
 or an indifference to, or ignorance of, any of the elements which, at 
 law, go to make the crime of murder, may drag my client to death, 
 lay sorrowand wretchedness on the bumble hearthstone of a fam- 
 ily already sufficiently miserable, and become the source of painful 
 'and unavailing regret to all of you during the remainder of your 
 days on earth. 
 
 The prisoner stands before you to-day just on the threshold of 
 life with all its bounding hopes, its fair visions, and bright pros- 
 pects before him, and your verdict must determine whether all 
 these shall be shut up and concluded forever in the solemn silence 
 of the grave, or whether he, while the dews of his morning are 
 yet fresh and bright upon his brow, shall be returned again to that 
 life of usefulness, honor, and respectability on which he had just 
 entered when its brightness was suddenly darkened by this prose- 
 cution. 
 
 It is a fearful thing to deal with life, and yet, as I have said, 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. '.' 9 
 
 from your judgment in this case there is no appeal; there is no j 
 revisionary power which can review its soundness, explore its 
 errors, if error there shall be, and right the wrong which indiffer- 
 ence or inattention may inflict— for such is the law of this State 
 of Maryland. Indeed there is no part of this trial, neither the 
 part that you perform, which is by far the most responsible, and 
 sacred, nor the part imposed upon the Court, that can ever become 
 the subject of review or revision byany other tribunal in the land. 
 
 If my client were before this Court contending for Ids right to 
 property, even of the small value of seventy-live or eighty dollars, 
 yes, even of (ifty-one dollars, everything; connected with such a. 
 trial would become legtimate objects of appeal, and revision be- 
 fore the higher tribunals of the State. If in such a case, a trial 
 for the 1 , value of a horse worth but fifty-one dollars, originating in 
 thisCourt, their honors should allow an item of illegal evidence to 
 be laid before you, that ruling would become the subject of revis- 
 ion before the' high Court of Appeals of the State, and upon dis- 
 covering error in such a ruling that court would send the case 
 back here for a new trial. 
 
 If an item of evidence offered by a defendant in a case originat- 
 ing in our circuit courts, where the amount in controversy ex- 
 ceeds fifty dollars is rejected, that rejected offer, at hi- election, 
 may be carried to the appellate court, and the party feeling him- 
 self aggrieved is clothed with the right to have the judgment of 
 that tribunal asto thesubject-matter of his appeal; butadefendant 
 on trial for his life enjoys no such privilege under the laws of this 
 "good old State of Maryland." 
 
 If the inferior court determine against a prisoner on a question 
 of evidence affecting his life, he enjoys no right of appeal, but if it 
 concerned not his life, but an article of property worth not less 
 than fifty dollars and ten cents, lie may invoke the enlightened 
 judgment of the eight judges of our appellate court. 
 
 If in a question concerning character, and where a jury had 
 returned a verdict of one cent damages, the party defendant feels 
 himself aggrieved, either by the rejection of proffered evidence or 
 the admission of evidence against him, or by the instructions of 
 the Court against him, he may have the entire matter reviewed 
 before the appellate tribunal, and if there be error in any of the 
 opinions of the nisi priua court, that defendant may have a new 
 trial in reference to that one cent damage; but where character, 
 honor, life, the affections of whole families, the joys and loves, or 
 sorrows and woes of parents or children are involved, this "gal- 
 lant State of Maryland " of ours gives no such right. There is no 
 bill of exception in any criminal case in this State. Whatever is 
 clone in the nisipriua court in such cases is final. You may ask 
 and obtain a binding instruction in any civil case, and if the Court 
 refuse your application, you may appeal and reverse that judg- 
 ment, but in a ease like this, if an instruction were asked lor and 
 denied, that denial would form no subject of appeal. 
 
 Indeed, gentlemen, if the Court should assume to instruct you 
 without the consent of both counsel for State and prisoner, such 
 instruction would not be binding on you; you would still be at 
 liberty to disregard the instruction, and determine the law accord- 
 
100 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 iiiC to your own judgments. In viewofall this, I am quite sure 
 will bear with me while I attempt, in the first place, to lay b 
 you and make plain the principles of law that, in my judgment, 
 govern and control this case, f If I can aid you. gentlemen, in com- 
 ingtoa just conclusion on ttfat subject there will belefl but one 
 Other subject: the facts, on -which you are to pass, and upon 
 that I feel such great reliance in your capacity and intelligence to 
 collate, digest, and comprehend them that I shall trespass but a 
 few moments on your time in their consideration. ) 
 
 I have adverted to the differences made by the law of this State 
 between a party contending for money or property, and a man 
 struggling for his life in no spirit of complaint, (although I have 
 always regarded it as a stain ami blemish on a judicial system 
 which prides itself so much on its justice and equality.) but t have 
 done so for the purpose of advertising you of the tremendous re- 
 sponsibilities that lie before you, and of admonishing yon of the 
 care and caution with which you ought to govern yourselves in 
 traversing those paths of inquiry, on which your feet are now 
 pressing, perhaps, for the first time in your lives. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, the very first step in an inquiry like this con- 
 fronts us with a doctrine as venerable and indestructible as the 
 common law itself, a doctrine that meets the accused in every 
 c.ise, on the very threshold of his trial, that walks with him 
 through the fiery ordeal of the prosecution, shielding and defend- 
 ing him against all presumptions, and like a blessing and benedic- 
 tion, raising up every presumption in favor of innocence. 
 
 It is in obedience to this principle that the whole burden of 
 proof falls on the prosecution, and there it rests until the last item 
 of proof is supplied, it never shifts, and this legal presumpiion of 
 innocence is to be regarded by the jury, not as a mere theory or an 
 unmeaning thing, not as idle talk or mere verbiage, but as matter 
 of evidence, to the benefit of which the party accused is entitled. I 
 say not as a myth, or something without any significance, but as 
 evidence. I refer to 1st Greeuleaf, sec. 34. Moreover, there is a 
 wide difference in the standard of proof as applied to criminal and 
 civil cases. In criminal cases the law has attempted to set up a 
 standard of proof, and, so far as human thought and language can 
 do so, it does deiine the degree and quality of evidence necessary 
 for a conviction. 
 
 You will see, gentlemen, if you will give me your attention, how 
 cautious, how careful the law is on tins point. You will see every 
 form of expression used, in order to set this matter in a clear 
 light, and will notice the plain, direct, concise language employed 
 to enforce it. You will not fail to notice how solicitous the law is 
 to draw broad, clear, deep lines of distinction between those evi- 
 dences and proofs wliich goyen us in ordinary civil cases ami those 
 strong, convincing, and manifest assurances which must be devel- 
 oped in cases of this kind. You will find that this is no case in 
 which you are at liberty to scrutinize and explore mere probabili- 
 ties; no room here for weighing the preponderance of evidence, 
 nor considering the weight of prepondering evidence. Nothing 
 but those proofs that generate conviction to the exclusion of ail 
 reasonable doubt; nothing short of such proofs and evidences can 
 justify a verdict against the prisoner at the bar, unless at the baz- 
 
FOR KQMNG COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 101 
 
 ard of the oaths you took to administer in its letter and in its 
 spirit the law T am now about to read. I read from sec. 29th of 3d 
 Greenleaf on Evidence: 
 
 "A distinction is to be noted between civil and criminal cases in 
 respect to the degree or quantity of evidence necessary to justify 
 the jury in finding their verdict for the government. In civil 
 Gases their duty is to weigh the evidence carefully, and find for 
 the party in whose favor the evidence preponderates. But in 
 criminal trials the party accused is entitled to the legal presump- 
 tion in favor of innocence, which, in doubtful cases, is always suffi- 
 cient to turn the scale in his favor. It is, therefore, a rule of crimi- 
 nal law that the guilt of the accused must be fully proved. 
 
 '.'Neither a mere preponderance of evidence, nor any weight of 
 preponderant evidence is sufficient for the purpose unless it gene- 
 rate full belief of the fact to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt. 
 The oath administered to jurors according to the common law is 
 in accordance with this distinction. 
 
 "'In civil cases they are sworn well and truly to try the issue 
 between tin 1 parties according to the law and evidence given; but 
 in criminal cases their oath is"' well and truly to try, and a true de- 
 li veranee make between the State and the prisoner at the bar. * * 
 For it is not enough that the evidence goes to show his guilt: it 
 must be inconsistent with the reasonable supposition of his inno- 
 cence; it is better to en - in acquitting than in punishing, on the 
 side of mereey than on the side of justice.'" 
 
 Now, that, gentlemen, is but the general principle that lies at the \ 
 foundation of all criminal trials. It is a, proposition engrafted on 
 the criminal law long before the book I have read it from was 
 written; and, indeed, before any regular treatise on the common 
 law was written by any one. It existed and was conspicuous when 
 all other principles of law applicable to the investigation of crime 
 were in utter confusion and obscurity, for we read in a note to 
 that same section that King Alfred of England caused forty-four 
 of his judges to be hanged in one year, because of their false judg- 
 ments in this particular. I will read it to you, and I beg you to 
 notice, its strong, masculjJ^ language. It is taken from the Mir- 
 ror, written at a, early^^od. which "reckons it to be among the 
 tthitst s of the common l?tw 'that justices and their officers who kill 
 the people by false judgments be not destroyed as other murder- 
 ers, which Xing Alfred caused to be done, who had forty-four 
 justices, in one year, banged because of their false judgment. 
 From that day to this that principle of criminal law has been dear 
 to all those who value the rights, the liberties, and lives of the 
 people. Whatever else has changed, whatever else has been as- 
 sailed, whatever else has fluctuated, this has stood its ground 
 unmoved, unassailed, and untroubled. 
 
 [f has stood by the accused tor centuries, and in the midst of 
 passion and feeling. of vengeance and oppression, whennighthuhg 
 low and wild over the dashing waters of persecution and oppres- ■ 
 sive power, it has thi'own f;( rout on tin-, troubled scene the promises 
 01 hope and life, where otherwise dispair and death had ruled 
 a. nd rode supreme. It, is the spirit and genius of the old colon ion 
 law of England, under whose auspicies so many innocent men 
 

 102 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 have successfully braved the frowns of power and walker! un- 
 scathed, and unharmed through the fiery furnace of prosecutions, 
 marked and distinguished by every circumstance of power, venge- 
 ance, and oppression. 
 
 I invoke it, to-day, for this boy, and demand it in the name of 
 that oath by which each one of you bound yourselves to the throne 
 of eternal justice, to administer the law of the land in this case. 
 
 With this great cardinal principle before us, let us proceed to 
 the examination of some of the facts as connected with the homi- 
 cide. 
 
 My client has been denounced as a murderer and an assassin. 
 He has been presented before this Court and before you. as hav- 
 ing gone stealthily about the streets of Cumberland, and in the 
 neighborhood of the place of McKaig's business, peering into 
 windows and skulking into door-ways, waiting and watching to 
 take his victim at disadvantage, and without warning to set upon 
 and kill him. And terms, which were galling to a sensitive mind 
 in the extreme, have been employed to describe the transaction. 
 which has been unfolded to you by" the evidence, and the main facts 
 of whi ch I will now recall to your recollection, and then apply the 
 law specifically applicable to those facts. 
 
 On that October morning you find the prisoner walking along 
 the south side of Baltimore street, in Cumberland, westward. 
 About the same time McKaig is found going eastward along the 
 north side of the same street. When, from the distance that sep- 
 arated them, it was probable that each one could have seen the 
 other, McKaig leaves the side of the street he is walking on, and 
 deliberately crosses over to the side on which Black is walkiug. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if such a fact as that had been proven as to 
 Black, what a theme for declamation and denunciation would it 
 not have furnished to our friends prosecuting in this case? 
 
 Why, because he walked past McKaig's place of business that 
 morning, and dared to turn his head or eye toward the windows 
 of that foundry this prosecution has attempted to extract from 
 that circumstance strong and satisfactory proof that he was there, 
 in their own expressive vernacular, BJLskulking." Because he 
 passed that morning along center stnM^as he had passed hun- 
 dreds of times before, and, as the proof slfbws you, he must pass 
 to go into the business part of the town ; he is described as laying 
 in wait. 
 
 Because he was seen standing on the step, and in the door-way 
 of a public store, on the principal street in Cumberland, when 
 McKaig was nowhere in sight, he has been denounced as having 
 concealed himself for the purpose of avoiding the observation of 
 McKaig, the better and surer to affect his murderous purpose of 
 springing upon him and dealing death to his person. 
 
 If a fact like this had, or could have, been shown; if Black had 
 crossed over to the side McKaig was on, you would have heard the 
 loud, indignant, and triumphant declamations of our friends on 
 the subject until tills court hall would have echoed and reechoed, 
 with their noisey clamor for his life. And, indeed, it is a signifi- 
 cant fact; one that would have been ugly enough for us to have 
 explained, but it-- significance is in no respect diminished, because 
 it was McKaig and not Black who crossed over. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 103 
 
 You will remember, gentlemen, that that was not the first time 
 McKaig had gone out of Ms way to intercept the prisoner. You 
 have heard enough to satisfy you that McKaig not only did not: 
 hesitate to go out of his way to meet Black face to face, but that 
 on one occasion he went far enough to have provoked an en- 
 counter had the prisoner been less orderly and peaceful in his 
 disposition. 
 
 You cannot overlook the affair at Furgeson's saloon, where the 
 prisoner was wantonly jostled and insulted, and where he re- 
 minded McKaig that that affair constituted the second insult lie 
 had offered that day. What the first was we have not been able 
 to show you. You cannot fail to remember, also, what had occur- 
 red under the eye of John Long, and the communication made by 
 Long to Black. 
 
 If these things had been done by Black toward McKaig; if Black 
 could be shown to have previously gone out of his way to encoun- 
 ter McKaig; if he could have been shown to have wantonly in- 
 sulted him, and have stood and waited and watched for him, and 
 then to have followed him along the street, and then on that 
 morning of the 17ih of October, could have been shown to have 
 left the side of the street lie was walking on ami gone over to that 
 on which McKaig was passing, then would these gentlemen prose- 
 cuting have found in all these things an argument powerful and 
 overwhelming on the point, that the crossing and the meeting 
 was with no peaceful purpose, but that it was the offspring of a 
 deliberate, studied, settled purpose to force an encounter on an 
 unwilling and unoffending mail. 
 
 But dothese acts loose t heir significance because they were done 
 by McKaig and not by Black? Is there any reason why they 
 should be supposed to indicate a motive or design, as to one, and 
 not as to the other? Are you to presume that McKaig was with- 
 out a motive when he crossed that street? But can you hesitate 
 in discovering that motive in the light of his previous behavior 
 toward the prisoner? 
 
 We must judge men by their conduct; you have been invoked 
 to judge the prisoner by his; you have been told that his walking 
 by McKaig's foundry that morning, his standing in the door of a 
 public store in broad day light, furnish indices of a motive on his 
 part to lay in wait, and conceal himself, the better and more 
 surely to effect murderous purposes. Apply the same judgment 
 to the conduct of the deceased; subject bis acts to the same scru- 
 tiny to which they would subject those of Black, and your infer- 
 ences will not be of thai overs trail led, farfetched character which, 
 I am sure, every candid mind must say marked the conclusion 
 drawn by the prosecution from the ads of Black. 
 
 Eere, gentlemen, are acts that lie close to mol ives; here is con- 
 duct that is hardly to be misinterpreted. Let us go one step 
 further. McKaig bas crossed to tin' side on which he must have 
 seen Black; they meet face to face; there is no livingcreature who 
 saw the beginning of that encounter. Not a single man, woman, 
 or child who swears at what time eil her of these pari ies drew his 
 
 pistol. That both were armed is too plain for argument. That 
 each drew his revolver is equally plain. But who drew first? 
 
10-i TRIAL OF H\RRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 Which of these two marl ;the firsl hostile demonstration no human 
 being is found to tell us. 
 
 That is a matter of inference and inference alone; it is a matter 
 of presumption, and of presumption alone: it is a faet to be in- 
 ferred, or to be ptesumed; il lias not been shown by any direct 
 proof. Lt is to be presumed, it must be inferred, by circumstan- 
 ces and circumstances alone. It lathe all-controlling fact in this 
 case; the central fact, around which the interest and issues of 
 this case congregate and thicken. But it can only be ascertained 
 by circumstances, circumstantial evidence. How are we to deal 
 with it ? What is the rule of criminal law when we come to deal 
 with circumstantial evidence? 
 
 My brother Nelson has read to yon the rule on that subject, as 
 laid down by Baron Alderson, a rule which is in perfect harmony 
 with the spirit of that great fundamental and unalterable rule 
 which I have endeavored to impress upon you. lie has read that 
 rule from one of the ablest law writers that ever wrote. Before 
 you can convict my client you must be convinced that he com- 
 menced that fight by first drawing his pistol. And the conviction 
 of that fact, on your minds, must be something more than a 
 rational conviction, it must, be, in the language of the rule read, 
 1 the only rational conviction which the circumstances will enable 
 you to draw," 
 
 Gentlemen, are you at all convinced that Black first drew his 
 pistol ? Does the subsequent occurrences satisfy you of that fact? 
 Does all that preceded that meeting, all that attend it, and all 
 that followed it. produce upon your minds the conviction that 
 Black was the. first to show hostility? And is that the only 
 rational conviction which the circumstances enable you to draw? 
 
 Just look at this case! At this point you are left to find your 
 way to the heart of the case, to its thinking head and beating 
 heart, by the light of other facts — by circumstances. You are to 
 find that Black commenced that assault, not from what anybody 
 saw, but from other facts. What other facts? Because he was 
 armed? Why, McKaig had three pisiols to his one. 
 
 Consider for one moment this circumstance; seven witnesses 
 called by the defense sawa pistol in McKaig's hand, or sawit fall- 
 ing from his hand after the fir'st fire, and before the second. It is 
 in proof before you that the fust lire took effect in McKaig's side, 
 and passed nearly through his body. 
 
 Do you believe that after a shot like that, shocking and paralyz- 
 ing his entire system, and shattering his strength, lie was aide to 
 have reached behind him and drawn a pistol from his holster? 
 No, no; that pistol which fell from his right hand after the lirst, 
 and before the second shot was delivered, was in that right hand 
 before any shot was fired — before Black tired at all. 
 
 It is absolutely impossible to conceive how any other conclusion 
 can be drawn. The ball that struck McKaig was as large as au 
 ordinary Minnie ball. The parties were, not five feet apart; the 
 ball passed nearly through the body, and under the sudden, shat- 
 tering shock and prostrating paralysis of that deadly fire, and in 
 the brief interval that elapsed before the second shot, it is incred- 
 ible that McKaig, or any other man in his situation, could have 
 reached behind him and drawn a nistol. That nistol was in Mc- 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. Bl'ZAIG, JR. 105 
 
 Kaig's right hand before he was shot. And this view of the 
 case is powerfully confirmed by the testimony of Enos Davis. 
 
 That witness saw McKaig cross the street; he saw him when he 
 reached the curb at Ryan's corner, and there he saw him change 
 his cane from his right to his left hand and reach back. He saw 
 more — he saw something ''glisten." Now, that took place, accord- 
 ing to these maps, some ten or twelve steps from the place where 
 he was when attention was arrested by the first lire. Black's lire 
 could not have been delivered until the parties were within four 
 or five feet of each other, certainly; after the first fire, and when 
 attention was arrested, McKaig is found some ten or twelve feet 
 beyond the place where Davis saw him change his cane and reach 
 behind for his pistol. 
 
 At what precise point of time that pistol was drawn cannot be 
 ascertained with precision. But every principle of law, the spirit 
 and the very letter of that, great rule of criminal law I have just 
 adverted to, demands that no presumption shall be indulged in 
 against the prisoner. That the burden of proving his innocence 
 is not in dim; hut that the whole matter must be revealed toyour 
 minds by the State, in such a manner, and by such strong, con- 
 clusive, manifest proofs, as to remove all doubt on the subject. 
 
 Can you look upon this scene, and declare that all is plain, 
 clear, and certain ? 
 'X Are you satisfied by the proofs thai Black commenced thai affray; 
 by lir-i drawing his pistol? Has the State proven that fact toyour 
 entire satisfaction? Sire, the probabilities are all the oilier way. The 
 law as to self-defense is scarcely susceptible of an accurate definition. 
 Indeed, the law of self-defense is one thai is not and cannot be defined 
 in men's books. It is written in men's natures, stamped upon their 
 ts, and each case presents its own peculiar and distinguishing cir- 
 sumstances, and depends upon them, li is fashionable for prosecutions 
 ti> dwell on old definitions, as found in very early writers on this sub- 
 ject, and they are full ol expressions about "retreating to the wall," 
 and * 4 declining the contest," and re lined, artificial distinctions, which 
 are painful to dissect, and which profess to lay down rules for the 
 government .of a man's conduct and action in moments of extremity 
 and peril, v. li u, to pause and recall to m'md such artificial, technical 
 rule-, would be set down by the world as mere sheer idiocy itself. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, when these rules, these absurdities about 
 declining contests and retreating to walls prevailed, they were 
 founded oil a \ iew of the relations of man to government and society, 
 ly different from those prevailing now. They are the offspring of 
 that sentiment which made society and government everything and 
 man nothing. When the Life of a human beiug was regarded as the 
 property of the government, and when the slightest infraction of the 
 police regulations of society was esteemed the mosl grievous offense. 
 When men w,-re called on and compelled to sacrifice everythiug, 
 properly, honor, lite itself, for society ami government . When society 
 was supreme and the individual nothing, when man was regarded as 
 existing only for governmenl;. Hence it was thai the government 
 would not excuse a homicide, unless the slayer had retreated to walls. 
 because its police regulations were considered higher, more sacred and 
 holy than the (: 5 oJ the peopl ■. But when a truer and sounder view 
 
 ■V 
 
106 TRIAL OF HARBY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 on this s«bj< cl began to prevail, when man's relations to society and 
 government became emancipated from the doctrines and sentiments 
 thai dwai'fed his individuality and dwindled aim into nothing beside 
 the State, when men and judges began to learn something of their 
 own personal importance and feel the promptings of thai individuality 
 which asserts its ov> a dignity and importance, when it. began to dawn 
 that government was created for man and not-anaci for government, 
 then these old, <lry, technical rules began to give way, and to-day the 
 doctrine i- this : That if the slayer had reasonable cause to apprehend* 
 and did apprehend da-tiger to his life, or even greal bodily harm, the 
 homicide is-excusable. That is the law prevailing all over this country. 
 [t has found expression in various other forms, but the whole subject 
 will be found to resolve itself into precisely that statement. 
 
 (Mr. Syesterthen, in support of his proposition, read from Wharton 
 on Homicide, pages '22s, 229, and 2U;;. Also from Judge Parkins' 
 charge in Selfridge's case.) 
 
 -Much, indeed 1 may safely say everything-, depends on appearances, 
 more especially when those appearances arc created by the party 
 killed. 
 
 Gentlemen, adopting the language of an eminent judge in Pennsyl- 
 vania, in delivering the opinion of the Court in one of the eases I have 
 adverted to, '• Look you into the heart of the defendant at the time of 
 the transaction ; search out his motives, * * and say whether, con- 
 stituted as nature made him, he had reason to believe, and did believe, 
 v that he was in serious danger." Go with this prisoner, as he went to 
 his humble, ruined home that Sunday night, with his heavy load Of 
 shame and bitterness on his. heart; Btaywith him as he wrestled all 
 night long with the hideous beliefs that were ever present in all their 
 deformity before his mind, and, as morning dawned, wearied, wasted* 
 and prostrate, with the presence of a bereavement too fearful for de- 
 scription, he nestles in his misery and wretchedness close to the faith- 
 ful and now bleeding bosom of her who bore him to the world, and 
 there fell into the short and troubled slumber, from which he was so 
 soon, summoned to the contemplation of a woe too bitter, too terrible 
 for description. And let me ask you what impressions doyou suppose, 
 respecting the sentiments, dispositions, and temper of McKaig toward 
 him must have been uppermost in his mind. To his apprehension, to 
 his belief, everything that made life valuable had been destroyed. His, 
 very name had passed into a by-word of reproach and infamy; the 
 honor and peace of his home and parents were gone, and the author of 
 all this woe, this indescribable wretchedness, had wantonly insulted 
 and manifestly attempted to force him into a bloody and deadly conflict, 
 I doubt not but at that moment the scene at Ferguson's came back 
 upon his mind with a force, significance, and emphasis never before 
 apprehended. I doubt not that the communication made to him by 
 Long the evening before revealed to his distracted apprehension a 
 malignity and a .settled purpose to draw him into a deadly issue, far 
 more clearly than you or I, not actors in the drama, can possibly con- 
 ceive of. Conditioned as he was. these circumstances reappeared to 
 his mind with ten-fold power, and clothed with a, hundred-fold more 
 meaning than they did when in a calmer state. 'They became known 
 to the prisoner, and yon .see the prisoner, with all these beliefs and all 
 these impressions on his mind, confronted by the man who was the 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'KAIG, JE. L07 
 
 author of them &\l. Ton find that man leaving his side of the stre< I , 
 and before he met him changing his eane from his right to his left 
 hand, and with that right hand reaching back where his pistol was ; 
 the same man who had purposely and wantonly insulted liim before, 
 who had stood and waited and watched for him, who had destroyed 
 all the green places in his memory, dried up everysource of enjoyment, 
 and laid tears, misery, and distraction on his hearthstone. Yousee 
 that man just in iron i of the prisoner^ the man thai he then was to the 
 prisoner, full ofhostile, deadly intents, and in the face of all this wc 
 arc told the prisoner should have wailed for more. There was not 
 enough, to Ins apprehension, to have generated a reasonable belief of 
 serious bodily harm, or death itself, why, gentlemen, in a ease like 
 this, can there be doubt as to what induced the prisoner to fire? if 
 there is a doubt on that subject, by the great, indesl ructible, and over- 
 shadowing principle of the common law, yon are bound by your oaths 
 to give the benefit of the doubl to the prisoner. But, be assured, gen- 
 tlemen, that no common circumstance suddenly transformed that quiet, 
 peaceful, and gentle disposition into a death-dealing minister. \ > 
 common passion swept thai bosom, which had always hern Hie abode 
 of peaceand order. No ordinary apprehension overwhelmed that will 
 which, from early childhood and amid the most trying scenes, had 
 ever cherished the sentiments of amiability and gentleness, and had 
 shunned every temptation to violence and disorder. If you are left, 
 in doubt, either from the want of direct or the force of circumstantial 
 evidence as to the origin of that deadly encounter^ let the history of 
 the prisoner's life, let the gilded volume of his character, let the liv- 
 ing memories of his life and its attributes, let these resolve that doubt. 
 If ymi must receive more satisfactory evidence upon that which the 
 Stale must not leave in doubt, if you must have assurances on a point 
 to which the state and the State alone must, respond, with clear, mani- 
 fest proofs, if you will go beyond the strict and solemn injunctions of 
 the law, and overleap those broad, deep harriers, erected for thepro- 
 tection of our lives and liberty, and will explore the forbidden fields of 
 inquiry, if you will have it that, by some means, this doubtful matter 
 must he cleared up, if the State shall demand of us that wc shall make 
 clear what lias been left in obscurity, gentlemen of the jury we do not, 
 we will not, shrink from theissue, although the law, of which you are 
 the sworn administrators, does not demand it at our hands. And. in 
 response to such a demand, we pointyou to the dispositions mauif 
 by the deceased toward the prisoner. We point you to a. character on 
 the part of the prisoner the like of which has never before been un- 
 folded to the admiration of a jury. We point to all these evi- 
 dences, and. by their imposing and substantial power, we confidently 
 await a triumphant solution of that, which we arc not called on by any 
 law to solve. 
 
 [ am aware that out friends assume to get overall this byreferring 
 you to the prisoner's repeated shots and to his declarations when that 
 bloody scene was shrouded in death, lint who shall assume to meas- 
 ure the distance a man shall go when moved by emotions and b: 
 such as were sweeping the prisoner along when that encounter tools 
 place f Who shall assume to say now, when the whole scene is calmly 
 and dispationately reviewed, and, piece by piece, unfolded »o us, who 
 shall assume to say bow many shots ought to lane been fired and when 
 
108 TRIAL OF HARRY CKAWFOB© RLACK 
 
 the prisoner should have stopped? With the beliefs that were upon 
 his mind, with the appearances that were before his face, he could uot, 
 and did nol stop while his adversary was <>u his feet. 
 
 Remember, genl lemen, we have all beeu here for near teu days, in- 
 quiring into matters that were crowded up into nol more than twenty 
 seconds; and it is preposterous to attempt to point out now what 
 might orcould have been^len or known by the prisoner, or to what 
 conclusion he should have come when the interests and investigations 
 ofdays wereall crowded up into an instant of time. Why, gentlemen, 
 do our friends for the prosecution expect thai the prisoner, or any 
 other person even witnessing that transaction, nol participating in ir, 
 to have been so calm and capable of reviewing the different stages oi 
 that affair as they, or you. or I am now? Have they forgotten, and 
 can you forget all that must at that moment have been crowding and 
 thronging the mind and memory and stirring the emotions of the 
 prisoner? Can you believe that the overwhelming sense of wrong, 
 injustice, and outrage, which had stunned him and roused all the deep- 
 est feelings of his soul! left any place in his mind tor deliberation, 
 calmness, or composure ? 
 
 Is it at all likely, alter all he had heard and seen and felt, and in the 
 presence of what was loo manifestly before him. lie was capable of 
 nidging as you and I now may judge, and coming to the same con- 
 clusions the gentlemen prosecuting have come to? 
 
 Only consider this matter for a moment. You are, all of you, men 
 of respectability, and know the value of an untarnished name, and a 
 pare and virtuous household; Suppose there should suddenlyhe un- 
 folded to you the story of the ruin of your home, the dishonor of your 
 name, the infamy of your wife, or sister, ordaughter, how calm, how 
 composed would you hey That would he revealing to you a sense of 
 wrong, a situation of calamity, more unsupportable than if you had 
 lost every dollar you ever possessed'. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, when the very jewels of our names and 
 household are prostit uted into the mere toy. to minister to the depraved 
 lusts of other.-; when the wife, daughter, or sister has been dragged 
 from her character and virtue down to shame and dishonqr; when ail 
 Society can point the slow-moving finger of its scorn at the home that 
 was once the abode of purity and virtue; when our homes shall be 
 .shunned by the pure and blameless in life, and he converted into the 
 Verystys of infamy, and there shall remain nothing of them, save the 
 crushiiigfaCt that all which gave them their charm and delight, are 
 gone, and gone forever; oh! when such a doom shall overtake our 
 homes, and blacken anil desolate our hearthstones — then, then will it 
 he that we can realize, in all its power, the hideous deformity of a 
 woe that, in spite of habit; education, and prayer, shall turn our 
 sweetest thoughts to bitterness, and our best-ordered purposes to mad- 
 ness ! 
 
 it was from the contemplation of such a scene, of which language 
 can give hut a faint outline, that my client had just turned — aye! 
 its hitter waters were upon him, when he was encountered that 
 morning by the deceased. That he had passed that long, sleepless 
 night of misery in distraction, none can doubt. And he was still 
 treading those dizzy, narrow heights, to which he had been swept by 
 the storm of the most fearful of all calamities, and from which even to 
 
FOE KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIQ, JR. 109 
 
 look was madness ! No ! no ! be did not, li" could nol stay bis hand, 
 while there remained the slightest chance that his adversary, and the 
 enemy of all that was true and lovely to him. might have power 
 to execute the deadly purpose he had so persistently, so fatally 
 sought. 
 
 Our learned brothers affeel to draw unfavorable conclusions from 
 the expression used by the prisoner after the body of McKaig lay dead 
 in the street, [f such conclusions had been fair and legitimate, do 
 you believe this prosecution would have struggled as it did against the 
 admission of those expressions in evidence before you? You will re- 
 member that when I asked Dr. Healey, on cross-examination, to 
 declare all that was said, as well as all that was done, by (lie prisoner 
 on that occasion* we had a lone,- discussion before the Court as to 
 whether any declarations by the prisoner were admissible, And now, 
 after having warred against this as evidence, our learned friends take. 
 it up as one of the very props of the prosecution. "Well did these 
 gentlemen understand the force and power of that expression : "Now 
 you will seduce another sister of mine I." tk I have killed the man who 
 ruined my sister."' 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, may heaven, in its great mercy, spare you 
 and [, and Olirs, the bitterness of such an expression. 1 have seen 
 my children cold and shrouded in death. I have stood by their open, 
 their early graves, and have felt all the bitterness and desolation of 
 bereavements^ which I thought too hard to bear, and iu my anguish 
 and wretchedness have almost questioned the mercy and providence of 
 heaven itself in thus overwhelming me with the waters of bitterness 
 ami woe. But 1 can say, in all truth and candor, that I would wel- 
 come them to their graves, rather than behold them before me infa- 
 mous, ruined, dishonored, aud degraded, as this wretched prisoner felt. 
 and knew her to be, ^ho, up to that hour, had been to him all that 
 was pure and blameless in life. That the sense of that calamity was 
 uppermost in his mind, and deepest and strongest in his heart, no one 
 can doubt ; and it, is not to be wondered at. that when death had set- 
 tled <>n tli" overwhelming excitement of that transaction, the remem- 
 brance of a ruined home and a dishonored sister should have risen up 
 and to his mind presented itself as all sufficient as a justification for 
 what he had done. 
 
 Gentlemen, i can conceive of nothing in life more calculated to ex- 
 cite passion. Certainly, there is no disaster, no misfortunein life so 
 utterly irrel rievaWe ; no sorrow so crushing ; no spectacle so madden- 
 ning as that which unfolded itself to the mind of my client. It is ab- 
 solutely impossible to contemplate the bare possibility of such a 
 calamity With composure. Our minds grow wild and feverish at the 
 hare thought. The purposes become unsettled at the most remote 
 prospect of a bereavement so fearful and harrowing as that. The wilt 
 shakes in its citadel, and order and reason totter in their strongholds 
 at the bare mention of a destruction so fearful in its desolation, so in- 
 curable in its woe ! 
 
 The learned gentlemen for the State have read law to you, to the 
 ctleei that there are circumstances and occasions when, on account of 
 the heat of Wood, the law steps in and reduces the grade of killing. 
 But we arc told that the law takes no account of the hot blood pro- 
 
110 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 dueed by a trespass like thai to which tin- prisoner felt himself sub- 
 jected, a trespass on the finest, the noblest, and the holiest affections 
 of the human heart — the sister whose purity you have enshrined as a 
 pure and spotless image in your heart, on whose Love and devotion 
 you have reposed from childhood to manhood — she may be snatched 
 from her innocent grace; dishonored before your face; betrayed, 
 wronged, set adrif! on the wild and tossing sea of abandoned and riot- 
 ous passion ; shunned, scoffed at and jeered at by the veriest outcast. 
 that prowl- the streets; and you are gravely told that these laws we 
 live under make no accounl of the stirring of blood that such a spectacle, 
 such a t respass upon all your love and affection produce- \ But if two 
 inen fall into a drunken brawl, and low and violent passions are 
 aroused bv a blowj the law, in tender consideration for the hot blood, 
 heated by brutal, vulgar habits and low indulgences, considers that the 
 death that ensued from such a scene is not murder, but manslaughter. 
 But when the blood is heated by arousing emotion-, and inflaming 
 into passion feelings and sentiments that have their seat and origin in 
 the ptirest and best affections of our common nature, and under such 
 impulses a deed of disorder or death ensues, these prosecutors tell us 
 the jury must take no accountofall that. You are walking the street, 
 and a man purposely jostles you there, (and this is one of the very ex- 
 amples read by the prosecutors from 122d sec. of 3d Greet deaf.) and in 
 the heal oi blood thus wantonly provoked, you slay the jostler ; the 
 law spares your life. But that same man might have entered your 
 household, in all the confidence of intimate friendship, and there ruined 
 your peace and the peace of your whole family, and destroyed every- 
 thing that was lovely and lovable about it ; and if, under the impulses 
 of a woe, too unutterable for human lips, you had destroyed the au- 
 thor of a misery like that, you would be met with a legal presumption, 
 to wit, that you was all the while perfectly calm, absolutely composed, 
 and entirely capable of forming deadly, deliberate, and malicious pur- 
 poses. A man may strike and scar your face with an unprovoked 
 blow, and you kill him on the; spot; but you are not guilty of murder, 
 because these law-books tell us of a weakness of the human heart of 
 which the law is tender, •' very tender," so that no malice will be pre- 
 sumed, and the hot blood provoked by the blow reduces the grade of 
 your o lie use. But that same man may scar your name with shame; 
 be may strike a blow into your quivering heart that shall open up a 
 stream of agonyso bitter, so exhaustless, that no time, no consolations 
 can heal it ; and if, under the impulses thus wantonly engendered, 
 you kill the author of a desolation like that, we are told that the law 
 makes no account of the emotions and passions that blinded reason 
 and subverted judgment, dethroned calmness, and held the will in 
 thraldom. A man assails you along the road, and attempts to rob you 
 of a fifty-cent government note, and if, in defending yourself from 
 such an assault as that, you kill the assailant; that is justifiable homi- 
 cide, because it was in defense of your property. But we all stand 
 here with our wives, daughters, and sisters — these priceless jewels of 
 our hearts — all exposed ; the practiced hand of any gilded seducer may 
 snatch them from our bosoms, tarnish and degrade them, and then, with 
 scorn and derision, throw them back upon us; and these laws, we are 
 told, declare all that nothing — nothing tluit you have drained to its 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. Ill 
 
 last dregs the bitterestcup that misfortune, injury, and outrage ever 
 presented to unwilling lips. 
 
 Gentlemen, let us clasp hands just here, and if it is true thai these 
 lawsofours ignore the truest instincts of our hearts, and banish the 
 purest, dearest, and most cherished affections of our natures, let as 
 trust our Jives and souls to the mercy of a just God, rather Hum be 
 subject to such calamities. Let our graves*sbe dug for us all overthe 
 land, and let the destroyers of our homes live surrounded by the hon- 
 ors and sustained by the honied commendations of a society that can 
 tolerate principles of law like those I have but imperfectly described. 
 It is a line thiug to talk about the peace, government, and dignity of 
 society, and quite fashionable (o indulge in discourses about the order, 
 the law, and well-being of the people; but believe me, neither the 
 peace of the people, nor the dignity of the State, nor the order or 
 honor of society can be preserved under the administration of laws 
 like these. What respect! what reverence! whathonor! can a people 
 entertain for a State orsoeiefy which casts the garments of wretched- 
 ness on tlx- wronged, ruined, and Let rayed, and leaves them to dead in 
 loneliness and desertion witli their sorrows, and at the same time 
 opens all it s saloons of refinement, all its resorts of fashion, and all its 
 posts of honor to those whose robes are stained with transgressions, 
 and whose hands are hardened with the ruins they have wrought on 
 the weak and unprotected. 
 
 Let no man take his stand amid the ruins of the first, the highest, 
 and holiest laws of human nature, and preach to US about the broken 
 statutes of society and the violated sanctions of law. 
 
 Gentlemen, there are laws other that those written in these hooks, ' 
 judgments oilier than those found in the precedents of courts. There 
 are laws, principles, and sentiments as imperishable and indestruct- ! 
 ible as human nature itself, and which no system of jurisprudence 
 can safely assume to undervalue, and which none has ever yet been 
 able to ignore. There a.re laws graven on the human heart, by a 
 mightier finger than ever traced the letters of your statutes, and im- 
 posed by a diviner sanction than ever fell from human lips; and these 
 laws must he vindicated and preserved at every hazard, for society 
 cannot exist one hour without them. The laws I am speaking of are 
 those which are rooted and grounded in the purest and best affections 
 of our natures, which bloom and blossom under the sacred influences 
 of our homes ; which, starting amid the loves and purity of the family 
 circle, broaden and deepen into love of neighborhood, and growing 
 •with our growth, and expanding with our experiences, ripen into love 
 of country. 
 
 1 know that the early law, framed by the Norman conquerors of 
 England, utterly ignored all the domestic affections, ami all the sanc- 
 tities and sublimities of our common nature. 1 know that these senti- 
 ments i am speaking of found no place, no recognition whatever in 
 a. system of jurisprudence that was founded on considerations of pro- 
 perty alone. They were all excluded by the spirit of an age and the 
 power of a race of conquerors who themselves appropriated the most, 
 sacred relations oflife to the gratification of rapacity and lust. There 
 was, under the laws set up by the Norman conquerors of England, no 
 law, no punishment for the destrovers of families. Those iawswere 
 
112 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 molded by the oppressors of the people, the conquering lords and 
 proud, overbearing barons of the manor, who rioted in ravishment 
 and the destruction of homes, and whose ill-gotten and bloated estates 
 enabled them to pay, without feeling it. the slight pecuniary fines im- 
 posed as ;i penalty for violating and destroying the happiness and the 
 honor of the people. Indeed, one caunot i urn, withoul a shudder, to 
 those pages of the old law e of Eugland, where the domestic loves and 
 natural affections, the sacred beatings and outbreathings of the heart 
 are brought into contact with the law. But, after long years of strug- 
 gle and conflict, these relations and affections, and pure and honored 
 sentiments have been emancipated from the thraldom imposed upon 
 them — they are beginning to take up their proper position among 
 those great interests and substantia] considerations on which society 
 itself rests, and are receivingat the hands of an enlightened, moral 
 judgment that high raid; and that imposing station which their im- 
 portance entitles them to. And whatever may be the artificial rules, 
 founded on a view of society existing in the rude and early civilization 
 of England, •when the criminal code was Trained to encourage and 
 shield the ravishers and destroyers of homes, and not to preserve their 
 purity and honor among the masses. Whatever may be contained in 
 the judgments of the assizes of an age when the husband and the 
 father had no other remedy for the ravishment of his wife or daughter 
 than a writ of replevin to rescue her from the lust and rapacity of some 
 haughty oppressor, nevertheless the judgement and heart of any man, 
 on whom even a glimmering of the civilization of this age has ever 
 rested, will pronounce thecrimeof that man who invades the peace 
 and sanctities of our homes with the desolations of seduction and 
 shame, to he the most heinous that can slain and blacken the annals 
 of transgression. Ami whoever assumes to ignore these domestic re- 
 lations and natural affections, and these sanctities of our common 
 nature, which are so closely bound up with the happiness of fche people, 
 the honorand purity of society, and peace and order of the State, who- 
 ever, in the madness of his passion and lust- shall darken our homes 
 witli thai hideous shadow which must- rest in shame and dishonor on 
 all that we most love and cherish, whoever shall turn the homes of 
 the people into desolate and waste places, dry up all fountains of en- 
 joyment, poison all sources of delight, and leave there nothing hut 
 maddening memories, and prospects all blighted and blasted with mis- 
 fortune, gentleman, such a man is a monster more dreadful, more 
 hideous than the stealthy assassin. Beside such a crime murder it- 
 self may clap its hands in t rininph. And the State, society, or govern- 
 ment that can tolerate crimes like that, or can shield transgressors 
 like ihese from the righteous vengeance of an insulted, outraged, and 
 ruined people, only mocks you when its representatives puate about 
 order, peace, and good-will among men. 
 
 Let no one dome the injustice to suppose that I am undervaluing 
 the common law of the country, or thai these remarks are made in 
 sympathy with that wild sentiment which would set up the fanatacisms 
 of partizan strifes in t he place of t he great principles of security which 
 lie at the foundations of stable, fixed law. Do not impute to me a dis- 
 position to withdraw this subject from the imposing sanctions of the 
 common law of Maryland ami set it up in the light of those passionate 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W\ W-. m'kAIG, JR. Ho 
 
 excitements which are in conflict with all peace, and at open war with 
 all order among men. 
 
 I have presented these thoughts lor the purpose of exhibiting, to you 
 the harmony that always must prevail between the written laws of a 
 people and the living, glowing, and indestructible laws of their nature, 
 not their passions which deprave, but those great, universal, and hon- 
 ored principles winch elevate and ennoble the race. And I say that 
 this harmony docs prevail, that the common law does not ignore these 
 principles, but takes them up and incorporates them into its own being. 
 For this thing, called the' 1 common law," is not a cold, dead stony 
 incrustation, cramping, and deforming all the developments of life, 
 and holding humanity to the condition in which it existed centuries 
 ago. Treating mankind as endowed with no law of development, and 
 making no room for such development. But the common law is itself 
 a living organism, which expands with the developments of society, 
 keeps pace with its progress, and which, while it looks with no favor 
 on innovations and change, nevertheless takes up and appropriates 
 to its own life whatever experience, reason, and practice shall demon- 
 strate to be true and good, politic and just. 
 
 I know that there is a sentiment, which supposes itself to be seated 
 high in authority, and which assumes that it, and it alone holds the 
 peace of society and the order of State in its own hands ; a sentiment 
 which, ever and anon, assumes to step down from its lofty place and 
 utter a dignified protest against what it is pleased to denominate prin- 
 ciples destructive of society, and subversive Of the peace of the State. 
 A sentiment which flatters itself that it is doing high service when it 
 can repress disorder among men, but never heeds the costly sacrifices 
 tliatsmoke and bleed on its altars; and I know that this sentiment 
 will turn away with derision, and a sneer from the thoughts I 
 am feebly uttering, because in its pride and self-sufficiency it 
 will pronounce them pregnant with mischief and full of social 
 discord. 
 
 But, gentlemen, when the day shall come, in which a spectacle like 
 that which unfolded its shame and horror to the mind of Crawford 
 Black, on the day he was told of his sister's ruin, shall be contem- 
 plated by the American people With no other emotions than those of 
 ordinary regret; when the day shall come in which the faith, virtue, 
 and purity of our wives, sisters, and daughters shall be but the wares 
 with which licentiousness and depraved lusts shall trade and traffic; 
 and the very names we bear shall be but the by-words of scolling 
 libertines; when our homes, no longer the abodes of virtue, where 
 character is molded into beauty .-hall become the lurking places where 
 depravity and sin and shame shall hold their stealthy carnivals, in a 
 word, when their lofty breathings of thought and sentiment, which 
 yet enfold and panoply the honor of our familiies shall be broken 
 down, and wild and riotous pas-ion shall rash in where purity and 
 beauty of character dwells, then will there be opened upon us all the 
 floodgates of a ruin ami desolation broadcast, dire, and inevitable. 
 Let me hear no more about principles, subver-ive of society, and 
 doctrines that uproot its order and peace or impair the dignity of the 
 Slate of Maryland. For after all, gentlemen, who does not feel and 
 know that tendrils of our serenest joys, and the roots of the peace and 
 
11-dt TRIAL OP HARRY CRAWFORD ELACK 
 
 order of society, twine around the thresholds and warm beneath the 
 hearthstones of our Eacred homes ! 
 
 And so long as these homes shall present a quiet and smiling refuge 
 from the toils and cares of life; so long as the purity and virtue and 
 beauty of character of the wife, the sister, and daughter shall remain 
 to ■welcome the husband, father, brother, and son to their cheerful joys 
 and smiling fireside; so long as the kindly charities of blameless and 
 loving hearts arc wreathing amid the hard realities of outer life, a 
 bower of blissful repose; where the jaded and weary spirit may 
 forget the tossings of an ever-heaving present in the holy antici- 
 pations of a sorrowless and endless future So longas the quiet dignity 
 of the mother, the twining tenderness of the sister, and the budding 
 loveliness of the daughter blending in one hallowed trinity shall grace 
 the household altar and adorn the household hoard ; SO long as these 
 shall remain in all their integrity and conservative and purifying 
 power; so long will the happiness of the people and the peace and 
 order of society remain as firm as the rooted rock. 
 
 Disappointments and losses may still occur; but when the pride and 
 heritage, of the heart are laid upon the family altar the evils of the 
 outer world are less heavily felt, because th^y leave untouched the 
 greater and richer interest. The sorrows of death may shroud all 
 life's scenes with gloom, and dash all its cups with bitterness; but 
 while there shall remain to us the precious memories of the pure and 
 blameless lives of those we loved, but whose forms arc forever hid, the 
 sweet sacred images which affection loved to cherish will come back — 
 
 " Apparalled in more precious habit, 
 More moving, delicate, and full of life 
 Than when they lived, indeed." 
 
 When those whom we love die with their honors fresh and bright about 
 them, they somehow become omnipresent and immortal to us. In- 
 deed, death brings them nearer to our feelings; raises them to a 
 higher place in our memories and affections, and immortalizes our 
 affections for them. 
 
 Moreover, it is always in such seasons of gloom and sadness that 
 kindly hearts are close beside us, to mingle their sympathies with our 
 griefs; and there, too, will ever be found the faith and consolations of 
 our blessed religion, under whose ministrations the loneliest, nakedest 
 grave becomes a sunlit bank, bright and empurpled with the blossoms 
 of eternal life. 
 
 "The Lord gave, and the Lord taketh away," has swept down to 
 us through the long vistas of the past, from the earliest dawn of re- 
 corded things, and that consolation will continue to abide with the 
 stricken and sorrowing until the last syllable of recorded time. But 
 what consolation can sooth the heart that writhes under the sting of a 
 home poisoned with shame and infamy ! If death immortalizes our 
 affections for those we love, infamy annihilates them. 
 
 If the prisoner had been told that his sister had died, the. loss, though 
 bitter, would not have been baleful, not deadly, for though cut off 
 from the object of his love and trust, he would still have retained those 
 sentiments for her in all their strength and beauty. It was not with 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. MIvAIG, JR. 115 
 
 his sister, but with his firith in her that he was forced to part; it 
 
 was not herself, but her honor and name that was dead forever to 
 him ! 
 
 Upon such a nature as his, the sadness of a bereavement like that 
 settles into the deep, dark gloom of a wounded spirit, and life will be 
 almost a burden to be borne, nut a blessing to be cherished. The 
 dawn of life is around him in all its freshness and beauty; hut its 
 morning hymns, and the sweet strains that charm away so many of 
 its sorrows are all silent — hushed in the presence of a bereavement so 
 sad, so painful, that its hare mention is a blighting torture to him. 
 Bnt do not touch that life with your verdict, gentlemen, for it is now 
 doubly dear to those who love and cherish him ; the life of this anxious 
 father, who has sal by his side, day by day, during this trial, is more 
 closely bound up with his than ever. And the same faithful bosom on 
 which he wept away the transient sorrows of his childhood, now yearn- 
 ing toward him with more than a mother's love, awaits your verdict to 
 enfold him with its boundless affections, and administer its consolations 
 to this crushing bereavement of his riper years. You cannot he in- 
 sensible .to the lact that your verdict is looked for with no common 
 interest. 
 
 It is not simply that it will give life or death to this prisoner, and 
 joy or sorrow to the anxious hearts that here cluster around him ; but 
 it is because profounder issues than the life or death of any man are 
 embarked on that verdict, and considerations far more important than 
 the joys or sorrows of his friends stand thick and trembling around 
 this case. That verdict will give us to know what estimate a Maryland 
 jury places on the honor and securities of our households, and how 
 dear they hold the loves and affections which bloom and ripen under 
 the roofs of the unnumbered houses of this happy land. 
 
 There is not a home in all this broad land that will not feel the rude 
 touch of a verdict which consigns this prisoner to the grave, startling 
 into dismay the joys and nameless benignities that nestle amid its 
 loves and affections. 
 
 There is not a brother whose faith and trust have reposed amid the 
 pure delights and tendencies of a sister's love, who will not feel, in the 
 death of this boy, under this prosecution, that a frowning shadow has 
 fallen and rests between him and the purest memories and most sacred 
 recollections of his life. 
 
 Your verdiet will stand a monumental point in the history and re- 
 collections of this people. "Nor marble, nor the gilded monuments 
 of princes" shall outlive its powerful influences for good or evil. It 
 will stand the Kving record of your memories, and tongues to be- 
 that verdict shall rehearse when all the breathers of this world are 
 dead. 
 
 There can he no room in your finding ior distinctions as to the grade 
 of homicide ; under that finding the prisoner must live or die. If the 
 prosecution is right he must, die; if wrong lie must live and be free. 
 The issues of life or death are as distinctly staked upon your verdict as 
 they were when the prisoner stood face to face with the same awful issues 
 on the morning of the 1 7ih of October, 1871. But, notwithstanding the 
 power and determination of this prosecution, l -till cling to the nope 
 that your verdiet will release him from the long Imprisonment he has 
 
11(5 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK. 
 
 endured, and restore him once more to the hopes and trusts that are 
 embarked upon his character. And, seeing that his early life is so 
 clouded widi misfortune and gloom, I am sure you will join with me 
 in the earnest hope that, in his later days, when the evening rays of 
 life shall fall upon him, he may not be found to give forth the same 
 mournful strains that have so sadly greeted the early messengers of 
 his morning. 
 
Hon D. W. Vocrhees 
 
ARGUMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. D. W. VOORHEES. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, we have now reached that point where 
 it becomes my duty to address you. In doing so. 1 have but one 
 thought and but one purpose. I believe, with fixed and solemn 
 convictions, in the innocence of the young prisoner who is here by 
 my side, and I shall tiy, while I stand before you, to make manifest 
 the grounds of my belief, and to the utmost extent of my humble 
 powers, to obtain for them the consent of your minds. 
 
 Allusion has been made to my position as counsel here. It is true 
 that I live in a distant State, but I cannot feel that I am a stranger to 
 you. We are allied to each other by many ties. We are husbands, 
 fathers, and brothers. We have wives, sisters, and daughters. Thes • 
 vital and precious domestic relations form all mankind into a universal 
 holy alliance. By them you and I are acquainted. We uuderstan I 
 each other by their promptings. Let us come close to each other in 
 this discussion. I can have no purposes that ought not to be yours. 
 As a citizen of this great country, desirous of the welfare of the peo- 
 ple, desirous of the supremacy of the laws, I cannot invoke any result a 
 that you ought not also to desire. We are all wedded to the public 
 good. We do not want to destroy the peace and good order of human 
 Society. None of us are interested in such a baleful issue. Good or 
 evil to you and yours is the same to me and mine. A blow al your 
 peace and homes is a blow at all the homes in the land, and an assault 
 upon the humblest family circle puts in peril everything that we all 
 hold dear. We meet, therefore, upon a common level, and in a plain 
 and simple manner I expect to speak to you in this spirit. 
 
 There is one consolation that I have in rising to address you that 
 presents itself to my mind at once. I have stood before juries quite 
 often, but never before, in the whole range of my experience, have I 
 known a man arraigned for murder who produced such a record ol 
 character as has been produced here. All the powerful presumptions 
 of a virtuous and well-spent life arise at the very opening of your 
 deliberation- in favor of the defendant. By the light of the proof let 
 us see who it La that we are trying. You have your lingers on his 
 pulac. You are measuring his life, and the manner of that life is all 
 In lore yon. He is young — hut twenty-four years of age. How much of 
 usefulness and manly life he has crowded into that brief space 1 If 
 one of yom sons of that age was arraigned for a high crime, how 
 proud you would justly feel if you could call, as has been done in this 
 
118 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLA( K 
 
 case, (Void every quarter and from every class everybody who had ever 
 mot him, everybody who had over done business with him, and receive 
 from them all one unbroken strain of commendation and eulogy ! The 
 aged and gray who have known Harry ('raw ford Black from bis 
 infancy, have here, in your presence, praised his pure and blameless 
 life. His young comrades have spoken of him as an example far 
 beyond his years. His fellow prisoners during the war describe him as 
 a model amidst the hard and demoralizing scenes of prison life. 'The 
 dusty miners from Piedmonl . as well as Members and Senators' in Con- 
 gress, '•onio here to bear their voluntary and affectionate testimony in 
 Eis favor. Hedoesnoi pass this ordeal alone ; he has the sweet reward 
 of virtue in the presence and consolation of those whom his good con- 
 duct has attached to his fortunes; and the voice of reason, as we'd as 
 law, proclaims that such a man is not a criminal. ITc is not familiar 
 with the walks of vice, where criminals are made. His hand and his 
 heart are iiw from the guile and tlfe practice of crime, and yet the 
 learned gentlemen for the prosecution insist that he stands now at the 
 foot of the scaffold, soon to ascened its desperate heights for the com- 
 mission of a crime without a parallel in the eye of the law. Pure, 
 innocent, and virtuous up to this time ! Do men of that kind, with- 
 out just provocation, enact deeds of bloodshed? If they commit what 
 seem to he violations of law, are they not always upon the most dread- 
 ful and imperative causes? It is this presumption which gives to 
 character its priceless value when the motives and conduct of a human 
 being is under investigation. But such a reputation as the defendant 
 here produces is usually the growth of a long life time, and is seldom 
 the accompaniment of early youth. Recall in your minds at this 
 moment the friends and neighbors by whom you are surrounded at home. 
 The best and most reliable are those of longest standing. Some you 
 have known for more than a quarter of a century. You have seen 
 their heads whiten as the winters and summers have come and gone. 
 Their characters are good and solid. Little by little, day by day, 
 week by week, month by month, they have built them up as firmly as 
 your beautiful mountains; but it has been the labor of long years. 
 IIow much more should your hearts lean to a mere boy, who has not 
 had much time, and yet comes into court with a character that the old 
 men of the country might be proud to produce. He has had but few 
 years, but in them he has been so prone to virtue, so free from vice, bo 
 free from evil associations that he has not a spot or stain or blemish. 
 Show me another boy in these bright valleys who went from home at 
 seventeen years of age, had an army experience, always terrible, 
 tasted the horrors of the prison-house, came out untainted in soul and 
 body, went to the far West into the employ as chief clerk of a heavy 
 mercantile house, returns with their warmest testimonials, becomes at 
 twenty-two the superintendent of one of the foremost mining com- 
 panies of the Alleghanies, winning at all times and places and circum- 
 stances golden opinions, and nothing but golden opinions, from all 
 sorts of people ; show r me, I say, another boy like this beside me 
 within the range of your acquaintance who has borne or can bear the 
 mighty tests to which the prisoner has been subjected, and you will 
 find him the cherished object of universal regard, beloved by the 
 fathers and welcomed by the mothers into every domestic circle as a 
 model for their sons and an associate for their daughters. Can the 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'EAIG, JR. 119 
 
 mark of Cain rest upon the brow of such an one? Tan the ineffaceable 
 brand of bloody guilt be there? Such an assertion is a perversion of j 
 tv!l the laws of human nature. The tree shall be known by its fruits; 
 the thorn and the thistle do not bear delicious figs, and a life of inno- 
 cence and peace, does not bloom and ripen of a sudden into a harvest 
 of atrocious crime. 
 
 If avc were defending, indeed, a criminal, one whose character we 
 did not dare put in issue, with blotches and stains upon him, how dif- 
 ferent would he our feelings and our positions, lint now we come 
 "with all our hearts clinging closely to the defendant in his peril, 
 believing, earnestly believing in him and in his innocence from the 
 very depths of our souls ; and we have no fear. The weight of a good 
 name is recognized in the hooks of law, hut over and above all it is 
 recognized in your own hearts. When the Hebrew children were cast 
 into the furnace, with its seven fold heat, there appeared to the aston- 
 ished gaze of the Babyhnish king another form, of celestial aspect, 
 walking with them in the midst of the flames, and comforting them 
 under their fiery afflictions. So is Crawford Black's good name this 
 moment hovering near him. like a beneficent angel, to guard, to bless, 
 and to protect ; and when he emerges from this trial his raiment will 
 not he scorched nor have the smell of fire. 
 
 Gentlemen, mention has been made of the change of venue in this 
 ease. I have something, also, to say on that subject. The McKaig's 
 are a powerful, able, intellectual, and wealthy family. That family, 
 with its numerous connections, represent, I am told, more wealth than 
 any other live families in Alleghany county. The prisoner lias no 
 means of his own, and no kindred nearer than cousins who have. He 
 is poor, ami so is his father, and. except through distant kindred, he 
 has not a dollar to aid him ; yet he was so strong in the community 
 where the deed was done, and his defense sprang up so powerfully in 
 tln> hearts of all. that the influence of the McKaig's melted like a 
 mountain mist before the opening dawn. They dared not meet this 
 stripling youth at their own homes. They lied from their native 
 heaths. There these two young men were born ; there they were 
 raised ; then' one was slain ami the other awaited his trial. Upon the 
 side of one is numerous kindred, strong, accomplished, intellectual, 
 and full of life and power On the other is merely a good cause and a 
 good name; nothing more ; and yet what a scene 1 witnessed in Jan- 
 uary last in the county of Alleghany ! I never beheld the like before, 
 and hope never to again. 1 saw an American Stale seeking to convict 
 a man of crime, though afraid to put him upon his trial where the 
 alleged crime was committed. It was his right, there to he tried. My 
 associate counsel has read to you the constitution of Maryland, with 
 its hill of right-. It is there declared that one of the principal rights 
 Of the citizen is to he tried where the facts arise. When our tore- 
 fathers alleged the causes on which they fought King George seven 
 bloody years, they laid down as a marked grievance that he trans- 
 ported American citizens beyond the seas to be tried for offenses com- 
 mitted here. It was one of the prominent causes for which our fathers 
 bled, for which Smallwood's Maryland regiment charged on the battle- 
 fields of the Revolution. They fought for the right of trial where the 
 offense was committed ; the light to hi' tried by their peers and neigh- 
 bors; the right to be tried where witnesses are known. The counsel 
 
120 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 for tin' prosecution in this case seek to invalidate the testimony for the 
 defense. ll<>w dare they assail men in this community whom they 
 were unwilling to confront in Cumberland, where they are fully 
 known ? Gentlemen, they ask you to do what an Alleghany county jury 
 would nut do. They come away from thai county and ask yon to do a 
 deed of horror that no jury there would commit. How stands this case? 
 The State of Maryland says : " Alleghany COimty acquits the prisoner, 
 but we ask Fred 'rick county to convict him." He has already one 
 verdict of not guilty in his favor The State said Alleghany county 
 would not convict him; thereupon a change of venufe was taken, it 
 amounts to one verdict of not guilty. It is a confession on the part of 
 the prosecution that the county where he was born, where he was 
 raised, and where McKaig was born, where he was raised, and where 
 he fell, will not convict the defendant. 
 
 The attorney general spoke of the scenes of Colonel MeKaig's funeral 
 in Cumberland — that the stores were closed and mourners went about 
 the streets as if a great public calamity had befallen the city. If this 
 dramatic picture is true, if there was a deep sense of wrong and out- 
 rage in the breasts of the people against Black, why is he here for 
 trial? If stores were closed, if there was burning indignation, if there 
 was grief over the loss of an unoffending citizen, why are we not all In 
 Cumberland, rather than in Frederick? What did this prosecution flee 
 from ? Why did it tlee at all ? It fled hoping to hide from a jury the t rue 
 causes of this disaster. The public mind wastoofull of knowledge where 
 all the facts were known. The very air Was full ofthe wrongs inflictedby 
 the deceased upon the defendant and his family. It was too well known 
 by the entire people that there was one desolate home, one ruined 
 daughter, one frantic, father, one broken-hearted mother, and one out- 
 raged, insulted, and menaced brother and son in their midst. The wit- 
 nesses by whom we have proven McKaig's assault upon Black on that 
 fatal morning were, also too well known in that communiiy to suit the pur- 
 poses of the prosecution. This prosecution fled from another fact. A 
 jury in Cumberland could inspect the premises and examine the 
 ground where the collision took place. They could see the exact posi- 
 tion these parties bore toward each other ; tliey could determine where 
 McKaig came from, where he was, how he crossed the street, whether 
 there was a natural crossing there, and that Black did not seek him by 
 crossing the street, but that McKaig sought, him. All that conld be 
 seen by the jury there, and all that we loose by being brought here. 
 This course upon the part of the prosecution is virtually a nolle 
 prosequi. It amounts to a dismissal, so far as the county of Alleghany, 
 where, the trial properly belongs, is concerned. In my judgment, this 
 law that allows the State to drag a prisoner from his home for trial, to 
 transport him from the location of his conduct, is unconstitutional, is 
 not in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, nor (lie 
 constitution of Maryland. I believe whenever this question is raised, 
 and the law tested, it will be so decided. 
 
 But we come now to a close and patient examination of 
 the facts in detail of this sad and dreadful tragedy. I will 
 ask you to start with me on Saturday evening at Piedmont, 
 next preceding the fatal Monday morning. There, to my mind, 
 the curtain first rises bringing the prisoner into mental cogni- 
 zance of the deceased on the subject which has wrought such wide- 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'KAIG, JR. 121 
 
 spread ruin. Blackand his friend Henshaw were together. Henshaw, 
 not liking to intrude upon such a subject, ye1 ventured to ask whether 
 the father of the prisoner had yel been indicted. The answer was that 
 he had not. " I thought; he would have been," said Henshaw. " Why 
 so?" inquired the prisoner. "Because," said Henshaw, "of what 
 occurred on the fairground." " Well," says the prisoner, "what did 
 occur at the fairground? I have never been able to get the truth of 
 that. Father was not in a condition to remember, and mother will 
 not talk to me about it." Henshaw then informed him that the 
 deceased, Colonel W. W. McKaig, had publicly denounced the sister 
 of the prisoner as a strumpet on that occasion. These were the burn- 
 ing, awful words for a brother's ear to hear and heart to fuel. They 
 wrung from his pale lips one brief exclamation of agony ; he changed 
 color rapidly, and his breast heaved with strong excitement. He grew 
 silent, and with an ashen face invited no further conversation, and Hen- 
 shaw attempted no more. He disappears from our view for that night. 
 Hia tortures are not for us to fathom. In hours of darkness and deep- 
 est woe the heart has no confident this side of Omniscience. How 
 that wretched night was spent there is no proof to show, for it passed 
 in solitary despair. The next day dawns on him in Cumberland, now 
 intent on solving the painful mystery connected with his sister. We 
 find him immediately in conversation with Mr. Lowndes, a relative by 
 marriage, and a gentleman of the highest character, and a member of 
 the legal profession. Was lie not a most proper person of whom to 
 make inquiry, and with whom to advise:'' Mr. Lowndes not only con- 
 firms the statement of Henshaw in regard to the language used at the 
 fairground, but also informs the prisoner that Colonel McKaig is the 
 seducer of his sister. This is his first information as to the author of 
 his sister's shame and ruin. It is true that he suspected she was in 
 trouble — she was absent from home — but who was to tell this young 
 and hopeful spirit that the idol of his childhood was worse than dead 
 to him? His parents were silent on the dreadful theme in his pres- 
 ence. You heard the stricken and sobbing mother on the witness 
 stand. With tearful eyes and voice she told yon that the wrongs of 
 the sister were never mentioned to her brother ; that it was a forbidden 
 subject In the little circle of home upon the occasions of the prisoner's 
 brief visits from the mines in the mountains, it was kept, as faras 
 possible, a sealed hook to him ; nor is this any new phase in domestic 
 life, or in family histories. How often do we read of one portrait? with 
 its face to the wall and its name never mentioned. It is, perhaps, the 
 image of one who, though deeply loved, lias planted sorrow and shame 
 in the hearts of the household. The name i- lobe spoken no more 
 
 forever. We can speak with a saddened pleasure of the dead who 
 sice]) iii purity and honor. The memory of their virtues fills our 
 hearts with love and peace, and we train white roses to bloom OD their 
 graves. But for one on whom a blight has lallen, beside which the 
 touch of death i- merciful, we invoke a deeper silence than the tomb. 
 There is a gallery in Venice where the facesofthe Doges of ancient 
 days adorn the walls, but the eye suddenly rests upon one vacant, 
 panel — no portrait is there. lie who should have filled it is blotted 
 from the walls of memory. He fell in an hour of temptation from his 
 high estate, and an oblivion was extended to him by his own and suc- 
 ceeding ages. And so, when the poor, deluded girl in this case fell 
 
122 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 into the snares of the spoiler, and the knowledge of her wayward 
 steps came partially to her suffering parents, they strove to draw an 
 impenetrable curtain around the horrible event ; and mosl of all did 
 they wish to conceal the humiliating and harrowing truth from their 
 son, their only remaining child — their staff and hope in the gloomy 
 and desolate future. lli~ life was dawniugwith auspicious omens; 
 lie was rising rapidly in business; his prospects were brilliant, and 
 well mighl the father and mother be reluctant to mar them with a grief 
 that always rangesin noble natures close upon the confines of mad- 
 ness. They were journeying towards the sunset of life, and wished to 
 hear their burden alone. They sought to spate the prisoner in the 
 bright morning of his existence this hitter cup of which they drank in 
 
 solitude, and whose wretched dregs they are now draining in public. 
 It was the sublime struggle of deep parental affection ami fortitude 
 under the darkest calamity that ever blasts the peace of a home. Their 
 
 conduct was true to the Loftiest instincts that ever adorned the annals 
 of human nature. And so it, was that the prisoner, on Sunday, for 
 the first time, and from the lips of Mr. Lowndes, learned of the awful 
 abyss into which his sister had fallen; who had led her trusting foot- 
 step to the brink, and hurled her into its frightful and remorseless 
 depths. The letter in evidence was at the same time shown him, and 
 he was reliably assured that it Was written to his sister by the 
 deceased. It conclusively proves criminal intercourse. The writer 
 speaks with an easy and familiar sense of power over his victim. She 
 was plainly the subordinate of his wishes. All this penetrated the 
 heart and brain of the prisoner at a glance. The facts were accumu- 
 lating upon him with startling rapidity. The night before he had 
 learned of the defilement of his sister's name on the public fair 
 grounds; on this day he was informed that the very man who had 
 hawked her name as a harlot in the midst of gaping and wondering 
 multitudes was himself the author of the ruin and dishonor which had 
 befallen her. and which he thus proclaimed. The written proof was 
 placed in his hands, lie went next with Mr. Lowndes to his mother. 
 If he hoped for comfort there, for once, at least, he did not lind it ; 
 rather he found the revolting climax of his misery, shame, and horror. 
 It was disclosed to him that a child, four mouths old, was then in his 
 sister's arms, at her distant place of retreat, as the result of the treach- 
 erous embraces of the deceased. Oh ! gentlemen, no tongue can paint 
 the force of this last blow upon a heart already bruised, swollen, and 
 bleeding. The pride of the; prisoner's young life — his pride in an hon- 
 ored and unsullied name, in the ties of home and kindred, in the 
 friends he had won, in the career opening before him, was over- 
 thrown and trampled in the dust by the haughty and insolent tread of 
 his sister's seducer. At the prisoner's time of life, and with such a 
 nature and reputation as his, how sensitive is the human mind to dis- 
 honor ! And the fame ami good name of mother and sister are then 
 more precious than all this world contains and than life itself. In 
 after years, wife and children may divide the bounties of love, but to 
 the pure and upright son and brother who has not yel left the hearth- 
 stone of his childhood, the mother that bore him, and the sister who 
 has grown up by his side, are the tender and cherished objects of all 
 his earthly devotion. It was so with Crawford Black. lie felt in a 
 moment all the agony of a whole life suddenly wrecked and covered 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 123 
 
 with disaster. Everything crumbled to pieces in an instant. Hope 
 died, and despair took its place in his breast; his bright dreams of the 
 future disappeared, and a wall of darkness rose up around him. The 
 sky, so clear before, grew black over his bead ; he felt, too, that all the 
 world knew the story which was consuming his heart with bitterness 
 and grief. It had been proclaimed by him who best knew its fearful 
 truth. The linger of scorn is a more dreadful instrument of torture, 
 than the cruel ingenuity of man ever devised, and the prisoner now 
 knew, for the first time, that it was upon him ; that he was pointed at 
 as one on whom the brand of a sister's degradation had been placed 
 by the successful arts of triumphant villainy. In this mood of mind 
 be witnessed the close of that eventful Sabbath day. To others it had 
 been a day of rest ; not so to him. To others it had been a day of 
 grace and of blessings; to him it was full of curses and of evil ; the 
 darkest day in all the calendar of time. And when night came with 
 its healing influences for the weary and sore-hearted, it brought no 
 oblivions antidotes to pain for this unfortunate prisoner. Wbo shall 
 tell of the scorpion stings and lashes of that miserable and sleepless 
 night? You have caught glimpses here and there from the mother's 
 testimony of the dismal hours as they slowly passed away. They were 
 laden with the baleful ingredients which kindle a frenzy in the soul 
 and a madness in the brain. Gentlemnn, have you ever .passed 
 through the deep floods of sorrow ? Have you ever walked the door 
 through the silent watches of the night, praying for the day to dawn, 
 and feeling that the wings of time were loaded with lfad? Have grief 
 and woe ever affrighted sleep from your eyelids and rest from your 
 hearts ? But yours, perhaps, has been the sorrow which comes of death 
 and ordinary bereavement. Here was the blister of shame burning 
 like a hot iron on the prisoner's brow, and a sense of disgrace like a 
 corroding, cankering poison inflaming Ins brain with a fever which no 
 medicinal drug can allay or cool. The art of the healer stops at the 
 threshhold of the diseased mind, and sinks down baffled and helpless 
 in the presence of the delirium of woe. Toward day, when all the 
 world was dark and lost to him, when the precious providences of God 
 themselves seemed blotted out like stars in the midst of clouds and 
 storm, he turned his weary steps toward that love which never falters 
 or grows dim, which triumphs over dishonor and death, and shines 
 brightest amidst the waitings of broken hearts and the ghastly ruins of 
 domestic peace and joy. lie threw himself by his mother's side to 
 comfort and be comforted in their mutual misery* He laid his bright 
 and manly head when 1 , he had slept the placid sleep of infancy. There, 
 sobbing and oppressed, he sought a shelter. The pitiless and merciless 
 storm was pelting him, and " other refuge had he none." Mother and 
 son wept together over the erring and the lost. There is often a 
 mercy in tears, but not in such as are shed over a loved one ruined in 
 SOU] and body. Then the unsealed fountains are scalding and bitter as 
 the waters of .Marah. While the parent and child thus lament to- 
 gether we will turn from this scene of holy pathos and tenderness and 
 consider an important question which here arises in the order of my 
 argument. 
 
 You have been asked, with earnest emphasis, by the counsel for the 
 prosecution why the prisoner was so crushed and appalled with grief 
 and frenzy against the deceased. You are reminded that we were not 
 
12-i TRIAL OF IIAKUY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 allowed by the Court to prove the direct fact of the sister's seduction 
 by McKaig. You will remember our urgent offer to do so, and the 
 determined 0] position to such proof on the part <>f the learned gentle- 
 man for the Slate, The Court held in your hearing that the informa- 
 tion which the prisoner received on that subject was competent evi- 
 dence, 'nit that the fact itself of the seduction was not an issue before 
 you. "Was he informed upon competent authority? Had be a right, as 
 a reasonable and prudent, man. to believe that Colonel McKaig bad 
 seduced Myra Black, and that she bad borne a child as the result of 
 their sinful intercourse? Did the facts, as communicated to him,, jus- 
 tify such a belief, and did he entertain it with the dee]) convictions of 
 an honest sincerity? If so, then bis sister's ruin by the deceased 
 became a proven, fixed, and absolute reality in bis mind, as much so 
 as if bis eyes bad beheld or bis ears beard the secret deeds of shame 
 over which the deep spell of silence reigns forever. If he believed, 
 then his mind was wrought upon by the power of a sincere faith. His 
 emotions and bis conduct were under its omnipotent influence ; and in 
 this respect be simply conformed to the great laws which have gov- 
 erned all the races and tribes of mankind since the birthday of human 
 history. You and I believe in the great and merciful Father in heaven, 
 the creator of the boundless universe, yet we have not seen him, nor 
 bath any man and lived. We believe that the blessed Saviour.walked the 
 bills and plains of Judea, and died to redeem the souls of men, but 
 our eyes did not behold the majesty of his face, nor ourears drink in the 
 deep and melancholy music of his voice. We believe because we have 
 faith in the sources of our information. We have been told, thai is 
 all. The testimony of the ages is ours. Nature throughout her illimiti- 
 ble realms proclaims a God, and the Bible, the Book of books reveals 
 him ; while the existence and the divine mission of the Messiah are 
 established by witnesses whose evidence we read and accept as true. 
 Upon these sources of faith Christain men and women found their 
 hopes of immortal happiness. They make Heaven an immediate re- 
 ality, and uphold the martyr as be smiles joyfully amidst the blazing 
 faggots at the stake. Nor is the power of human belief over the ac- 
 tions of men lessened because it may be founded in error. The un- 
 tamed Indian has bis faith as we have ours. He has not seen the Man- 
 ito, but his trust in the happy hunting grounds, the sparkling rivers, 
 and the fadeless verdure of an eternal world is as unfaltering as the. 
 bravest disciples that ever died for the cause of the Cross. He sings 
 his death song under slow tortures, recounts his earthly deeds of merit 
 and anticipates his blissful rewards hereafter with all the calmness 
 and confidence of a Christian philosopher. The eastern Mussulman 
 worships with sincere devotion at the shrine of Mahomet, and giving 
 full credit to the testimony of bis fathers, follows the Crescent and re- 
 joices in the prospect of a sensual paradise at the end of life. The 
 Chinaman, the countryman of Confucius, has a faith in bis system 
 equally firm and unrelenting. The history of the whole human race 
 forces us to exclaim, how little is known and bow much is believed ! 
 The world of faith is wide, the world of knowledge is narrow. What 
 we think we know best depends mainly upon the credibility of those 
 who have narrated to us the facts. How few of you have crossed the 
 mountains and beheld the valley of the Mississippi ! Yet you know 
 that there it lies, stretching from the regions of perpetual snow to the 
 
FOE KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'IvAIG, JR. 125 
 
 land of unending summer, an empire of present and future wealth 
 and populations. What one of this jury has ever beheld the great 
 father of waters as he rolls onward to the Gulf of Mexico? Yet you 
 all know that the ceaseless and resistless current is forever there. You 
 have listened to the tales of travelers ; you have read their letters and 
 their hooks, and you are convinced as fully as you could be through 
 the medium of your own senses. I only ask for the prisoner that these 
 universal rules of faith he extended to him in this dark hour of his 
 peril. I do not ask you to shield him if his belief was irrational and 
 unnatural — if he accepted information from unworthy and unreliable 
 persons. Put yourselves in his place ; could he doubt the truth and can- 
 dor of his faithful and tried friend, Henshavv? Could he distrust his 
 kinsman and advisor Lowndes? But above all, were not the words 
 of his idolized mother sacred and holy with him ? No better, surer 
 foundations of human belief ever challenged the consent of the hu- 
 man mind. Crawford Black as much knew, by the time the sun set on 
 Sunday evening, that McKaig had destroyed his sister as it is given to 
 mortals to know the affairs of this life. No doubt or misgiving for a mo- 
 ment mitigated his anguish. The awful fact stared him in the face with 
 painful and maddening intensity. It confronted him incessantly. It 
 would not down at his bidding. It taunted and mocked him in his sleep- 
 less desolation and despair. It tempted his imagination with the appal- 
 ling details of the victims' 1 surrender and debasement, and the destroyers 
 triumph and insolence. And if he arose and acted upon this fact and slew 
 the man who had put out the light and joy of an innocent and unoffend- 
 ing household would his conduct have been without precedent, novel and 
 strange in the history of mankind? There is a very old case and of very 
 high authority on this point. It is the earliest on record. The daughter 
 of Jacob was seduced by a prince of one of the neighboring tribes. Her 
 brothers, Simeon and Levi were in the fields at their usual avocations, 
 when they were told by others of what had befallen their sister. They 
 believed the story of their disgrace, and with their swords, in due 
 time, they acted upon it to the total destruction, not merely of the se- 
 ducer, but of the whole tribe who supported him in his conduct. And 
 when their father, who was old and apprehensive of trouble growing 
 out of their terrible vengeance, deplored their fierce and sanguinary 
 measures, they gave that memorable answer which has sprung to the 
 lips of manly brothers in every age and clime from that hour to this, 
 "Shall he deal with our sister as a harlot?" Human nature is the 
 same to-day as it was then, and Crawford Black simply exclaimed with 
 Simeon and Levi of old. You would cry out in the same indignant 
 words under the same circumstances. You are now asked to punish this 
 young brother in Maryland. Were the brothers in Israel punished? 
 God ruled immediately and directly in the house of Jacob. Are you 
 wiser and more just than your Maker? Will you sit in judgment upon 
 the Almighty and condemn his ways ? Should you not rather find out 
 His rulings in a case so similar to the one you aretrying^and then im- 
 plicitly and humbly adopt them for your guidance? The patriarch 
 and his family, including the two defenders of their sisters' honor, 
 Were led by Jehovah out from among their enemies, up into Bethel, 
 a place of safety. " And they journeyed ; and the terror of God wus 
 upon the cities that were round about them, and they did not pursue 
 after the BOns of Jacob." They were thus protected, not prosecuted. 
 
126 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 I may cite other cases hereafter, but with the approval of God upon 
 tli" conduct of the prisoner, I know thai I might safely leave this 
 branch of his defense where it now rests. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, the light of Monday morning at last 
 broke over the hills of Cumberland and brought thai dreadful 
 night to a close. The sun of the morning conies with life in its 
 beams to all. Tt illuminates the hovel ami the palace; the home 
 of the heart-broken and the. circles of gayety and pleasure. In all 
 its kindly visitations of human abodes, however, on that morning 
 it lit up no lonelier, sadder, drearier hearthstone than that around 
 which once shown the pure and innocent face of the beloved 
 daughter and sister, to be seen there with the angel light of virtue 
 no more forever. The prisoner went forth from that blighted 
 home, and the hour of retributive justice drew nigh; not by his 
 artihee or device, but by the spirit of the avenging Nemesis who 
 sooner or later overtakes the violators of domestic sanctity. His 
 provocation was already sufficient in the estimation of all the 
 ages of the past to justify the death of McKaig. While he stands, 
 however, on the brow of the hill, and before he descends, weary 
 and heavy laden into the town, let us examine still more closely 
 into the relations which the deceased and the accused bore to each 
 other. What were the purposes and feelings which McKaig had 
 deliberately and repeatedly evinced toward Black? One of the 
 oldest and basest principles of human nature was at work in the 
 heart of the deceased. lie had wronged the prisoner beyond the 
 reach of forgiveness, and he therefore hated him. The scandal, 
 too, of his conduct had become public and he thought to brow- 
 beat all complaining voices into sileuce. His own domestic peace 
 was doubtless in peril, and it was necessary to overawe the injured 
 family into abject submission. He had met the insane and fran- 
 tic father, and received an assault vaguely mentioned here in the 
 evidence. No danger or menace, however, threatened him any 
 longer in that quarter. The forbearance of the distracted father 
 was secured by indictment and heavy bonds. There was but one 
 other who held the honor of the name and the household in his 
 keeping. It was the brave, generous, dauntless being here before 
 you, and it was for him that McKaig wore his daily belt of loaded 
 fire-arms. Conscience told the deceased that he had forfeited his 
 life to the prisoner. He would have slain the seducer of his own 
 sister like a dog in the highways, and the guilt in his breast bade 
 him beware of the brother of his victim. Perhaps, friendly ton- 
 gues had also warned him of his danger if the accused ever made 
 a full discovery. Thus steeped in crime I shall demonstrate from 
 the evidence that he sought a collision with Black under circum- 
 stances of his own choosing, and with the advantages all in favor 
 of himself. He could not retrace his steps and undo the wrongs 
 he had inflicted. He therefore prepared to go forward and wade 
 in blood to a place of safety; a place of security, as he supposed, 
 against the consequences of his own evil deeds. He believed the 
 issue would come, and he became restless and agressive in order 
 to have it no longer pending. Why else did he rudely jostle the 
 prisoner in Ferguson's saloon? Between friends such an act 
 might pass without siguiiicauce; but when men are deadly foes; 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'KAIG, JR. 127 
 
 when their hostility is open and proclaimed; when unpardonable 
 
 wrongs have been given and received; when their blood is full of 
 wrath; when the insulter is armed with weapons of death, then 
 the intentional touch in passing is a threat and a challenge of the 
 deepest and most sinister import. What Lawrence Wilson saw 
 has that meaning and none other. It was McKaig's palpable pur- 
 pose to provoke Black into a fight at a time and place of his own 
 selection, and with his preparations doubtless fully made. Wil- 
 son is not contradicted. He located the place and fixed the time 
 and mentioned the presence of others on the occasion. The bar- 
 keeper was especially identified. If this evidence was untrue; 
 if the deceased and the prisoner were not thereat the time named; 
 if the circumstancs of insolence and assault did not take place as 
 described, the means were amply furnished by the witness himself 
 for his detection and contradiction. If it was a fabrication it 
 would have been demolished longerewow. Thereis power and wealth 
 and the thirst for revenge in this prosecution, and no great fact 
 like this would be left standing if it could have been overthrown. 
 It occurred but two weeks before the fall of the deceased, and 
 throws a full flood of light upon his movements and motives at 
 the final and deadly encounter. Its importance in this case can 
 not be magnified. It is uncontradicted, and, therefore, conceded 
 that when these two young men are first brought to your view to- 
 gether the deceased was the hostile aggressor seeking to degrade 
 or slay the brother as he had worse than slain the sister. How 
 much longer was Crawford Black to endure? How much more of 
 the proud man's contumely was he to bear? But the hour had 
 not yet come; he knew not yet the full story of infamy which 
 afterward filled his soul with horror. 
 
 But there is yet stronger and more striking evidence of Mc- 
 Kaig's deadly purposes toward the accused. John Long, born 
 and reared in Cumberland, well known by all, detailed a scene 
 upon '.he witness stand that will never be forgotten by those who 
 heard it. It is said that the deceased was a brave man. It may 
 be so. I have no doubt he acted with courage in battle. Many 
 have done so, surrounded by admiring comrades, inspired by hopes 
 of distinction, who have faltered in the face of a personal conflict; 
 especially so when not upheld by the. consciousness of right. He 
 who hath bis quarrel just has a contempt for danger which the 
 heart oppressed with guilt never knows. A troubled conscience 
 makes many strange and devious steps. Many actions thaWire 
 mysterious to l he world would be thus explained if the secrets of 
 all hearts could lie laid bare. When John Long saw McKaig 
 watching the prisoner at that street corner with iiis hand on his 
 pistol, he was but acting in obedience to the hard necessities of 
 bis criminal position. The consequences of his evil career were 
 developed in his own character. His own nature was depraved 
 and perverted until we see him by the light of this evidence, 
 lying in wait meditating what measure of destruction he should 
 next adopt against this unoffending family, it gives me no pleas- 
 ure to speak these words. The truth is painful to me when it 
 reproaches the dead, but the claims of the living here in this 
 court-roum cannot be denied. What the immediate intentions 
 
12S 
 
 TRIAL Ol' HARRY CRAWFORD I3LACK. 
 
 of the deceased were while he was waylaying the prisoner, you 
 and I may not fully determine. He may not have entirely com* 
 prehended them himself, To my mind he appears on that occa- 
 sion irresolute, undecided, wavering, and halting between the 
 conflicting purposes of his own disturbed and agitated breast; at 
 one moment strongly impelled to confront and assault the pris- 
 oner, and the next hesitating and doubting, until the opportunity 
 for decisive action went hy. But an effort has been made to dis- 
 credit Long. In what way? He is a native of Cumberland, and 
 there grew up to manhood, and though his face wears a darker 
 color than yours or mine, yet no man dares to savin your pres- 
 ence that he lias not borne as good a character for truth and verac- 
 ity as the loftiest and proudest in that community. Although 
 hundreds of citizens of Alleghany county have attended this pro- 
 tracted trial, and hundreds more could have been obtained in a 
 few hours, yet no impeachment of the reputation of this well- 
 known and vitally important witness was attempted in the re- 
 motest manner. This is equivalent to the affirmative support of 
 his credibility by the entire community in which he lives. But at 
 the last moment two zealous colaborers in this prosecution rushed 
 into court and lifted up their hands and voices to contradict John 
 Long — Dr Dougherty and Smith Johnson! Both admit that they 
 are partisans in feeling against this unfortunateyoung man, who has 
 never harmed them by word or deed. They tell you that two 
 nights ago, in the dim still hours between midnight and day, when 
 the evil and prowling spirits of the known and the unknown 
 world usually commit their nocturnal freaks against the peace of 
 mankind, they inspected and surveyed the localities described by 
 Long, decided there in the dark that he could not have seen Mc- 
 Kaig where he swore he did see him; took the cars in haste for 
 tliiscityand arrived just in time to detail their astounding di>- 
 covery before the testimony in the case was finally closed. Long 
 was examined more than a week ago. There is a line of telegraph 
 and a railroad from here to Cumberland, and there is a venomous 
 energy and power in this prosecution unparalleled in my expe- 
 perience. If Long was false and the locality itself as given by 
 him would expose his perjury, would his contradiction have been 
 left to the finishing details of the case and to the ridiculous testi- 
 mony of Dougherty and Johnson? No! Scores of men would 
 have been promptly produced, having made careful daylight ex- 
 aminations of the points in dispute and ready to tell you that this 
 great, gigantic fact established by Long was impossible from phy- 
 sical causes. Gross and Ferguson, the proprietors of the saloon, 
 and familiar with the corner where McKaig was seen, with the 
 spot where Long st^od and with the positions of the lamps that 
 have been mentioned, would have been the most competent and 
 proper witnesses on this point. Why were they not called instead 
 of these hasty, prejudiced, midnight surveyors? John Long 
 might and would have been contradicted if his statement had 
 been untrue, but he stands here now uncontradicted and unim- 
 peached. Let the doctor, therefore, assuage his feelings in the 
 use of his scalpel and pills upon his patients, and let him and 
 Johnson both hereafter abandon the business of willing and anxi- 
 
FOR KILLING COLOXEL W. \V. m'kAIG, JR. 129 
 
 nus witnesses against an innocent man on trial for his life. If 
 they are satisfied with their appearance in this sad drama, T will 
 now drop the curtain, while the audience hoots and hisses them 
 out of sight and out of mind 
 
 But again; Long was faithful to his early playmate and friend. 
 On the distressful Sunday, when the fearful truth was rapidly 
 breaking upon the distracted mind of the prisoner, John Long met 
 him, as he told you, on the bridge in Cumberland for the first 
 time since he had witnessed McKaig's secret menaces a few days 
 before against his life. Tlis inquiry of him was most natural — 
 "When did you see Colonel McKaig last?" Crawford Black's 
 heart was bitter and sore at that moment. The sound of that 
 name maddened him. His reply to the faithful boy that loved, 
 him was stern and angry: "What is that to you?" Grief and 
 humiliation have their right to solitude and exclusion, and tho 
 prisoner repelled what he took to be an attempt to invade his con- 
 fidence and look upon the bleeding wounds of his miserable heart. 
 Long corrected his mistake, and narrated to him the recent strange 
 and threatening behavior of McKaig. He put him in possession 
 of every detail. The prisoner listened, and left in silence. Tie 
 now knew not only that his sister had fallen, but that his own life 
 was hunted. Dishonor had already come, and death was pending. 
 His sister led to her ruin, and then advertised to the public by her 
 destroyer as a common bawd, his aged father reviled, and de- 
 nounced and prosecuted as a felon for his feeble and vain attempt 
 at redress, and now thoroughly convinced that he himself was to 
 be watched, threatened, glared at, bullied, waylaid, and eventu- 
 ally subjected to deadly assault! What more of outrage and 
 provocation can man submit to unless, like a hound, he re- 
 ceives the kick and the lash of his master? Bear in mind that 
 meeting on the bridge and Long's statement. Do not for a mo- 
 ment forget it. Invoke it into your presence when you retire, 
 lor with such a notice as he then received the prisoner had the 
 right to kill the deceased whenever he approached him with the 
 slighest evidences of hostility in his movements. No retreat, 
 no delay was after this required of him. Henceforth if lie slew 
 McKaig he had a double defense; each one assure and firm as 
 the everlasting hills. His sisters's cause and his own united in 
 their appearand the spirit of his noble manhood responded ; a 
 volcano justly raged within his breast, and Providence dictated 
 the moment of its eruption and the result which followed. The 
 burden of the prisoner was more than he could bear, and he moved 
 and acted as an instrument in the hands of a just God. You 
 are to judge of his conduct as if you had been in his situation. 
 That is your duty to-day. I state it in the hearing of the Court, 
 and in the presence of my profsessional hretliern. You are. 
 not to estimate his guilt or innocence by the appearance of tho 
 
 circumstances to a c 1, indifferent, and disinterested observer. 
 
 Y"ou are to put yourselves in his place, assume ins relations to others, 
 imbibe his affections, and survey everything from his point of 
 view; stand with hi tu on the brow of the hill, near the old home- 
 stead, where 1 left him some t ime ago; recall to your minds all Miat 
 lie then knew of McKaig's conduct in the past, and of his purposes 
 
130 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 a gain si himself in the future, and answer in your hearts whether 
 the wealth and honors of the whole earth would have tempted 
 you to embrace the prospect that lay before him as your own. 
 You cannot desire to take this young life, to cut the briefly spun 
 
 thread of liis exist enee; you cannot wish to rear a gibbet against 
 your sky with that elegant and accomplished form upon it. and 
 that handsome and intelligent face shrouded for the grave. Such 
 a doom cannot he a welcome thought to you. I dent if y yourselves, 
 then, with him as the waves of sorrow and of peril rolled over his 
 head, and yon will reach forth your hands, your all powerful 
 hands, to Mess and to save him. 
 
 And, gentlemen, now as Harry Crawford Black descends into 
 the town, the other party to this tragedy of blood, of broken hearts 
 and ruined lives, came forth from his home at the other extrem- 
 ity of the place. It is claimed by the a Me attorney general that he 
 was slain contrary to the peace of the State of Man land, [f so, then 
 he must have been at peace himself with her citizens, and in obedi- 
 ence to her laws. The picture of his peaceful departure from home 
 has been vividly drawn. As a pure work of fancy, it has high 
 merits. The reality, however, was speedily shown when he mel 
 the prisoner. When he arose that morning he made a toilet of 
 death, and clothed himself with the implements of destruction. 
 Three loaded revolvers, as the proof establishes, constituted his 
 s,| l'ply; one in the prepared pistol pocket on his hip, and two in 
 their leather holsters belted around his waist, lie sallied forth 
 more heavily armed than any man who had walked the streets of 
 Cumberland since the close of the sanguinary strife between the 
 north and the south. Instead of being afollowerof peace, he was a 
 moving machine of war. Instead of being a law-abiding citizen, his 
 preparations were those of the desperate and deadly outlaw. And 
 as he thus prepared himself I ask you to look at him in the light 
 of his previous conduct toward the prisoner; in the light of his 
 conduct as described by Long at the corner of the street, and 
 of his menacing insult at Ferguson's saloon. You cannot mis- 
 take his fatal meaning. lie was bent on bloody mischief 
 131ack had uttered no threats against him ; not one has been 
 proven or attempted to be proven ; he did not arm, therefore, for 
 self-defense. He had not been apprised of any danger from the 
 prisoner, except by the suggestions of his own guilty conscience. 
 They told him, perhaps, of the necessity of prompt, determined, 
 and aggressive action. We can only judge, however, by his 
 acts, and they speak in clear and certain tones. When you 
 once saw armies in these now smiling and happy valleys equip 
 themselves with the cannon, the rille, and the bayonet, and 
 move forward toward the enemy, you knew that the sorrowful 
 heaps of the slain and the wounded would soon cumber the ground 
 and appeal piteously to heaven. So, too, when you behold a citi- 
 zen in time of peace invade your streets with the most extensive 
 a>nd extraordinary preparations for taking human life, you at once 
 fear and expect scenes of violence and calamity. 
 
 Am I answered that Black, too, was armed? Who ever had so 
 much reason to be? May not a threatened life defend itself? He 
 had one pistol ; was not one-third as powerful in conthct as his 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'ZAIG, JR. 131 
 
 enemy; lie had five balls ready for action. Tt is admitted by the 
 prosecution that MoKaighad twelve, and the testimony shows con- 
 clusively that he had eighteen. I have thus traced these parties, 
 described their relations to each other, and their disposition in re- 
 gard to a collision until I have reached the time and place when 
 and where they met. And here I again deplore your absence from 
 the spot where a personal inspection would give you a more accu- 
 rate knowledge of the transaction than any description at this dis- 
 tance. But concern ingt he leadingfactstherecan lie no doubt. Black 
 was on the south side of the street going west; McKaig was on the 
 north side of the street going east ; thus they were on the same 
 street, but meeting with its whole width between them. Through 
 Cumberland runs Will's creek, and over it, on this street, is an 
 elevated bridge. The evidence first disclosed the deceased as he 
 was crossing that bridge with the prisoner in full view diagonally 
 to his right on the other side of the street. There they first be- 
 held each other that morning. Every step now assumes the most 
 terrible importance, and is charged with the responsibility of life, and 
 death. Who sought the banquet of blood? Who turned from his own 
 pat hway to interfere with the course of the other? Not an object 
 was between them to obscure the view. The instant McKaig saw 
 Black he left his own sidewalk immediately at the east end of the 
 bridge, where there was no crossing for pedestrians as at the inter- 
 sections of streets, diverged obliquely to his right on a line that 
 would bring him to the sidewalk on which the prisoner stood about 
 thirty feet in front of him. lie walked rapidly in that direction. 
 "Why did he thus leave the even tenor of his way, and bear sud- 
 denly down on Black? Why did he not pass on and let the pris- 
 oner do the same? Was that Providence, whose moral laws he 
 had mocked and spurned, hovering over the scene, and guiding 
 him to his swift and awful doom? Did the fair and open oppor- 
 tunity tempt him to his own destruction in seeking the destruc- 
 tion of another? lie could have let the prisoner alone; but a be- 
 lief in the efficiency of his arsenal, and a blind and fatal infatuation 
 carried him with defiant confidence into a presence most danger- 
 ous to him on that morning — the presence of one who had just 
 emerged from a night of sleepless phrenzy over the injuries, the 
 incurable and burning injuries, he had received from the man who 
 now sought and approached him. 
 
 Is it pretended tnat thissuddpn movement by McKaig had no 
 hostile meaning? Consider all that had passed between them 
 before; consider all the provocations, the insults and the threats, 
 for actions often utter louder and deadlier threats than words. 
 Consider al! the past, and consider the warlike preparation of the 
 deceased, and then determine whether he crossed that street with- 
 out a purpose. But you are not left to the uncertain field of con- 
 jecture. The evidence makes his motives as plain as the light of 
 Idle sun. The sinister movements of his hands make a perfect 
 revelation of his designs. The cane was in his right hand as he, 
 passed over the bridge. Conner, a witness for the State, saw it as 
 well as Davis, a witness for the defense. Conner turned away 
 and saw no more; Davis saw it shifted from the right to the left 
 hand by the deceased as he approached the prisoner, lie saw that 
 
132 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 right Land, thus relieved of the cane, t. r <> back to the hip p 
 and come in contact wit h a shining objecl ; the polished handle to 
 one of his pistols. l>o I mistate the testimony V Would I dare do 
 so even if restrained by no higher motive than the success of my 
 cause? Nothing is more dangerous than to attempt a fraud upon 
 a jury. You have heard every word here uttered, and you quickly 
 resent the effort of consul to mislead you. No attempt was made 
 to contradict Davis; this you know. Others profess to have seen 
 the deceased while crossing the street who were called by the 
 prosecution. Why was not one of them asked in regard to the 
 change of the cane? Because it was known to he true. There 
 was no hope of contradicting this crushing fact. And the motion 
 of the hand for the pistol is equally proven. Is there anything 
 unreasonable in all this? He had betrayed active hostility on 
 former occasions. Why not now? He was fixed for the affray; he 
 never could he readier ; he did not know the condition of the 
 prisoner's mind; he did not know that in the prisoner's breast 
 had been boiling a fierce cauldron for the last thirty-six intoller- 
 able hours; he did not know that he was himself at that moment 
 the one supremely horrible thought in Black's feverish brain. He 
 thought to confront him unawares, perhaps to brow beat, degrade, 
 and trample him under foot; perhaps to slay him where he stood. 
 Colonel McKaig was a full man in years, large, commanding, and 
 powerful in person. Crawford Black is slight, almost a hoy in size 
 as in age. There w r as the contemptuous confidence of Goliath on 
 the one hand, and the just cause and unquailiug heart of David 
 on the other. 
 
 Gentlemen, I need not read from books to inform you what the 
 prisoner's rights were when he saw his mortal foe approach him 
 preparing with hasty strides to become his instant executioner. 
 The law of self-defense is written in the heart of man more plainly 
 and powerfully than in the pages of libraries. We here place our 
 feet on its solid and eternal foundations. We build upon it a 
 bouse of refuge for the prisoner, which will withstand the fury of 
 the storm and the malice of his enemies. Ho was not called upon 
 to retreat. I spurn the doctrine of being driven to the wall or the 
 ditch, that odious doctrine of degradation, danger and death to 
 the assaulted party. Every inch of ground on which he stood was 
 his own. Who had the right to command him to yield it? The 
 free air around him was his wall, and he who sought to drive him 
 further embraced the peril of his own lawlessness. Nor was the 
 prisoner required to wait for the development of McKaig's designs 
 upon him; lie already had full notice. No shot or blow was neces- 
 sary to make them clearer, lie had the right to presume the 
 bloody intentions of McKaig from his previous as well as his pres- 
 ent movements, and to act with promptitude. This is the law of 
 the courts, and is sustained by the authority of reason. In it lies 
 all the safety bestowed by the great principles of self-defense. The 
 whole panorama of the past flashed upon the mind of the prisoner 
 at a glance, and called upon him to defend life, honor, sister, and 
 home without the delay of an instant. There was the destroyer, 
 the insulter, and now the threatening assailant. 
 
 After carefully examining and comparing the testimony I think 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. VV. M'KAIG, JR. 133 
 
 any candid mini will agree that as the deceased stepped upon the 
 side-walk in front of the prisoner, they simultaneously drewtheit 
 
 pistols. There are six witnesses who prove that McKaig had 
 drawn when J51aek fired and two of them were brought here, 
 though not sworn, by the prosecution. The same number or 
 more saw the pistol fall from his hand as the prisoner's first shot 
 took effect. The cane fell from the other hand at the same time. 
 As the evidence shows, the ball had taken effect in the side and 
 had ranged near the spine, prod ucinga shock to the nervous and 
 muscular systems. The prisoner had been able to lire quicker 
 than his antagonist from the fact that his pistol, as you have seen 
 here, is self-cocking. 
 
 It is contended, however, that the deceased had not drawn, be- 
 cause Dr. Smith and some others did not see the weapon in his 
 hand, nor see it fall to the ground. This is no proof at all; it is 
 of a character which is always scouted from the presence of pos- 
 itive, affirmative evidence. What one man did not see is often 
 seen by many others. Instances of this rule are very familiar in 
 all the' books. In this case, however, those witnesses who did not 
 see the pistol in AjcKaig's hand, were also blind to his cane. Yet 
 no one disputes that he had the cane. That is conceded by all. 
 They say they did not see. the pistol drop at the curb-stone when 
 the first shot was fired; but they admit also that they did not see 
 the cane fall, and yet it is not denied by the prosecution that the 
 cane fell there. If this negative testimony disproves the pistol, it 
 likewise disproves the existence of the cane, although the cane 
 and its fail from the hand of the deceased, the moment he receiv- 
 ed the prisoner's lire, are accepted tacts in this case. But in this 
 connection, why was Dr. Ilumroelshine not called by the prosecu- 
 tion ? A strange and most lamentable feature in a criminal trial 
 is here deu loped; it oppresses me with sorrow and apprehension. 
 The suppression of evidence more extensive, systematic, and de- 
 rate than I have ever known, here commences. Dr. Hummel- 
 shine's name is on the back of the indictment as the witness on 
 whose testimony, ano on whose testimony alone, before the grand 
 jury, it was found. lie has been here in obedience to the process 
 of the State from the opening day of this court to the present 
 hour. Yet the prosecution did not place him on the stand. 
 The learned prosecutors closed their case without submitting 
 to yon the evidence on which the indictment was procured. Such 
 an unnatural proceeding of course fixed our attention on this 
 Witness. We placed him on the witness stand before you, 
 and then it was discovered why he had been kept back. lie 
 saw the pistol l'aH from the hand of McKaig at the curb- 
 stone, into the gutter, when Black first fired; thus proving 
 conclusively that it was already drawn for action. These are 
 the words of the original witness for the Mate. Was it not 
 the clear, plain duty of the prosecutors to call him? Do they 
 wish to obtain a verdict against this young man by hiding me 
 truth from you V Do they wish to shed his blood by fraud V Would 
 they encompass his destruction by low artifice'? What explana- 
 tion is possible here? Have they not denied him the evidence in 
 their own hands which demonstrates bis innocence? What is the 
 
13-1 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 object of a trial like this? [s it the mere display of skill on the part 
 of counsel in obtaining a verdict from you without scruple as to 
 the means? The stake here played for isa human life; does the 
 
 State of Maryland demand its sacrifice with only a partial knowl- 
 edge on your part of the circumstances that have put it in jeop- 
 ardy? I appeal to you; you represent this noble commonwealth 
 to-day; you have been mocked and trifled with; you wanted the 
 whole truth and yon had not received it when the prosecution 
 ! closed and rested. They kept hack a vital part and hoped that 
 we would never find it. Have you a favorable regard for such 
 a prosecution? Does it commend itself to you? Those who ask 
 and demand a verdict against the life of a fellow-mortal should 
 do so with clean hands and pure hearts. I aim to say nothing 
 unkind of counsel, b ut not for all the land that lies betwe en the 
 sw ellin g w aves Qf the two oceans would 1 strive for the convic- 
 tion of a human Vicing, concealing at the same time within my 
 own mind a fact which would justly acquit him if made known 
 to the jury. Where, also, was young Clark, the boy brought here 
 with so much pains by those who inspire the private branch of 
 the prosecution? You did not hear him testify until we put him, 
 another State's witness, on the stand, lie saw McKaig's second 
 pistol drop from the relaxed muscles of his hand when he fell. 
 Out of the mouths of its own chosen supporters this piosecutioo 
 stands condemned, and Crawford Black stands justified. But 
 more than all this; y&u were not allowed by the State to know 
 that the deceased was armed at all, that he tiad a single weapon 
 upon him. The learned counsel for the State ceased ttieir exam- 
 ination without suffering a word or a hint of the truth on that 
 point to reach your ears. Yet they were possessed of all knowl- 
 edge in relation to it. They not only knew the evidence of ttum- 
 melshine as to the pistol at the curb-stone of the south side-walk, 
 but that another was also found by his side when he was raised 
 up in the middle of the street, and the third was yet remaining 
 in the holster of his belt. He was carried into Dr. Smith's office, 
 where his heavily armed condition was disclosed; yet the doctor 
 was not called in chief; only in rebutting, when we had proven 
 all the facts that were within his knowledge by others. Then the 
 brother of the deceased, Mervin McKaig, appears next in this 
 wholesale suppression of proof. He took his brother's belt and 
 pistols and disappeared. Turney picked up one in the street , a 
 man, whose name was unknown to the witness Hall, picked up 
 the other, and the holster yet, contained the third. Why was 
 Mervin McKaig made to remain silent in your presence from 
 day to day throughout this entire trial? 
 
 This is Without a parallel in the annals of criminal jurispru- 
 dence. 1 candidly and firmly believe that it is utterly without 
 precedent, in English or American history. The man who be- 
 came the keeper of those weapons of death, and who alone can tell 
 their exact condition when tiie deceased tell, sits before you for 
 two weeks, and opens not his mouth. The presumptions are all 
 / against a proceeding like this. Evidence that is suppressed is 
 j presumed to be injurious to those who suppress it. This is an 
 ancient maxim of the law as well as a proverb of wisdom. You 
 
FOE, KILLING COLONEL W. \Y. M'KAIG, JR. 135 
 
 have a right to know the condition of those pistols immediately 
 after the fatal affray. Were they all loaded, or had one barrel 
 been discharged from the first or second one in the street? Ts that 
 the reason that Mervin McKaig made no explanation here? The 
 
 defendant has the right to that presumption. The law gives it to 
 him and you will nor strive to withhold it. ft is said that four 
 shots were fired and that the prisoner fired them all. Possibly it 
 is so, but it would have been much easier to decide it' die arms of 
 the deceased had undergone the proper inspection and the. result 
 been detailed to yon. There is a dark and cloudy spot here; all is 
 not plain and fair; there is something to conceal and it is done. 
 Two pistols have been produced here in the rebutting testimony 
 as those of McKaig. How are they identified? Dr. Smith simply 
 says they look like those he saw. Mervin McKaig, then, as now, 
 present, could have removed all doubt by a word, but that word 
 he did not speak. This strange and astounding plan for the con- 
 viction of a man by the suppression of facts, however, does not 
 stop even here. Will some one tell me why Turney has remained 
 dumb in this case ? lie has been here all the time, subpeenied by 
 the State, and doubtless ready to do his duty if permitted by 
 those who brought him here. Several persons have testified that 
 he was seen to take a pistol from the street after the deceased 
 was removed. His name has been repeated over and over again in 
 your hearing, and the fact that he himself was not brought for- 
 ward to explain his own conduct and to inform you of the condi- 
 tion in which lie found that fire-arm is damning and overwhelm- 
 ing to this prosecution. You should not move a single step 
 toward a conviction. You should not even consider the testi- 
 mony produced for that purpose. You should stop at the very 
 threshold and say to the State: ''You have withheld vital and 
 important facts tiiat were under your control; yon have not dealt 
 fairly with us or with the prisoner at the bar, and yet you ask us 
 to imbrue our hands in his blood. We decline and utterly refuse , 
 to join in such practice and we dismiss your proposition as an 
 insult to our intelligence and sense of justice." 
 
 But it has been urged, and will be again, that after tin; first shot 
 the prisoner might with safety have ceased tiring before he did. 
 The perforated coat will be displayed in your sight, and a tongue, 
 of vengeance, made to speak from every rent. But if Black had 
 reason to believe that McKaig was seeking his lite, and was amply 
 prepared to take it, at what point of the conflict was he to pause, 
 and say that the future was secure? lie had seen the deceased 
 come to meet him. lie witnessed the shifting of the cane, the 
 right hand in deadly preparat ion upon the p stol, and the act of 
 drawing, all before, he commenced his defense. Was anything 
 more needed to convince him that the awful moment, had arrived 
 when one or the other must fall; when the light was to he to tin; 
 death? Ami with such bio uly hostility proclaimed by the de- 
 ceased the prisoner was not required to cease the stiife that had 
 been forced upon him until he knew that his adversary was dis- 
 abled and rendered incapable of further attack. Such is the writ- 
 ten law of tin: land as administered in its courts of justice. I an- 
 nounce this in the hearing of their honors on the bunch as one of 
 
 v 
 
136 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 the great cardinal doctrines of self-defense. Without it. indeed, 
 there would be no self-defense. It would bo a delusion and a 
 snare. When, therefore, McKaig, as described by George Garner, 
 sprang into the street after the first lire, and put his hand behind 
 as if to draw another weapon, Bla sk had no reason to believe that 
 his life was yet safe lie could not know that the deceased was 
 hit at all. lie still stood ami endeavored to continue the fight 
 with the abundant means that were upon him. There was no 
 security or peace for the prisoner until McKaig fell. If Mc- 
 Kaig moved from Black, the evidence shows that it was only 
 for the purpose of obtaining time and opportunity to draw a 
 second m'stol. Under these circumstances, was the prisoner to 
 cease firing and allow the deceased to turn and fire upon him 
 when he got ready? The deceased, in fact, did turn, and fell 
 with his face toward the prisoner and with the pistol, afterward 
 found by his side, in his hand. His arm had become nerveless, 
 and it was too late for him to execute the last*urpose of his life. 
 And as he fell, the last scene in a long dramaof secret sin and 
 open shaine, of private grief and public ruin, was closed by the 
 sudden pall of death. But as that stalwart form lay there under 
 the early sun of that mornings and as the liberated spirit ascended 
 to the great fountain of life on high, what accusing word of guilt 
 could it bear to the dread presence of a righteous God against 
 Crawford Black? Wherein is his offense against the laws of man 
 or the majesty of heaven? Would you have had him avoid the 
 encounter that was sought; abandon his right to the highway and 
 turn and flee from the face of his enemy? The laws, human and 
 divine, make no such demand, nor does the history of your State. 
 The fame of Maryland is glorious and full of honor in peace and in 
 war. She is a child of the Revolution, and its baptism of tire and 
 blood rested upon her head. Her sons are reputed brave, and her 
 daughters beautiful and virtuous, wherever her name is spoken. 
 The Maryland line met the scarlet uniform and the glittering steel 
 of England, from the darker hours of Bunker Hill to the trium- 
 phant glory of Yorktown, in behalf of personal as well as national 
 independence. With what pride you can point to that long and 
 brilliant, though bloody record; it has extorted terms of eulogy 
 from the pens of even reluctant historians and commanded the 
 admiration of posterity. Nor has her soil in modern times bred 
 the spirit of cowardice. She has not infused it into the veins of 
 her children, and no dastards example is in her escutcheon to 
 temp the prisoner to flight and dishonor, ilebutstoad his ground 
 as his fathers did before him against the armed destroyer of life 
 and the ravager of peaceful homes. 
 
 At this stage, however, of this dark and melancholy affair the 
 bitter cry, wrung at last from the prisoner's heart, is caught up 
 by the prosecution and urged against him. Yes, when he saw 
 McKaig fall. Ins lips broke forth for one brief utterance as if 
 touched by the spirit of retributive justice, lie thought no moro 
 of his own danger; he was uncoisciousof the peril of his own life 
 as the image of his poor sister, torn from her high estate of virtue, 
 and then spurned and trampled upon, rose before his inflamed 
 Vision. It is said that the dying have a swift and far reaching 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. V, . M KAIG, JR. 137 
 
 glance of the realms and records of time, but not moresothan 
 this prisoner at that supreme instant had of the pure-faced play- 
 mate of his childhood, now the prey, the sport, and the scorn of 
 human perfidy; once wandering by his side, in the early dawn of 
 their lives, then expanding into womanhood like a '"(lower in 
 flushing, when blightingwas nearest, "then plucked by theruthless 
 hand of the seducer from the garden of honor and (Inner away in 
 a little while, withered and dead. He beheld, too, the sweet, bright 
 home of other days when Ins loving mother smiled in her narrow, 
 but happy and untainted domestic circle; when her days and 
 nights were not idled with weeping and her face was not furrowed 
 with tears; when her voice was not lifted up with lamentations 
 more bitter than "the wail above the dead; 11 when his father's 
 brow was not bent before the gaze of men because the deceased 
 had covered it with the mildew of shame; when he himself looked 
 forth, upon the enticing career of manhood with a proud, high 
 heart and an unblemished name. All this came as a Hash upon 
 memory, illuminating all the dear objects of his existence and 
 then giving way as suddenly to the worse than midnight darkness 
 of the present hour. In the twinkling of an eye all was changed, 
 and home, and sister, and father, and mother, and Ins own youth- 
 ful hopes and pride all lay together before his eyes in a heap of 
 ruin and misery. The imprisoned pangs of his soul burst forth, 
 and he spoke the fulfillment of human and divine justice. He 
 announced the execution of the decrees of God an 1 man; he pro- 
 claimed the fate of the man who had ruined his sister, and pur- 
 sued her father as a felon because he resented her destruction. 
 Though his own life had been assailed, though he had justly stood 
 upon his defense, yet his tongue gave the true interpretation of 
 the reason that his adversary had fallen. "The wages of sin is 
 death," and they had been earned and were now paid. Am I told 
 that there is no law by which he who rides a home of its most pre- 
 cious treasures shall be slain? Am I told that the pr-isoncr announced 
 a sentiment for which he should die when he declared his sister's 
 nun to be the cause of that bloody scene? With magnanimity 
 he waived all considerations of himself, and thought only of those 
 dearer to him than life. Tor this shall he sup the horrors of a 
 conviction at your hands? What more did he do, even if no prin- 
 ciple of self-defense shielded him, than others have done in every 
 age and in every clime? The christian and the pagan tribes of men 
 alike give him their examples and their support. Examine all that 
 is left, all that can be found in every distinctive period of history 
 since the great flood of mankind commenced to flow from a single 
 family in the morning of Lime, and, with the exception of now and 
 then, a licentious reign like that of Charles 1 1 of England, where 
 the object was to cheapen female virtue and license Uie unbridled 
 lust of the court and its infamous favorites, ^ou can find no prece- 
 dent for the punishment of the prisoner, no authority to lay your 
 hands upon Uie defender of your liresidesand the protect or of your 
 homes against the common enemy of the human race. And i here, 
 in this solemn presence, with the dread issues of life and death in- 
 trusted to my care, declare as far as my voice will reach, that he 
 who invades the sanctuary of a home, imposes the impurity of his 
 
138 TIL : BARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 debased and brutal desires upon the presence of innocence, breaks 
 the charm and halo of virtue, and denies the altar of dom 
 life, forfeits his right of abode in t he midst of human society, and 
 deserves to die. The husband's hand is thrice armed for his de- 
 struction, the father rises against him in paternal majesty, and the 
 brother may scourge him from the face of the earth wherever he is 
 found. His offense is beyond the reach of pardon, and appeals to 
 heaven and earth combined for redress. It, is rank with crime, 
 and invites t he lash of chast isement from every virtuous quarter. 
 Nor is this doctrine, without that same powerful sanction of which 
 the mighty common law of England was born. That vast and 
 splendid structure is simplv the offspring of the customs, and 
 usages of the people of the British empire, its broad and endur- 
 ing foundations rest upon the long com inued habits and practices 
 of an enlightened race and nation. It springs from the consent 
 and approval of centuries. Has not the principle for which I con- 
 tend the same great support? Is it not a common law within 
 itself, the eldest born of all laws, ante-dating the d tysof Edward, 
 the Confessor, and Alfred, the Law-Giver, as wide spread as the 
 light of history, and as universal as the nations of the earth? Has 
 it not the sanction of Jehovah himself in the case I cited from the 
 pages of sacred history? Did it not blaze forth from the heights 
 of .Sinai to the uttermost boundaries of space and time? The 
 death of the seducer and the adulterer was decreed in the high 
 courts of heaven when the ages were in their infancy, and tin; 
 decision lias been followed wherever the marriage couch lias hern 
 spread and the family tie has been woven. The usages of civiliza- 
 tion, the uniform conduct of men at the same moment of time, 
 and in different and distant parts of the globe; the rulings of 
 judicial tribunals, and above all, the unvarying, unbroken chain 
 of verdicts rendered by juries since the beginning of human juris- 
 prudence have all combined to establish and consolidate the fatal 
 but just decree. Modern ages have lent their sanction to the cus- 
 toms of antiquity. Tue span of our own live- in these latter days 
 is crowded with illustrations of the great truth which 1 Jay before 
 you. American history has its faithful story to tell, as well as 
 the annals of the family in Israel, and of every civilized coast 
 and tribe from that hour until the present day. 
 
 A quarter of a century ago there occurred in Philadelphia, the 
 city of meek and peaceful antecedents, a full and perfect test of 
 this common law of homicide where a seducer is slain. The bin- 
 gleton-Mercer case rang out upon the ear of the world as a note 
 of safety to the young and confiding members of virtuous homes, 
 and of warning to those polluted and polluting vvretcnes who look 
 upon woman in the same debasing spirit with which S ttan, prowl- 
 ing amidst the splendors and the innocence of Paradise, looked 
 and leered with lustful eyes upon the unsuspicious and angelic 
 movements of .Eve. No ingredient of sell -defense was there. The 
 bald and naked issue was presented. Tue arm of the brother was 
 made naked, and his right hand red in the defense of his sister's 
 honor, and a jury of the vicinage and a jury of the world acquitted 
 him with universal acclaim. Tue District of (Joluinoia has the 
 case of Jarboe with the same uueering aud pmiosopaie result. 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. fll'KAia, JR. 139 
 
 California spoke within the last two years; and the great central 
 State of Oli io makes her recent contribution in the caseof Mc- 
 Quigg and his sister. I might multiply unt il I would degenerate 
 into the simple narrator of a catalogue of events and names well 
 known to you all. And when we mount up to the unclouded 
 regions of impartial reason and natural right why Should not this 
 rule against vice and on the side of virtue prevail? What miti- 
 gation can he offered for the conduct of the most evil monster 
 produced from the lowest and most depraved elements of our 
 fallen humanity? Can his crime be lessened or brightened by 
 comparison with any other that darkens our brief pilgrimage be- 
 neath the stars? If the door or window of your house is broken, 
 for an article of the meanest value, you may take the life of the 
 burglar. It is only your house and its material contents that are 
 in danger, but so tender is the regard of the written law for prop- 
 erty that you may arise and slay to defend it. Do your dwellings 
 contain nothing more valuable and sacred than silver and gold? 
 Are there not gems this moment in the circle of your households, 
 whose luster you would not have tarnished or their presence torn 
 away for all the glittering treasures of the G-olcondas, the Cali- 
 fornias.and the Perns? Wives,and daughters, and Sisters are there, 
 and the loss of one to the embrace of dishonor would rend your 
 hearts in twain, and plant a poison in the cup of life which would 
 never cease to rankle until the grave gave you peace. Yet it is 
 contended that for the criminal monster who might thus destroy 
 all for which you live, and make life itself one Long continued 
 and unbearable anguish, there is no personal punishment, no pain 
 for him to suffer; that he may walk your streets in peace and 
 security, and spend his days in ease and comfort while his victim, 
 pale and wasted with sorrow, is sinking into an untimely grave 
 in some lonesome and secluded spot where she lies hidden from 
 the unpitying eves and unfeeling scoffs of the world. His crime 
 is a thousand fold blacker than murder, yet there are no prisons 
 or scaffolds for him. For the betrayed and ruined woman there is 
 nothing left of life except the pain of living. The joy of existence 
 never comes again. When we see the autumn leaf falling to the 
 ground, and the white shroud of winter spread over the face of 
 the lields we are blest, with the certain hope that the soft air 
 of spring will after a little while come back to us and renew in 
 our midst the splendors of this beautiful world; that the fresh, 
 green sward, adorned with flowers, will again spread at our feet, 
 and the deep foliage id' the forest will weave; its bright canopy 
 over our heads. But t o the soul that has loved, trusted, and lost, 
 there comes no second spring. The solemn sky of autumn and the 
 chilling winds of winter alone remain to her. No glad and golden 
 suinmer awaits her in the future. A scorched and barren desert 
 without verdure, withoul tree, or plant, or blossom, or shrub, or 
 one single cooling fountain at which to rest in all the desolate pil- 
 grimage, lies before her tired and faltering footsteps. She makes 
 the rest of her journey, too, alone. The lepers taint is upon her 
 in the eyes of the world and friends fall i<\\ and avert then (aits. 
 And with such a spectacle as this before you, are you willing £o 
 say that the man wiio thus curses the entire existence of one wiio.se 
 
1-10 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 sole offense has been her Mini], unreasoning devol ion to him should 
 pass unscathed and unwhipped of jusl ice ? Such a decision would 
 spurn and trample under yourfeet the holiest and tenderest in- 
 terests, affections, and loves of humanity, and would blaspheme 
 all the attributes of a just and righteous God. Does some one, 
 however, who is careful of the life of the destroyer profane this 
 subject with asuggestionof damages asa measureof legal redress? 
 The bare thought stifles an elevated nature with feelings of loath- 
 ing and disgust. Who can estimate the value of family honor? 
 Who shall lay a price on domestic happiness? Who shall remu- 
 nerate you for the stolen and defiled members of your household ? 
 As well might you attempt to fix the value of a lost and ruined 
 soul in hell. "What will a man not give for his own soul," and 
 will he not give the same, or even a higher ransom, if need be, for 
 the salvation of wife, mother, daughter, and sister V Without 
 them, in their purity, the regions of time and earth would be filled 
 with fiery tortures, and the condition of the fallen spirits in eter- 
 nity could be no worse. Can you pay the husband for his wife, the 
 son for his mother, the brother for his sister, and the father for 
 his daughter ? Can you make atonement to the heart-broken wo- 
 man herself for%iolated vows and wanton perfidy? Can she or 
 any of those that l><ve her be redeemed to their original estate by 
 the assessment of damages ? A division of property between the 
 so ial outlaw and his prey may be just, but as a mode of punish- 
 >ueiit it is vain and void of meaning. Who, also, would have such 
 gain ? If a judgment was taken in favor of the husband or father, 
 in whose behalf an action lies, what a revolting acquisition to his 
 fortune it would be ? in what way would he expend it? If the 
 husband invests it in "ships that go down to the sea," he makes 
 his ventures into foreign lands and distant waters upon the wages 
 rendered to him by a jury for his wife's infamy, lie traflics upon 
 the honor of her whose dear and precious head once laid in its 
 sweet sleep of fidelity upon his confiding heart. If his argosies 
 come home from successful voyages they are freighted with gains 
 founded upon the dishonor of his bed, the debasement of his name, 
 and the overthrow of all his fireside gods. His bills of lading stare 
 at him as the reward of his submission to the lowest depths of deg- 
 radation ever fathomed by the most abject spirits of the human 
 race. The articles of merchandise, which he unpacks and offers 
 in exchange at his counter, would salute him with the taint of 
 moral deatti and remind him perpetually of Ins hideous bereave- 
 ment. The ghost of his murdered peace would arise and confront 
 him wherever he turned. 
 
 It the father accepted a pecuniary award for the shame of his 
 daughter, it would bitterly mock him in all the after years. In 
 what channel of trade would he embark with the proceeds ? If he 
 bartered them for lands, his growing meadows, his waving corn, 
 his ripening wheat, and the flocks and herds upon his hills would 
 seem to be flourishing over the dishonored tomb of his lost and 
 undone child. His soul would sicken at the sight of his own pros- 
 perity springing from such a source. He would turn away, and 
 lliough tilled with the peaceful precepts of our holy religion, he 
 would invoke the death of the seducer and pray for the blessings 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 141 
 
 of heaven to rest upon the hand that smites him in his career of 
 wickedness. This is the universal law of the human heart, and 
 the prisoner at the bar simply proclaimed it when lie slew the de- 
 ceased. Such is the meaning of his exclamation when tried by all 
 the experience, instincts, and reason of mankind. 
 
 And now, gentlemen, my labors are drawing to a close. I have 
 endeavored to treat plainly and fairly all the material aspects of 
 this painful and most important case. If there is guilt in the con- 
 duct of the prisoner, T have not found it. Soon you will discharge 
 the most momentous duty of your lives. In a few hours more you 
 will determine whether Crawford Black shall live or die. There 
 is no intermediate point for one like him. If he is guilty at all, he 
 tells me to say to you that he anxiously and earnestly desires the 
 extreme and fatal penalty of the law. I join in that solemn and 
 awful request. That untainted and unsullied spirit must not herd 
 with hardened felons, or taste the fearful degradation of the pen- | 
 itentiary. The odious garb of the prison was not made for such 
 a form as his. Far rather would I bid him farewell forever on the 
 scaffold than to know that he lived with the stain of infamy upon 
 him. But I will not indulge in such gloomy forebodings. I be- 
 lieve that you approach a cheerful and pleasing task. I believe 
 that your faces will be radiant with happiness as you restore, the 
 prisoner to life, liberty, and the embrace of his weeping parents. 
 They reach forth their eager arms to carry him home. They have 
 been lonely, very lonely there for manymonths. This mother has 
 wept like Rachel for her children because they were; not. One has 
 been taken, the spoiler's prey; you will not take the other also. As 
 the aged father in Israel clung to Benjamin when Joseph was gone, 
 so dothese afflicted parents yearn for their good and dutiful son, 
 and long to clasp him, free and unharmed, to their bereaved 
 breasts. In full confidence that by your verdict you will grant 
 this blessed privilege, reunite this broken family, and solace theii 
 wounded hearts, as far as it may be done by human power, I sur- 
 render all, all into your hands. Accept my thanks, each one of 
 you, for your kind and patient attention; and allow me to tender 
 you my best wishes for your future welfare and happiness. 
 
ARGUMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. MILTON WHITNEY. 
 
 Mat it please the Court, -and you, gentlemen of the 
 jury, after the long and patient investigation which you have 
 given to the examination of this case, involving absence from 
 homes, and the daily avocations of life, it is with extreme reluct- 
 ance that I rise to trespass any further upon either your patience, 
 or your time, and were I to consult my own private convenience 
 and feelings, I would submit this cause into your hands for your 
 final determination. But, gentlemen, I feel that I have a duty to 
 perform from the performance of which I have no right to shrink. 
 It will be my effort, gentlemen, and I trust I may be aide to dis- 
 charge that duty in such a spirit of fairness and candor that it 
 may receive the approbation of your own best judgments. I have 
 carefully examined the testimonyin this case, and I have as care- 
 fully examined the principles of law and of human action that, it 
 seems to me, should be applicable to that testimony, and my 
 mind has arrived at certain conclusions. It will be my duty to 
 lay before you the process and the grounds upon which those con- 
 clusions have been arrived at, and, if I am right, you will arrive 
 at the same conclusions. If I am wrong, you will detect the error 
 into which I have fallen., ftnd be governed accordingly. 
 
 Gentlemen, by virtue of the const itution of the. State of Mary- 
 land, guaranteeing the right of trial by jury, and by virtue of the 
 laws under which we live, and to the strict and impartial admin- 
 istration of which we look for protection in all of the blessings of 
 life, liberty, and property, you have been separated and set apart 
 from your fellow men; and the most important duty that men can 
 be called upon to perform in civil society, this day devolves upon 
 you. Acting upon the solemn responsibility of the oath you have 
 taken, already spread upon the records of this tribunal, you are to 
 determine and decide the issue that is now made up between the 
 people of your .State on the one side, and the prisoner whom you 
 have in charge upon the other. That issue involves on the one 
 hand the life or death of the prisoner at the bar, and on the other 
 hand it involve- the integrity of our constitution, the vindication 
 of the laws under which we live, the peace, welfare, and protec- 
 tion of society of which you are members, and the fair name and 
 reputation of the community of which you forma part. That 
 same constitution of government that guarantees the right of 
 trial by jury, and lias this day set you apart as its administrators, 
 announces and declares that the end and design of all true gov- 
 
f 
 
 FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'Iy'AIG. JR. 14;j 
 
 ernment is to secure the existence of the body-politic to protect 
 it, and to guarantee protection to every individual member of that 
 community in all of I lie blessings of life and liberl y. If the Gov- 
 ernment falls short of that, it fails to mount np to the standard 
 of its required duty; it falls short of the discharge of its legiti- 
 mate function and it proves recreant to the solemn compact into 
 which it lias entered with every individual member of that com- 
 munity over which it seeks to extend its power. To secure these 
 blessings, and thus to enable government to accomplish its 
 great end and design, laws are passed and penalties enacted as a 
 part of those laws, and the public peace, and individual security. 
 depends on the observance of those laws, or upon the infliction of 
 those penalties in case of their violation ; and just in proportion 
 as those laws are observed, or those penalties inflicted in ease of 
 violation, just in the same proportion does that government dis- 
 charge its duty to society and that society receives its protection, 
 and all the ends and aims of civil government are accomplished. 
 
 But, gentlemen of the jury, not only are these laws enacted with 
 these penalties annexed, but tribunals of justice are established 
 in which those laws are to be vindicated, and those penalties in- 
 flicted in ease of their violation; and thus it is that we stand in 
 this temple of justice, dedicated to its administration, each to 
 perform his respective duty under the solemn responsibility that 
 he owes, to his God, to his country, and to himself. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, leaving with you these general observations, 
 I ask you to go with me a moment as we travel backward upou 
 the pathway of time, to the morning of the 17th of October, the 
 morning of the fatal day named in this indictment, Revisit your 
 sister city of Cumberland; it is the hour of early morn; the hours 
 of darkness have passed; the curtains of night have been raised, 
 and the ushering in of the morn has called forth men from their 
 hours of retirement to the stern realities of active life. It is an 
 hour, gentlemen, when passion, resentment, and revenge should 
 be hushed beneath those calmer and holier thoughts that cluster 
 around home and all its associations. Let us enter the dwelling 
 of the deceased and make the acquaintance of the household. 
 We behold there the husband and the lather; we behold the wife 
 and the mother; and, beside them, we behold the first and only 
 pledge of their sacred union here on earth. And, gentlemen, that 
 is the household to which the government under which you live, 
 and tins laws of which you are this day made its administrators, 
 have guaranteed the protection of which I have spoken. At its 
 head stands one just upon the threshold of active life, in the full 
 vigor of his manhood, equal to the emergencies of war or of peace; 
 he stands there with an arm strong to protect tin 1 rights of those 
 whom the providence of (bid has placed within his keeping, and 
 with a heart warm ami large enough to respond to all the duties 
 growing out of that sacred relation. He bids them his morning 
 farewell until ihe hour of their accustomed meal shall once 111016 
 reunite them around their frugal hoard; and ere the clock of time 
 has ticked its tinny minutes, the hand of the assassin has done 
 its work. That wife has been made a widow, that child has been 
 orphaned, and that noble form lies mangled in the dust. That 
 
141 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 ig arm has been paralyzed, that generous heart has ceased its 
 beating, and that soul, unwarned and unnoticed, has been ushered 
 into the presence of its God. The mangled remains are removed; 
 no need of a physician; no need of kind and sympathizing friends 
 to cool the parched brow; no need of guardian angels to watch 
 around the dying bed to convoy that soul to its home of immor- 
 tality on 1 ne other sideof the dark and turbid stream. That spirit 
 has already passed through the valley, the footsteps ui' which all 
 tend in one direction. Gentlemen, the story is soon told; the 
 undertaker is sent for, and he does Ids accustomed work; the city 
 is draped in mourning; its places of business are closed, and the 
 assembled multitude crowd around to.perform the last sad office 
 i ' respect to one who had taken his first outlook upon the world in 
 that his native city. The laborer leaves his implements of labor; the 
 artisan, his workshop; the merchant, his counting-house, and the 
 professional man, his office; each and all to join in the funeral 
 procession, to convey one whom they had only known to love, to 
 the home of the dead. They listen to the cdods of the valley as 
 theyfall upon the coffin lid, and return home appalled at thesight, 
 and the widow is returned to her desolated hearthstone to spend 
 the first night of her widowhood, and that child only to listen to 
 the echoes of its own voice, as it calls in vain upon the sacred name 
 of father. And, gentlemen, the head that devised and the hand 
 that perpetrated this fearful tragedy is confessedly before you for 
 judgment. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, does the State of Maryland, do its peo- 
 ple, does every household, does every man, woman, and child, 
 every father, every mother in the community, ask too much at 
 your hands when they ask you 10 hold the acknowledged perpe- 
 trator of such a deed to the strictest accountability in his defense? 
 
 Gentlemen, whatever considerations may have been discussed 
 in this case, and how far soever the counsel on the other side may 
 have traveled out of the record, and discussed questions of a col- 
 lateral character, having no bearing upon the particular issues 
 involved, i beg you to c me with me as we analyze the case that 
 has been presented before you by the testimony in the cause. Strip 
 it of all its theatrical surroundings, aud let us lay it bear and 
 naked before you as an American jury, and see where the truth 
 and where the error is. 
 
 Now, gentlemem, what is the subject-matter of the inquiry that 
 presents itself to our minds at the very threshold of this case? 
 There has been a great deal said — and I beg you to bear in mind 
 that 1 do not propose to take any notice of any personal allusions 
 that have been made, or be lead by any remarks from the legiti- 
 mate examination of the case upon which you have to pass — there 
 has been something said as to the manner in which this question 
 has been presented to you by the introduction of the testimony. 
 The same thing was said to their honors upon the bench. And you 
 will bear in mind, gentlemen, that the Court in giving a decision 
 upon that point, stated precisely the position we had assumed, 
 that in an investigation of this kind it was incumbent upon the 
 State to make out its case, and that the State in so doing had no 
 right or power to anticipate what might be the defense, but when 
 
TOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIGj JR. 145 
 
 that case was made out on the part of the State, it was the duty 
 of tin' defense then to show to the jury, and to the satisfaction of 
 the jury, what that defense was, and it would then become the 
 duty of the State to rebut that defense, if they could, what- 
 ever that defense should ho. Therefore, gentlemen, so far as all 
 the comments of the gentlemen on the other side are concerned, 
 in reference to the manner in which this testimony has been 
 offered, T simply refer you to the opinion of the Court when the 
 same question was raised before that tribunal. 
 
 Gentlemen, here is the indictment that contains the charge 
 upon which this defendant is now upon his trial. It is an indict- 
 ment found bythe grand inquestof the body of Alleghany county. 
 Something has been said about the change of venue to this county 
 by way of complaint that you are now to try this case. I shall 
 have occasion to call your attention to that branch in a subsequent 
 stage of this investigation. I do not now wish to disturb the order 
 of my argument by callingyour attention to it, and to the remarks 
 that have been suggested by counsel on the other side now. We are 
 then to look in the first place and ascertain what is the charge 
 against this party! That charge is willful murder. It is not neces- 
 sary, and I do not purpose to consume your time by the reading 
 of the numerous law books that have been referred to by the 
 counsel on the other side, or to go into that old ancient commoii 
 law, of which they have bad such an abhorrence, and yet, to a 
 large extent, have occupied your time and attention in reading. 
 I propose to do no such thing. I shall call your attention to the 
 laws of Maryland enacted by you through your representatives, 
 expressing the. will of the sovereign people of your State. 
 
 The statute law of Maryland provides that all murder which 
 shall be perpetrated by means of poison, or lying in wait, or by 
 any kind of willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder snail be 
 murder in the first degree, &c, all other, murder in the second 
 degree. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I might go on and discuss with you, and trace 
 out the history of this legislation, and show you why and how 
 murder was divided into different degrees, but I do not conceive 
 it to be necessary in this case, and therefore I shall save you the 
 time, and myself the exhaustion of so doing. Let us stay by the 
 law as it stands out on our statute books, enacted by yourselves 
 through the agency of your representatives whom you have sent 
 to express the will of the people. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you will find there are two classes of murder : 
 "All murder which shall lie perpetrated by moans of poison " — es- 
 tablish the poison, and that is sufficient; " or lying in wait " — 
 that is another sufficient ground; "or, by any kind of willful, de- 
 liberate, premeditated killing, shall lie murder in the first degree." 
 This last means where the specific intent to take life exists. 
 
 You understand me, gentlemen, that at the common law, any 
 person who took the lire of another being in the pursuit of a felo- 
 nious purpose, or With intent to do gnat bodily harm, and by 
 accident, life was taken, then that was murder, although there 
 was no intention to take life. The State of Maryland making the 
 degree says, that where the specific intent is to take life, where 
 
146 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 there is that evidence of depravity and corruption of the human 
 heart that can entertain for a moment the idea of taking human 
 life, it shall be murder in i he first degree. Therefore, genl l< men, 
 in a case of this kind, wherever the investigation' shows the mur- 
 der to have been committed by means of poison, or lying in wait, 
 pr any kind of deliberal ion which means int em ional killing, then 
 it is murder in the first degree. The other kind of murder is mur- 
 der in thesecond degree; leaving I he definition of murder precisely 
 as it existed at common law; and, therefore, gentlemen, under 
 the Maryland law, where a party is arraigned upon an indictment 
 charging him with murder, a Maryland jury can find either one 
 of four verdicts : murder jiu the first, murder in the second, man- 
 slaughter, and not guilty. 
 
 Now gentlemen, considering what I have already stated to be 
 '.■ sufficient explanation of what the law is by which you are to try 
 this party, the statute law of Maryland, by which rule alone you 
 are to be governed in the investigation of the facts, let us come 
 now to a careful analysis of what this case is, and let us answer 
 the first inquiry that presents itself to our mind, k 'has the State 
 upon its own showing made out a case which brings it within the 
 rule laid down by our law," because if this has been done, and it 
 has not been successfully rebutted, then you have no discretion 
 save to act upon a statute law as it is written, by which you and 
 I are bound and in which we seek protection for ourselves and 
 families. 
 
 Gentlemen, on the morning of this fatal occurrence where was 
 Crawford Black? Where was he first found? I anticipate for a 
 moment here, because it makes the connection good. 1 anticipate 
 a portion of the testimony offered on the part of the defense, so 
 far as the testimony of Mrs. Black is concerned. There is a great 
 deal in that testimony, gentlemen, upon which I would like to 
 comment; but in the argument of this case I shall do precisely 
 what I did with her when she was on the stand. I did not think 
 proper to ask her a single question; she was here as the mother of 
 this party, and she would have been less than a mother had she 
 left any effort undone to have protected, and to have saved that 
 son from the fearful peril which now awaits him, if my view of 
 this case be correct. Mrs. Black tells you — after nan ateing the 
 occurrences of the day before and the night before— she tells you 
 that her son, on the morning of that day, left her house. For what 
 purpose? She tells you that he left, saying that he would pay 
 some bills which he had neglected to pay on Saturday. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, he was not paying bills in Cumberland on 
 Saturday; he had been engaged at Piedmont with his pay-rolls, 
 his money corresponding to that pay-roll. Where, then, had he been 
 engaged in the making of those payments according to the pay- 
 rolls, in every case the money corresponding to the amount on the 
 roll ? She tells you that he left, and that before he left he put on 
 an overcoat. Her attention, therefore, was called to the overcoat. 
 She tells you not only that her attention was called to the over- 
 coat, but that he then told her that it was Mr. Henshaw's over- 
 coat. So that the overcoat upon that occasion, and at that time, 
 was a subject of conversation between these parties. Now, gen- 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. Jl'KAIG, JR. 147 
 
 tlemen. did lie put that overcoat on to go to the mines? Did he 
 put that overcoat on to go to the town, or village? She tells yon 
 that he started from that house with that overcoat on for the 
 purpose of paying bills, and attending to the usual and ordinary 
 business of the day. What kind of a morning was it ? You have 
 heard from the witnesses it was a warm morning, the doors and 
 windows were open, and yet he puts on an overcoat to go about, 
 traveling from place to place in that town, for the purpose of at- 
 tending to the ordinary affairs and business of life. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, wheredo you next find him? You next find 
 him at Mr. Goodman's store; the clerk tells you that he came there 
 and that he was there about five minutes; that he bought somecigars, 
 lighted one, smoked for a time, and then left. And my distin- 
 guished young friend, Mr. Price, was very forcible in his remarks 
 as to how far the cigar went to quiet his agitated and disturbed 
 mind. Therefore if anything agitated and disturbed the mind of 
 Mr. Black at that time, applying his counsel's own argument, 
 those agitations must have been reconciled and quieted before he 
 left there. 
 
 lie then goesdown to Centre street; that brings him past the foun- 
 dry of McKaig. Now. there is no doubt about that. Where do you 
 next see him? Because now we are testing this case; stripping it 
 of all the giddy surroundings with which it has been draped. 
 Where dp you next see him? "You see him near Mi-. ( Iraigs' corner, 
 coming up Baltimore street from the direction of Centre street. 
 Am I right? Followme as T go. He is seen by Mr. Craig walking up 
 slowly on this pavement until he got about opposite this corner, 
 when he stopped, apparently looking up Baltimore street. Then 
 he turned, he thought, and either went into Mr. Dailey's store, or 
 passed down Mechanic street, which would again lead him to Mc- 
 Kaig's foundry. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, he had left Goodman's store, and was coming 
 up Centre street; he passed the foundry and came up in that 
 direction; there we see him through the eyes of Mr. Craig a second 
 time. How long was that, before this shooting? Mr. Craig tells 
 you it was at least half an hour. Now, where did he go? That is 
 the next subject-matter of our inquiry. Where is he next Seen? 
 Mr. Arrick tells you that living upon Centre street, about half way 
 between Baltimore street and the foundry, as he was coming out 
 of his house that morning' to go to his work, as he was coming 
 down these, steps, he took Ins watch out of his pocket, and it was 
 10 minutes to 8 o'clock, and he saw this man Black coming up 
 Centre street, passing that foundry, lookinginto those windows, 
 and the door of that place. Therefore, gentlemen, he must have 
 gone from the position when Craig saw him, and passed down 
 Mechanic street, gone around the foundry, and been there when 
 Mr. Arrick saw him looking into those windows, which must have 
 been the second time, because Mr. Arrick tells you that that was 
 about 10 minutes before the shooting took place. 
 
 1 am coming down to details— to facts in reference to this case. 
 We want to prove the lying in wait to bring it within the language 
 of the law of Maryland* and not within the language of the musty 
 law of ages gone by, so much commented upon hy the counsel on 
 
148 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 the other Bide. Where do wp see him next? We see him n< xi En 
 the vestibule of Mr. Shriver's store. What was he doingthere? 
 Mr. Hughey tells yon that at that time he had this overcoat on; 
 that he had his hand on his right pocket, and that when he held 
 ont his hand to him to shake hands wit b him, Black extended him 
 his loft hand, and being apparently in a hurry to break off the con- 
 versation, Mr. Hughey says that he left him, and that he (Black) 
 returned hack into the vestibule, or that when he saw him last he 
 was taking a step on to the vest Ibule. Follow these facts with me, 
 because we desire that this case shall be tried upon the tacts?'/; 
 the case, and not facts supposed to be, and r< ferred to as being 
 in it. Now, where do we see him again? Why, we see him 
 again on Humbrid's corner. You see (turning to the plat) that 
 is the point near the south side of the street, Bear in mind, gen- 
 tlemen, that I am correct in this matter; follow me step by step 
 as T go. AVe find him on that corner, by whom? By Dr. Smith, who, 
 my friend says, was very much excited that morning. He was not 
 excited then; nothing had occurred to excite Dr. Smith, or any- 
 body else. Dr. Smith was passing from his house to his office, and 
 in passing down by there lie saw Black as he stood upon that cor- 
 ner; Black conld have a full view of the bridge, and this side ot 
 the bridge a full view up Baltimore street, where McKaig was ac- 
 customed to come, walking from his house to his foundry. Mark 
 it, gentlemen, that in regard to these facts 1 am right. What does 
 Dr. Smith say? He says that he had succeeded in reaching his 
 office; that he had gone inside for a moment, when his attention 
 was attracted by a remark made outside. And as lie went to the 
 door to look out he heard the first shot, and simultaneous with 
 that McKaig threw up his hands, and the smoke from the fatal 
 pistol had not raised above the head of either of the parties. Now 
 where did Black go when he left Humbrid's corner? He goes 
 upon the south side of the street, the very side that McKaig always 
 came; the very side that McKaig passed over to on that occasion. 
 Yet the learned gentleman who last addressed you in reference to 
 this case, tried to persuade you that McKaig went out of his usual 
 course and crossed over on that side for the purpose of meeting 
 Black, when all the evidence goes to show that that was his usual 
 and ordinary course, and when Dr. Smith tells you that Black 
 was standing on this side of the street, and not upon that, and 
 therefore, when he (Black) crossed over it brought him directly in 
 McKaig's path. 
 
 Now, where, is that pistol? My friends have talked a great deal 
 about this being a light overcoat, and all that. It is perfectly 
 immaterial to us; you recollect the testimony; 1 want to call your 
 attention to it. My friend, Mr. Syester, stated in his opening that 
 it was necessary for him to go armed to protect himself in the 
 dangerous community in which he was, among the miners ; that 
 they were of a dangerous character, and, therefore, that it was 
 necessary for him to go armed, and that that accounted for his 
 being armed on this occasion. 
 
 " Against miners,'" the very men that he has called before you to 
 establish excellency of character. Gentlemen, he was not going 
 to the mines on that day. lie was going about Cumberland to pay 
 
"FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. 14'J 
 
 bills, to attend to tlie ordinary transactions of life. When he left 
 his mother's house with that overcoat on him, why did lie need 
 the pistol and the weapon that was found on him at the time he 
 perpetrated this fearful deed? Was it to protect him from the 
 dangerous neighbors by whom lie was surrounded at the mines? 
 He was not going there; he was going to his own family custom- 
 ers in his native town for the purpose of attending to the civil 
 and ordinary affairs of life, and yet yon find him armed with 
 a weapon equal to a minnie rifle, and carrying it, where? In the 
 pocket of the overcoat that he had put on at his mother's house. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this is a very short time from the time that 
 Pr. Smith saw him upon that c'orner when this shooting occurred. 
 That shooting has been described to yon, gentlemen. It has 
 characteristics — it has surroundings. Is it necessary that I should 
 state more fully the circumstances under which it occurred? And 
 now. gentlemen of the jury, the question comes home to us, has 
 the State by its testimony made out such a case as entitles it to 
 ask at your hands ;i verdict of guilty for the crime set forth in the 
 indie 1 ment? Has thepfosecution satisfied you that there was in this 
 case a specific intention to take life, or that it was taken by lying 
 in wait? If either, it is murder in the first degree; and, gentlemen, 
 in addition to all this testimony of the prisoner's preparation, the 
 instrument of death that was used, the manner in which it was 
 held and concealed upon his person, looking into McKaig's place 
 of business, looking in recesses past which McKaig must go, then 
 startingto meet him as soon as he beholds him crossing the bridge. 
 In addition to all this, and much more that I might mention, you 
 have before you the terrible manner in which the bloody deed was 
 perpetrated. Allowing his intended victim to pass, he fires thefirst 
 shot hack of the medial line, he then follows him up as he attempts 
 to make his escape, too much paralyzed to defend himself, and tires 
 another shot in the hack of his shoulder, and then, as his victim is 
 falling, fires the third, which enters the spinal column, each of 
 which were fatal, and all of which were cowards' shots, tired from 
 
 behind; and then exclaims, "You son of a b h, you have got that 
 
 (what for?) for ruining my sister, and trying to put my father in 
 the penitentiary, and I have another shot for any d d scoun- 
 drel who says I did wrong." 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, was this the taking of human life with 
 intent to hill? Had there been a, lying in wait? If either, the 
 law of Maryland marks out your duty, and you have no diserel ion. 
 The Slate has brought it within that law, that written law, by 
 which you and I are to be governed and controlled. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, what is the answer to this case? Because you 
 heard it announced from his honor on the bench, when the case 
 upon the part of the State had been established, it was then neces- 
 sary for t he defense to put in by way of rebuttal, by way of excuse 
 or justification, such facts as t hey might rely upon before the jury; 
 and it: would be necessary, if they were put in, for the State to re- 
 but them, if they saw proper. 
 
 I ask you now what is the excuse? Is a plea, of just ilication set, 
 up here by this man l!kick,or is it a plea that this occurrence took 
 place under such circumstances of provocation as shall reduce it 
 
loO TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 from what the law of Maryland saya is murder in the firsl d 
 to murder in the second? What is the defense? If the defense is 
 that of self-defense that amounts to justification. They have 
 offered here evidence for the purpose of satisfying you that this 
 was a case of necessary self-defense ; they have offered other tes- 
 timony for the purpose of showing the condition of mind under 
 which the party was laboring at the time he committed this deed. 
 For what purpose? Whywasthat testimony offered? It cannot 
 mouni up to a justification unless they set up here the plea of insan- 
 ity, because no matter what a man's feelings maybe, nomatterwhat 
 may be the condition of those feelings, or what may have caused 
 them, unless it mounts up to that standard of legal irresponsi- 
 bility thai excuses the man who does the act. Now. that is not 
 claimed here, therefore I am saved the necessity of discussing this 
 question of insanity, because, in the offer of testimony, the coun- 
 sel on the other side say we offer this testimony to enable the jury 
 to^ determine from such provocation the grade of homicide com- 
 mitted by the prisoner. It is offered then, gentlemen, not as justi- 
 fication, not as an excuse, not for the purpose of establishing the 
 plea of insanity, that is usually set up in cases of this kind, but 
 offend for the purpose of enabling the jury to determine from 
 such condition of mind the degree of murder of which he is guilty. 
 
 Now. what is that testimony offered? Here I come to a very 
 important branch in the consideration of this case. I ask you 
 now, gentlemen, to bear with me for a few moments when I call 
 your attention to this question. What was the testimony offered 
 on the part of the, defense for the purpose of showing the condi- 
 tion of this man's mind at the time when he made the attack 
 upon McKaig, and he took this man's life? My friends say that the 
 quest ion of seduction is not in this case. Why? They offered in 
 evidence a piece of paper here, and that is the paper, gentlemen; 
 they offered, (showing the letter), and we objected to it. We 
 objected to it because itdid not tend to prove any fact in the cause, 
 because it had no tendency to prove anything. The question went 
 to the Court; and what did the Court say? It was offered as a 
 fact; it was offered to follow it up by showing that that fact was 
 communicated to Crawford Black. Now, mark, they had stated 
 in your presence and hearing, as a fact, that that girl, sister of 
 Crawford Black, had had a child, and that the lather of that child 
 was W. W. McKaig; they had stated in your presence and hear- 
 ing, as a fact, that he (McKaig) had seduced her, and that these 
 facts were communicated to the prisoner for the first time on this 
 Sunday morning. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, let me refer you to the ruling of the Court. It 
 was not the fact of seduction to which we objected, only so far as 
 to protect us in our right to rebut any such evidence if offered by 
 the defense, but it was the particular paper offered in evidence, 
 and we objected to it upon the ground that it did not tend to 
 prove any fact material to the issue in the cause — it did not tend 
 to prove anything. 
 
 The Court, in delivering its opinion, says, and I quote from its 
 decision : " It is competent to offer evidence tending to prove the 
 condition of the mind of the prisoner at the time of the homicide, 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'KAIG, JR. 151 
 
 either by proof of communications made to him on i he subject of 
 his sister's seduction by the deceased, or by facts and circum- 
 stances coming to bis knowledge touching that subject, and that 
 the paper offered is admissible upon that "round.'" Here, then, by 
 tli is ruling of the Court t lie door is opened wide to the defense to 
 prove any or all of thefacts alleged by them relating to the alleged 
 seduction of the sister or paternity of the child. All these facts they 
 say were rcabt iescxist ingin pointof fact, and asfacts were commu- 
 nicated to the prisoner on the Sunday preceding tbehomicide. The 
 riiling of the Court was that all such facts could be shown by the 
 defense upon the "round that they had been communicated to 
 the prisoner, and it was for the jury to say how far, and to what 
 extent, they affected his mind at the time be committed the fatal 
 deed. Here, gentlemen, was a, fair, full, and complete opportu- 
 nity for the (icfcn.se to est ablisb, by compel cut evidence, the .al- 
 leged seduction or paternity of the child. It was in view of this 
 ruling of the Court that we challenged the defense to come up 
 boldly and meet the issue, seduction or no seduction. We had 
 pronounced the charge false and a base fabrication. We had an- 
 nounced before the Court, before the jury, and before the com- 
 munity our readiness to establish, beyond the shade of a shadow 
 of a doubt, that at the time of the deceased's first acquaintance 
 with Myra Black she was not a subject of a seduction, and that 
 at the time her child was begotten (if child she had, which lias 
 not been proved.) she was not in a condition to know who was its 
 father. Here then is the case of the prisoner and the state fully 
 presented upon this question of seduction. The prisoner standing 
 by the dead body of his victim — his lips sealed in death — for the 
 first time brings against him this serious charge, a. charge that he 
 never would have dared to breathe in his presence while living, 
 and having done this, he now conies into this temple of justice, 
 and through his counsel, before you and before the world, reiter- 
 ates the charge. Here, in the presence of the aged and sorrow- 
 stricken father, with a, heart overburdened with grief, and who 
 is fast wending his way across to the other side of the stream, he 
 boa.stinj.rly tells you it is true. "I assumed the prerogative of the 
 Almighty ; I sent the soul of my victim unannounced to eternity ; 
 I draped the young and loving wife in the emblems of mourning, 
 audi robbed that child of its natural protector, and 1 now stand 
 here and ask you as a jury of American citizens to place a brand 
 upon that child's brow that he shall wear through all time, and 
 be observed by all the world that his father sleeps in a seducer's 
 grave." Gentlemen, it, was in \ Lew of such an exhibit ion as this, 
 when the opportunity had been fully and amply given by the rul- 
 ing of the Court, that we called upon them, in the name of all 
 that was sacred to the cause of justice, in justice to the memory 
 of the dead, in justice to the living he. had left behind him, in 
 vindication of their own professional integrity to sustain the 
 statements made by them, it was in view of all this that we 
 begged them to make the effort to sustain the allegations they 
 had made upon this subject. They had said that the deceased 
 was the Seducer of the prisoner's sister, and that she had a, child, 
 and hi was its father, and these facts were communicated to the 
 
152 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 prisoner on the Sunday named. The Courl lias said it is per- 
 fectly competent for them to prove each or all of these facts; and 
 then it was, gentlemen, that we called upon them to come boldly 
 up and make the effort to prove what they had so boastingly, and 
 the prisoner had so cowardly charged over the dead body of his 
 victim. They knew, gentlemen, that they had the opportunity, and 
 they knew that, if successful, it would secure an acquital for 
 their client. How broad the opportunity, and how eager it should 
 1 mb seized ; what easier than to place the sister upon the stand and 
 let her pour into the ears of a sympathizing jury a history of her 
 alleged wrongs and ruin ; how the very tones of her voice would 
 have been the death notes to this prosecution, and how eagerly 
 the public waited for something substantial to sustain their sym- 
 pathy for the defense, which sympathy had been enlisted through 
 a stream of public sentiment, manufactured by means as subject 
 to criticism as the sentiment itself. 
 
 But, lo ! and what is the disappointment to which all are 
 doomed? Has judicial proceedings ever witnessed the like before? 
 With all these damning facts in their possession, their time to act 
 had come, the time to talk had passed, and what do we behold: 
 they offer you a miserably false and mutilated paper, signed by 
 no one, addressed to no one, purporting to have been written six 
 years ago, without any history, nothing to show where it was 
 found, or by whom, or for what purpose it has been re- 
 tained these six years past; a paper written originally in pencil, 
 afterward drawn over with ink, by whom, or for what purpose it 
 is not attempted to explain. Gentlemen, for what purpose is this 
 offered? It is offered as an existing fact communicated to the 
 prisoner to show the condition of his mind on the Monday morn- 
 ing following. What effect would it have upon your mind, or 
 upon the mind of any reasonable man authorizing him to act, 
 even to the taking of human life. Now, what other fact is com- 
 municated to the prisoner on that Sunday preceding the morning 
 of the homicide; why the opinion of Mr. Lloyd Lowndes, that Mc- 
 Kaig was the seducer of his, the prisoner's, sister. 
 
 Gentlemen, before we proceed to a careful analysis of this testi- 
 mony let us look for a moment at its surroundings, the sources 
 from whence it comes, and then we can the more understandiugly 
 examine its character to ascertain the force it should iiave. 
 
 Mr. Lowndes is a relative of the family, and not only a relative 
 of the family, but upon that Sunday sustained the relation of 
 counsel to the prisoner's father, and which relation he now sus- 
 tains to the prisoner himself. The prisoner was there on this 
 Sunday, as Mr. Syester tells you, to assist in preparing for his 
 father's defense — defense of what? to an indictment for having 
 cowardly shot young McKaig some months before, and which fact 
 must have been as well known to the prisoner as it was well 
 known to every other citizen in Cumberland. Young McKaig in 
 place of taking the law in his own hands had sought a court of 
 justice for a vindication of the truth, he was the only witness on 
 the indictment against the father. The prisoner was in company 
 with Lowndes on Sunday to prepare for his father's defense, and 
 at 8 o'clock the next morning is standing over the dead body of 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'kAIG, JR. 153 
 
 the only witness on the indictment against the' father. Gentle- 
 men, the sequel shows how effectual was the defense prepared. 
 Why was that paper offered? Was not that paperoffered as a,fact 
 in the case, and was i( not offered to be proved by Mr. Lowndes 
 that on the day preceding this homicide that paper was shown to 
 the prisoner, and this evidence is admitted as a fad communi- 
 cated to the prisoner for the purpose of influencing his mind, and 
 Showing yon how it operated upon it. Now, if it was a fad in this 
 case that William w. McKaigwas the father of that child, and 
 that fact was communicated to him on the Sunday preceding, it 
 was no more or less a fact than this paper offered in evidence. 
 
 My friends on the other side said in their argument that when 
 we got up here, ami not only offered to let them, bill invited them 
 to go into this question of seduction and paternity of the child, 
 that we did it for the purpose of influencing your minds. We did 
 not do it for any such purpose, when the Court decided they 
 could introduce any fact communicated to this party, and when 
 they claimed thai the fact of seduction and paternity of the child 
 was communicated to him on Sunday for the first time, we 
 asked them not to blast this man's name with any such miserable 
 and contemptible document as that offered, that if they had the 
 evidence of the seduction of the sister and the paternity of this 
 child, to come and prove it on the deceased and give us an oppor- 
 tunity to show how utterly false the whole charge was. That is 
 what we desired, and had a right to desire. And T say it is cruel 
 and worse than cruel, to stand now by the side of this dead man's 
 grave-and undertake to insinuate that he has violated the peace and 
 chastity of that home, when they had it, as they say, in their power 
 to prove it, and the Court had given them the right to prove it, and 
 did not dare to make the effort. Then, gentlemen, where is the se- 
 duction? gut they say this is not a case of seduction. They tell you 
 in one breath that seduction is not in this case, and then they ask 
 you to acquit this man upon the ground that William W. Me- 
 Kaig was the seducer of his sister, "it is either in or out. If it is 
 not in this ease, it is their fault and not the fault of the State. 
 We asked them and invited them, and the Court gave them the 
 liberty of entering into the fullest investigation oi' that fact. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, what did they do? Oh, in the name of jus- 
 tice, in the name of the laws of the land under which we live, in 
 in the name of every household in this community, gentlemen, 1 
 inquire what did they do? Have you looked at that paper, gen- 
 tlemen? Where did it come from? What is its history? Written 
 in 1866. By whom? Addressed to whom? Hearing internal evi- 
 dence of what ? The evidences that would show a, deeper state of 
 degradation on the part of anybody receiving and acting upon it, 
 
 t lian we would imagine ever attached to the sister of t he accused, 
 
 offered either as evidence to prove seduction, or offered as evi- 
 dence, as a fact that was communicated tot his party, upon which 
 he would believe that his sister had been seduced I iy the writer .of 
 such a paper as tins. Does it bear evidence that the party that 
 
 would receive such a communication as that and act upon \l was 
 the subjeel of » duction? 
 
 Gentlemen, if the counsel on the other side will allow you, and 
 
154 TRIAL OF HARRY (JTi \WFOBP BLACK 
 
 you think it is of any weight, or importance in tl case, Ebfigthat 
 you will take this letter to your jury room, and 1 beg you will 
 apply to i1 a strong magnifying glass. I have one here, and l b«g 
 that you will trace the letters and see where in almost every in- 
 stance those have been traced over the lead-pencil marks with ink. 
 That has been done by somebody ? But nobody knows who. 
 
 And then, gentlemen, evidently, after having traced over with 
 the ink the rubber is applied, ami the pencil marks in many eases 
 rubbed oul . or in many cases left, and with a magnifying glass by 
 bringing the principal Focus to the lines, you can thus trace dis- 
 tinctly where the lead-pencil marks are, and where i hey have been 
 traced over by the ink, and where they have failed fully to erase. 
 This is the fact that they offered to show, bearing on this question 
 of seduction, when they had the fact in their possession, as they 
 tell you, that William W.McKaig was the lather of the child and 
 the seducer of this girl. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, again, who was brought upon this stand when 
 the letter was offered? Why, John M. Resley. What did they 
 ask him? He was asked, " Whose handwriting is that?" He 
 answered, "That is William W. MeKaig's." "How do you 
 know':'" He was not asked the question, "Are you acquainted 
 with the hand-writing of William W. filcKaig?" Then .he was 
 dropped and allowed to go oil' the stand, and lie was not, brought 
 back to us lor cross-examination, lie simply stated the fact with- 
 out laying the proper foundation that this was in the handwriting 
 of William W. McKaig. When was it written? [n 1866. Why. 
 William W. McKaig had been away from Cumberland for six or 
 seven years. Who knew his handwriting? And how can you test 
 handwriting, gentlemen ? Why there is a certain element of indi- 
 viduality about handwriting that gives you the test of recognition; 
 it is like recognizing a man by the countenance — individuality that 
 stands. When you see the handwriting of a man that you have 
 heen familial- with, and have often seen him write, then comes up 
 that individuality that attaches itself to the handwriting itself 
 by which you are enabled to judge. But let that handwriting be 
 tracked over with ink, that individuality is destroyed, and, there- 
 fore, I ask what evidence there is in the case to show who wrote 
 that paper, or where; it came from':' But, gentlemen, this is not 
 all; where was that letter found? Who found it? To whom was it 
 addressed? Gentlemen, let me submit that letter to a jury of t welve 
 women. Do you think they would have any sympathy for a party 
 who would receive such a communication as that, and act upon 
 it? Do you think that a person educated up — no, I would rather 
 say, educated down — to that standard of morality, is a subject for 
 sympathy among refined, virtuous, chaste ladies; is there any evi- 
 dence of seduction there? And that, too, in response to a note 
 written by one to the party who was the writer of this letter. Why, 
 gentlemen, go to the largest metropolis in the country; go into 
 your most common brothels and it is a production only worthy to 
 be issued from such a place as that, i do not know how you would 
 feel, but Lknow if I had laid before me a, communication like that 
 and it was said that that had been addressed to my sister in re- 
 sponse to a note seut by her, I would go to her and inquire often 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG, JR. LOO 
 
 before T would lay the charge of seduction to any roan. And they 
 say toe have been suppressing testimony, because we did not bring 
 a pair of pantaloons here. Our friend, who addressed yen yester- 
 day, and all of them have rung the changes upon it. and staled we 
 suppressed the pantaloons, and for a purpose. Whoever supposed 
 the pantaloons would he wanted in a caseof this kind. Suppressed 
 testimony have we? Give us the history of that paper before you 
 talk of suppressing testimony; you promised to do it in your open- 
 ing; you promised to tell us where you found it; to whom address- 
 ed, and by whom it was written. You have uot done, a solitary 
 thing of the kind, and yet, gentlemen stand here and brand McKaig 
 as the seducer of this man's sister. 
 
 But the gentlemen say that although the question of seduction 
 is not in this case — and not in, gentlemen, because they have 
 Shirked the responsibility of the issue, for they had full opportu- 
 nity to have placed it in evidence before you — that although that 
 is not in. yet he still acted under the belief that such is the case, 
 and, therefore, you are to consider it when you come to consider 
 the gradeof this homicide. Acting under the belief; do they wish 
 to make the belief a test? They say that that belief was a, reason- 
 able belief, growing out of the communications made to him ou 
 the Sunday preceding the homicide. 
 
 Weli, now, gentlemen, let me call your attention for a moment 
 to the scene. What were the communications made to him? Why, 
 Mr. Lowndes telisyou that he had sent for him to prepare for his 
 father's defense. Defense of what? Defense of his father, who 
 had been indicted for an assault with intent to kill, for shooting 
 this young man down in the streets of Cumberland some months 
 before .Now, what did he tell him? lie told him that, in his opin- 
 ion, McKaig was the seducer of his sister, and therefore, it would 
 be necessary for that sister to be brought as a witness to testify 
 upon the stand. Now, is Mr. Lowndes' opinion to be a test in 
 eases of this kind? Is he to be judge and jury, and to pass judg- 
 ment on the man, and then the party who listens, to go out and 
 execute that judgment? Is that the law? Is that the test you wish 
 to establish in cases of ibis kind? And he, Lowndes, tells him 
 there is a. letter. lie did not tell him by whom it was written, but 
 be tele- him that tbe letter is at Mr. Roman's house. Then the only 
 Other testimony is that he, goes to Mr. Roman's house and he says 
 to this party, " read this letter." And what Mr. Lowndes tells you 
 is a remarkable fact, that he did give him the mimes of Judge 
 Pearreand William vv. McKaig in connection with that letter, and 
 yet no effort was made by either of the parties to tins conference, 
 to obtain from either of those persons any information about this 
 letter. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, standing at this point of the case, let us test 
 the theory of the defense that is now presented ley them. Having 
 abandoned the theory of seduction, theynowcome before you and 
 say, that Black acted under the belief when he committed this 
 homicide, 1 li.>t McKaig was such seducer. Assuming litis to be so, 
 we have called in vain tor the. counsel on the other side to show 
 us the law that such a. belief would mitigate, much less excuse a, 
 homicide. But L am not now examining this branch of the case 
 
156 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 in reference to any question of law, but in reference to the two 
 questions of fact. Did lie entertain any such belief, and had he, as 
 a reasonable man, any sufficient ground for entertaining any such 
 belief. 
 
 what did this man Black know at that time; what did he know? 
 He knew that his sister, in the month of April, six months ante- 
 rior, had been sent from borne in disgrace. lie knew, from the 
 testimony of the mother, that she was of an unchaste character, 
 although he did not know who was the seducer, or who was alleged 
 to have been. He knew, because he had been told on the Saturday 
 preceding, that an occurrence had taken place some time before at 
 the fair grounds between the father and William W. McKaig; and 
 lie knew that at that time, and in that public place, in the presence 
 of that father and the people assembled, William W. McKaig had 
 announced that she was a woman of an unchaste character and 
 had denied every thingconnecting him in reference to this matter. 
 HeTcnew all these facts; he had been referred to Judge Paerreand 
 to William W. McKaig, in refeienceto this letter. And what else 
 did he know? Why lie knew William W. McKaig; and he knew 
 him as a gentleman of high standing in Cumberland; he knew him 
 as a man of extensive business; lie knew him as a generous and a 
 brave man; he knew him as a friend and acquaintance to a certain 
 extent; he knew r that he was at the head of a family; a husband, 
 and the fa: her of a child. He knew all these things; and he knew 
 that William W. McKaig was there in the city of Cumberland; 
 he knew that if he went to William W. McKaig, as a gentleman, 
 and a man of honor, and had said to him, "Sir, you are charged 
 with this thing, here is a communication, is this true, or is it not? 
 Tell me; i want to act upon the facts." He knew that he could 
 have gotten the facts from that source without any difficulty at 
 all. lie knew another thing; he knew that, notwithstanding his 
 father had shot A illiam W. McKaig down in the streets of Cum- 
 berland in a cowardly manner, from behind, that McKaig had 
 declined taking the law into his own hands. Why, gentlemen, he 
 knew that this very man, William W. McKaig 
 
 Mr. Nelson. Mr. Whitney, what evidence is there that Mr. 
 McKaig had been shot down by Mr. Black? 
 
 Mr. Whitney. Gentlemen, he knew that he was called there to 
 assist in the preparation of the defense of his father, for an indict- 
 ment had been found by the grand jury. 
 
 Mr. Nelson. That indictment is not before this jury. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. He knew then that William W. KcKaig — what- 
 ever may have been the difficulty — lie knew that William W. Mc- 
 Kaig, instead of taking the law into his own hands, and applying 
 the law of vengeance that has been supplicated here in behalf of 
 tins prisoner— he knew that William W. McKaig was then apply- 
 ing to the tribunal of justice for five investigation of anything 
 that might be connected between hnu and the father of the pris- 
 oner. He knew all these facts, yet, on the following morning at 
 the early hour described by the witnesses he is found watching, 
 lying in waif, armed with a dangerous, deadly weapon of the 
 character shown to you on the stand, waiting ami waiting for his 
 victim; ami then, when he comes within sight, marches forward 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M KAIG, JR. 157 
 
 to meet him, and then this occurrence takes place. Is that the 
 law to be established in Maryland? Why, my friends on the other 
 side say that there never was a case of this kind where a party 
 had been convicted; there neve!- was a case of this kind tried 
 before; there never was a case of the kind tried before where such 
 an abortive attempt was ever made to crowd in the question of 
 seduction to prejudice the mind of the jury as in this case. 
 
 T et me turn your attention for a moment, at this point, to the 
 case of Sickles. My friend has read law here; lie cited the case of 
 Simeon and Levi. That is not the first time it has been cited; it 
 has been cited in everyone of the seduction cases that have ever 
 been tried in the country; it was cited in the Sickles case, but the 
 gentleman did not read far enough. If it had occurred to the 
 learned gentleman to read further, he would have found that the 
 aged parent, when he was about to depart, inspired by the proph- 
 ecy that was upon him, and his lip* touched, as it were, with a 
 coal from heaven's altar, he said "cursed be their anger, for it was 
 fierce, and their wrath, for it was cruel." That is Jacob's lan- 
 guage when he was ascending up to heaven, and about to be 
 gathered to his fathers. 
 
 Now, what are the facts in the Sickles case? 
 
 Mr. Nelson. Is that the Bible that you are reading from? 
 
 Mr. Whitney. I am quoting the language of the Bible; lam 
 reading from this trial in order to save time. 
 
 Mr. Nelson. If you are reading from the Bible, or quoting from 
 the Bible, I wish you would read from it. We have got nothing 
 to do here with the Sickles trial. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. The Sickles trial has been referred to repeatedly 
 here, as it has elsewhere, as a test case, because Mr. Sickles was 
 acquitted. Nov, gentlemen, you have nothing to do with verdict - 
 of other juries; I do not complain of this verdict; the law laid 
 down in this case is perfectly satisfactory to the State of Mary- 
 land. But what was this case? It has been cited as a parallel 
 case to this. Let me read you a brief statement of the facts. 
 
 Mr. Whitney proceeded to read. After he had read a few minutes, 
 Mr. Nelson, interrupting, &aicl : 
 
 May it, please your honor. I must object to this. 1 do so with great, 
 reluctance. It may be all right ; butwhatin the world has the mere. 
 annotation of somebody whom we do not know, put to a mere 
 pamphlet of this kind, got to do with the facts of ibis case before this 
 jury? Is ii any portion of the case that the gentleman is reading 
 from.-' It is nothing in the World but the mere statement of some irre- 
 sponsible reporter. We do not know whether he is stating properly 
 the facts in the case or not. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. It is the same work from which Mr. Voorhees rend. 
 
 'I'hc members of the < lourt taking the matter into consideral ion, and 
 apparently being a little embarrassed by the objection, Mr. Whitney 
 said : [f there is any difficulty in the mind of the ( 'ourt, 1 am willing 
 to waive the further reading. 1 certainly, however, have a right, when 
 counsel refer to the case, to stab' the tacts of that case, and to show 
 that the case is not a parallel one. 
 
 The Court. Proceed, air. 
 
 Mr. Whitney. The facts of that case are perfectly notorious, and 
 
153 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 every ease depends on its own facts. We have called upon the coun- 
 sel <>ii the other side for facts. My friend in his opening address ii> yon 
 challenges the production of a case of this kind where the party has 
 ever been acquitted. Whal does it reduce us to? Pause for a moment and 
 reflect — consider what is til:' law to be established by any such doctrine 
 as this. Let us consider and see what is to be its application. The 
 question of seduction is out ofthecase. That they say, although they 
 could have proved it had itexisted. Don't they know very well that 
 if they could have proved the fact of seduction, plainly and clearly 
 before you, that this family wrong and all these at rocities, said to have 
 been committed, which have been Btated here, that they could have 
 acquitted this many But what have they done instead? Theysay 
 that they acted on belief. What docs that doctrine amount to ? Let 
 us tor it. Gentlemen of the jury. I stand in somebody's way in the 
 city of Baltimore. Sonic person's sister has fallen, and has. perhaps, 
 given birth to a child. That man goes and says to the brother, k " Mr. 
 Whitney has sedueed your sister; now, you shoot him, and I will give 
 you $5,003." lie shoots me, ami is brought into a court of justice; 
 and what does he say? ''Why somebody told me that Mr. Whitney 
 seduced my sister, and T shoot him, ami a Frederick county jury have 
 established the law, and that justifies me." That is it, gentlemen ; 
 you cannot make it anything else. You may talk, and discuss, and 
 cite as much scripture as you please, and it cannot come to anything 
 else. Now, whatever may be your views as men, where the tact of 
 seduction is established under the peculiar and harrowing circum- 
 stances surrounding the family, where confidence is betrayed, and 
 where all those feelings of our nature are outraged, what a man will 
 do is for his own conscience to decide. It is a question for him to deter- 
 mine. It' he takes vengeance into his own hands, he violates the laws 
 of the land ; but under certain circumstances he may he sustained in 
 doingit. When such a question comes before you, as a jury, it will 
 lie rime enough lor you to settle the question as to what you will do in 
 such acase as that. But gentlemen, in the name of common justice, 
 in the name of humanity, in the name of law and order, in the name 
 of all that is dear and sacred to an American citizen, establish no such 
 doctrine as is here contended tor; make no man's opinion a Final 
 judgment, from which there is no appeal, ami on which the party may, 
 without notice, proceed to execute, even to the taking of human life. 
 Gentlemen, ponder well the results of such a doctrine. Juries are 
 said In' the teachers of public morals; look well to it, the lesson you 
 shall teach by the verdict yon may render in this ease. 
 
 Although our friends have repeatedly told you that seduction is not 
 in this case, and you are not to consider it, yet they have spent hours 
 in reading from the Bible, and painting before you, in the most vivid 
 colors, the character of the offense, and the merited doom of its per- 
 petrator. Grant it all. If the offense is of such a character, and the 
 perpetrator is to be punished with death, is the party charged not to be 
 entitled to a trial, in order to ascertain the fact of his guilt or inno- 
 cence? Are we living in a country, and under a government, where 
 we have a crime punishable with death, and that without a trial, to 
 determine the guilt ? Is the opinion of any man, however interested 
 as a relative or legal adviser, to be a sufficient warrant, upon the 
 strength of which the man is to go forth to slaughter and vengeance? 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. ITKAIQ, JR. 159 
 
 Is this the high moral sentiment thai has overridden and obliterated 
 
 the musty law of our fathers, covered over with the dusi of ages, about 
 which we have heard so much from the eloquent gentlemen <>n the 
 other side? Is this the law that a Frederick county jury is t<> establish 
 for their own households and their own hearthstones? Rest assured, 
 gentlemen, that however congenial it may lie to (he atmosphere of 
 Indiana, the home <>r the distinguished advocate who has advanced 
 it, such a doctrine ami such a law will find no response in the hearts 
 either of the sons or daughters of Maryland. 
 
 You have been told, in most eloquent terms, that it was better that, 
 ten guilty men should escape, than that one innocent man should 
 suffer. Grant it ! T>id Black act upon this rule when he shot Mc- 
 Kaig? Does the higher moral sentiment that the gentleman from In- 
 diana seeks to establish as law, recognize any such rule? lie tells 
 you that you are to give a party the benefit of any doubt, and he has 
 read hooks to sustain the position. Grant it ! Did Black act upon 
 this rule when lie shot McKaig? Does the higher moral sentiment 
 the gentleman desires to inculcate into the jurisprudence of Maryland 
 recognize this rule? He says you are to give no judgment against 
 this prisoner, unless you have ail the probabilities before yon. Had 
 Mr. Lowndes all the probabilities before him, when he pronounced 
 judgment against McKaig on the Sunday, and had Black all the prob- 
 abilities before him on the following Monday morning, when he issued 
 forth, armed to the teeth, to execute the judgment of Lowndes? Did 
 Black give McKaig the benefit of a doubt? The counsel has read to 
 you where the old justices were hung, because they gave false judg- 
 ments, and did not give the party accused the benefit of a doubt. Did 
 Lowndes give McKaig the benefit of a doubt, when he entered up 
 judgment against him on the Sunday; and, perchance, if from not 
 giving him the benefit of the doubt, he entered up a false judgment? 
 Whom will the learned counsel on the other side designate as the 
 proper tribunal to administer to him the same justice that was admin- 
 istered to the justices of old as a penalty for entering up their false 
 judgments? 
 
 Once more, before I leave this branch of the subject, I ask you to 
 ponder well before you establish any such doctrine as has been urged 
 before you in this case. The eyes of the people are upon you; you 
 stand forth to-day as the conservators of the public peace. Stand 
 linn to the law as it is written, and not be carried away by alleged 
 laws not written, and existing only in the imagination of ingenious 
 counsel, who find it necessary to appeal to them to carry through a 
 desperate cause. Remember, gentlemen, that the jury box is the 
 great balance-wheel in the complicated machinery of human govern- 
 ment. Let il sustain, the integrity Of the Constitution, and vindicate 
 the laws of the land. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I am exhausting your patience and occupying too 
 much oi your time, for it really seems to me that this whole ease i-. 
 within a very small compass, and I will hasten to the second inquiry 
 that, is presented to our minds in the investigation of this cause, ami 
 that is the subject of self-defense. When, did that originate? Where 
 did u originate? l>id if originate when Crawford Black, on the 
 morning oi that fatal day. was Lurking about in the pathway of 
 this very deceased for the purpose of taking hi-- life, armed with a 
 
1G0 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 deadly weapon : armed with a weapon of this kind, [showing the pisl >1 
 to the jury, which is a large navy revolver,] to protect himself against 
 wiwiar*, going about in his Dative city to deal wi>h his customers in his 
 ordinary business? Did ii originate, gentlemen, when he stood by the 
 side of that dead body, and for the first time announced "That is 
 whal you have got for ruining my sister, and trying to pul my father 
 in the penitentiary; and I have another shot left for any damned 
 scoundrel who says that I have done wrong." Is there self-defense 
 there? Is there self-defense in the affidavit that is found in the very 
 record in this case? An affidavit made by him In Cumberland, that 
 he could not safely proceed to the trial of this ease at that time, on ac- 
 count of the absence of his sister, who was a material witness to prove 
 the paternity of thai child, a witness that he has not dared to put on 
 the stand, now that his trial has come up. Gentlemen, do the facts, 
 the living facts that originated a! that time, mark out self-defense? 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I desire to call your attention for one moment to 
 the coat. This, gentlemen, is the bouquet of the widow and the or- 
 phan. You see there how that wound was inflicted. Was it not 
 necessarily inflicted when the arm was raised above the head? You 
 see that wound ; you see that wound in the side ; you see by the shirt 
 that there is a wound entering the side. Xow, these are living facts, 
 that don't depend on living testimony. These are the records that 
 < 'iaw Cord Black has left, by which he is to he judged. .Vow, what does 
 the doctor say? The doctor tells you that the ball entering die side, 
 entered a< a point posterior to the medial line. How was that received ? 
 lie tells you that it« course was downwards and forwards through the 
 body. Where stood the party who fired the shot? These are facts 
 not depending on the recollection of witnesses Where is the first 
 shot fired on that occasion. What was the situation of the party when 
 he fired that first shot? Why, hi' waited, in the language of the wit- 
 ness, until McKaig had passed him, until he was entirely oil" his guard, 
 when he turns round and points the pistol and shoots him there. 
 Now, what occurs alter that ? What is the evidence? Why, the testi- 
 mony all shows that simultaneously with the first shot, and before the 
 smoke from the fatal pistol had risen above the head of either of the 
 parties, the deceased threwup his hands in a supplicating position, 
 (nothing in them then, gentlemen,) and staggered from the pavement 
 into the street. The deceased then attempts to cross the street, and 
 Black follows up from behind and discharges another barrel of Ins pis- 
 tol ; the deceased succeeds in reaching the curbstone at the opposite 
 side of the street, and when, by the post is about to fall, he receives 
 another shot, from behind, the effect of which seems to be to rally him 
 foi a moment, and he makes another effort to recross the street, and 
 when about midway, in the very act of falling, with his face to the 
 ground, he receives another shot from the pistol of Black, who was 
 then standing over him, which shot entered the spinal column, and he 
 
 fell a corpse. 
 
 Gentlemen, you have this testimony from the witnesses on both 
 sides, corroborated by the locality of the wounds, as testified to bythe 
 medical witnesses, and by the blood-stained garments of McKaig that 
 have been exhibited here before yon. Gentlemen, what can the ad- 
 miring friends of Crawford Black find here to awaken their enthusi- 
 asm? What can a brave man discover here to hold up to the admiring 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 161 
 
 gaze of chivalry? What can an American jury find here to sustain 
 the theory of self-defense? They were coward's shots, and most cow- 
 ardly were they inflicted ! 
 
 The gentlemen on the other side say, when they came to the ques- 
 tion of self-defence 4hat if you have a doubt about it, you aretoacquit. 
 I disagree with thisi in their law. I say it is not the law, but, on the 
 other hand, if the State has made out its ease against this prisoner, 
 clearly and fully, and he puts in a plea of justification, he is bound to 
 make good that plea, and if he fails, the case of the State stands 
 good and unrebutted, and conviction must follow. 
 
 How singular the exhibition of Crawford Black, standing here, and 
 through each of the four counsel who have addressed you, ask to be 
 acquitted upon this question of doubt, repeating and reiterating it in 
 your hearing, reading from the books to show it to be your duty so to 
 do, when he, without a moment's warning, ushered the soul of his 
 victim into eternity, because, as they say in one branch of their de- 
 fense, be believed him to have been the seducer of bis sister, which 
 fact, if he ever believed at all, (and assuming him to have been a brave 
 man, the evidence all shows he never did believe,) he could, in thirty 
 minutes' time, have fully satisfied himself that such belief was ground- 
 less, and the opinion of Mr. Lowndes was a false and erroneous one. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, let us for a few moments come to discuss this 
 question of self-defense. You have these living facts before you, 
 already referred to. Now let us come to the witnesses by which they 
 seek to establish this self-defense. Let us analyze this testimony ; we 
 have the surrounding circumstances ; these transactions ; we have his 
 declaration ; we have the affidavit that he made, found in the record ; 
 we have the locality of the wounds, and we have the situation of the 
 party as be crossed the street. Let us now analyze this testimony and 
 see where this theory of self-defense is to be found. The first witness 
 they called is Charles M. Medore. Now, he tells you that he was in the 
 store nearly opposite to where this occurred, and that what he saw was 
 through the window, and the window was down; that hearing the 
 first shot he turned around and looked out of the window. Now 
 what does he tell you ? He tells you that he saw the pistol, and that 
 when he saw it it was ten feet in the street. Now, 1 want to test these 
 witnesses, one by the other, and see how they stand the searching test 
 of truth, which you are bound to give. He says he saw this pistol, 
 and described it, attempting to give us the size and character of it 
 as he saw it through that window, about ten feet in the street. 
 He tells you that he went into that office, unbuckled that. belt,. 
 And tells you another fact. That when that last shot was fired by 
 Black at McKaig, Black was standing in front of McKaig, a fact that 
 is contradicted by every witness in the cause, except one other, offered 
 by the defense, and alike contradicted by the locality of the wounds. 
 Now you are testing human testimony. Let us bring it to the crucible 
 that will bring out the truth. But what does be tell you also? He- 
 tells you that the pistol that he did see "was the pistol that Mr. Turney 
 picked up. Now, it is proved beyond all question that the pistol that 
 Turney picked up was the pistol that fell from the body of McKaig 
 when his body was raised, and it could not, therefore, have been in 
 his band. Again, this witness swears that he unbuckled McKaig*s 
 belt. But they say on the other side, (to be sure, be swore that heun- 
 
» 162 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 buckled his belt.) bul la nol his testimony as good as Dr. Smith's, who 
 swore he did not doit? Now, it is a desperate cause thai requires 
 counsel to raise a question of veracity between the boy Charles M. 
 MedoreandDr. Smith. Dr. Smith is, f trust, known tosomeofthe 
 gentlemen of this jury. He Us a native of your county, a man who 
 has grown gray in the respect, confidence, and love of all the people 
 who know him throughout the section of the country where he has 
 spciii his years of toil, in the relief of the pains and sufferings of others,. 
 I undertake to say that Western Maryland can produce no man whose 
 head lias been whitened by the frost of years witli so much honor and 
 so much credit as that of Dr. Smith's. Not that alone. Did not 
 Dr. Dougherty tell you, also, that lie was there in that office and that 
 lie heard Dr. Smith ask Mervin McKaigto take his papers and unbuckle 
 his belt, and that the doctor saw Mervin McKaigwhen he unbuckled 
 that belt and put it around his body, :it the request of Dr. Smith. 
 There can be no question of veracity between Dr. Smith and Charles 
 Medore. Dr. Dougherty is too well known, as well as Dr. Smith, to 
 admit of that. Now, mark the locality where he locates this pistol. 
 Ten feet in the street, when their very next witness, a colored gentle- 
 man, puts it on the pavement, or just in the gutter. Now, the next 
 witness called is Enos Davis, a colored man. [ do not wish to com- 
 ment harshly upon the testimony of any witness, it is a matter en- 
 tirely within your discretion ami judgment; I have my own views 
 about it. For my own part, I do not believe that Enos was there to see 
 anything about the pistol. I think he was on the other side of the 
 street w ii'n his horse and cart, which lie tells you he had left there. 
 But what does Davis swear to? lie swears that he was standing by 
 the corner of the bridge, and says that he saw nothing in this man's 
 hand, but that he saw him put his band behind his hotly. Now, Enos 
 Davis was standing by the bridge; Mr. McKaig was walking in this 
 direction and he put, bis hand behind his body in that direction. Could 
 he have seen anything shine, as testified to by him? He says, how- 
 ever, I saw McKaig when he threw up bis hands, and he swears that 
 he saw nothing in them. Now, mark that, gentlemen. What does 
 William Wolf say ? We are now testing the accuracy of the locality 
 of the pistol, which they say was the third pistol. Mind you, gentle- 
 men, Medore had testified that he saw the pistol, and that it fell ten 
 feet in the street. Wolf says that the pistol he saw fell into the gutter, 
 and that pistol Turuey picked up. Turney picked up but one pistol, so 
 that wherever the pistol dropped that he saw, Turney picked it up, no 
 matter where it might be. We shall see hereafter where that pistol was 
 that Turney picked up. 
 
 Now we come to the testimony of John Hipp, the man who went 
 over the fence in the back-yard to avoid being a witness, and failed to 
 succeed. You saw him on the stand. I think it did hhn more good 
 while he. was on the stand than anything else could possibly have done 
 him, unless he had gone to Baltimore and taken one of those hew baths 
 recently introduced there. "What does he say? He said : " 1 saw Mc- 
 Kaig running, and Black after him ; McKaig run across the street, and 
 Black followed him ; 1 saw McKaig when lie fell ; he had a revolver in 
 his hand. " Therefore, according to his testimony, he saw a pistol in 
 McKaig\s bain! when he fell in the street. And he says further : "I 
 saw the pistol in his hand when the second shot was fired. " Now, 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kATG, JR. 163 
 
 mark it, ho saw the pistol in his hum! when the second shot was fired, 
 and he says the second shot was fired about the middle of the street. 
 Compare this with the testimonyof Wolf, who saw it fall in the gutter. 
 And this is the man who informed Mr. Peter Yarnell, who called upon 
 him for some information, that if he did not go away lie would break 
 his damned neck. lie says farther that the second shot was tired about 
 the middle of the street, and the third shot was tired as he got on the 
 other side. Therefore, he must have seen the pistol in McKaig's hands 
 in thf middle of the street, because he saw the pistol when the second 
 shot was tired, and that was tired in the middle of the street. 
 
 Now, we come to the testimony of George Garner, another colored 
 witness, and I leave these witnesses with you. You recollect George 
 Garner, the colored man from Washington. He said that he lived in 
 Washington, but had been in Cumberland several weeks without work, 
 that he left his home that morning, and met a stranger in the street, and 
 stopped him at that hour of the morning, entering with him into conver- 
 sation. A most remarkable thing. He succeeded in getting a job. He 
 stopped him and asked him about work, being a stranger. He knew the 
 people in Cumberland, because, when I asked him if he knew a man by a 
 certain name, he asked if that was the policeman. He knew a policeman 
 by that name ; he had made himself acquainted with that class of the 
 community at least. He knew some of the people of Cumberland, but 
 he did not know this person whom he stopped to talk to that morning. 
 Most remarkable, and this statement that lie makes is more than remark- 
 able, lie said both of these parties exhibited pistols after the second 
 tin 1 , and he said when McKaigrun across the street he put his hands 
 behind his back and tried to pull a pistol out, but could not. Now, 
 compare this statement with the others made by the witnesses exam- 
 ined by the defense. Medore says the pistol dropped in the street ten 
 feet from the gutter ; Wolf says it fell in the gutter; Ilipps says he 
 saw McKaig when he was running ; that he had a pistol in his ham], 
 and had it in his hand when he fell. And now comes this man. all 
 the way from Washington, and he says that both parties exhibited pis- 
 tols, but he saw McKaig when he run across the street, and that he 
 then put his hands behind his back and tried to pull a pistol out, but 
 could not. 
 
 Gentlemen, can you reconcile this testimony? And this is the only 
 other witness who test dies with Medore that Black was standing in 
 front of McKaig when he tired the last shot, a fact directly in conflict 
 with all the other evidence; in the cause, coining from the prisoner as 
 well as the State. 
 
 Then we have the testimony of Charles Clark, a boy, who says that 
 he did no! see any pistol in McKaig's hands. He saw the pistol fall 
 during the time, but the pistol he saw fall Mr. Tiirney picked up. This 
 closes their testimony on the theory of self-defense. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, when you come to consider human testimony how 
 many considerations, how many facts, and how many circumstances 
 are to be viewed ? This question of human testimony could be dis- 
 cussed at great length, but I am not here for that purpose ; it 
 would take, too much of your time. They are uncertain, they arc 
 unreliable. You have got to look at the honesty and integrity of the 
 witnesses; their appearance upon the stand, and opportunities for ob- 
 servation. Now let us apply that test in this case. In tlie first place 
 
16-1 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 you have 1 1 1« • testimony of Dr. Smitb : you know the man or, at least, 
 I trust some of yon do. They Bay thai they have the- positive testimony 
 upon one side, and that this is negative. Th< y say that where there are 
 two men in a room, and one hears the clock strike and the other does 
 not, that ii does not follow that the clock did not strike ; thai you are 
 to determine that the clock did strike. Such is not a parallel case to 
 this. Here was the same thing i<> which the attention of these differ- 
 ent parties was called. And what does Dr. Smith tell you? He tells 
 3*ou that, simultaneously with the firing, being in full view of the par- 
 ties, and before the smoke could curl and raiseabove his head, and 
 while McKaig was throwing up his hands in this imploring manner — 
 describing it — he looked, but he saw nothing in I lie hands of McKaig. 
 lie tells you from that time until the time McKaig's soul departed his 
 body, he was not over live or nine feet from his person. Therefore, it 
 would have been utterly impossible for him to have had anything in 
 his hands without Dr. Smith having seen it at the. time. Now, how 
 was the locality of Dr. Smith, compared with these other witnesses ? 
 What were his opportunities for observation ? What are his powers of 
 recollection? Then we come to Dr. Ilealey. Dr. Ilealey tells you the 
 same tiling, and what were his powers of observation, and what is his 
 integrity in the community, and how much credit is to be given him 
 as a witness on this stand ? Then we have the testimony of Mr. Gross, 
 who states to you, gentlemen, that he saw him at the first throWingup 
 of the hand, and that from that time to the. time of his death there was 
 nothing in it. Then we come to the testimony of Mr. Enfield. What 
 does he say? He says that he was approaching the body as they were 
 raising it, that he saw this pistol fall from the body, and that that was 
 the pistol that Mr. Turney picked up. Now, he tells you that the pis- 
 tol that dropped from McKaig's body was picked up by Mr. Turney, 
 and Wolf, Medore, and Clark all tell you that the pistol they saw fall 
 they saw Mr. Turney pick up. Now, these are the facts. Then, you 
 have the testimony of Mr. Cahill, a witness who was examined twice 
 by the other side ; a highly respectable gentleman from Cumberland. 
 He says that his impression is that, as he approached the body, he saw 
 something fall from it ; but that after (he body had been taken in he saw 
 Mr. Turney take up the pistol from the spot where the body had been 
 lying. Now, look at these things; look at these facts. We desire 
 this case to be tried upon the facts. Then we have the testimony of 
 Mr. Moorehead, who testifies to the same thing. The additional testi- 
 mony of Dr. Smith, who tells you that, as they were raising the body 
 from the ground, he heard something jingle, but he could not tell what 
 it was. But they say why not bring Mr. Turney here ? Why didn't 
 we bring Mr. McKaig here? And tiiey stated that Ik; had been here 
 during the whole of this trial. No such thing. Mervin McKaig has 
 been here but one or two days, I believe, during this trial. You try 
 this case upon the testimony that is before you, and, as you are well 
 aware, it often occurs that, as you are going on with the. case, the wit- 
 ness is not in court, and Mr. Turney was not in Frederick when this 
 testimony was going on. But what was the necessity of bringing Mr. 
 Turney here wizen all these witnesses swear they saw Mr. Turney 
 pick up this pistol, and tell you where the pistol was when he did 
 pick it up. 
 Now, gentlemen, where did this self-defense originate? Here is 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'KAIG, JR. 165 
 
 "Mr. Wolf hero, a witness brought into Court for the purpose of sus- 
 taining this theory of self-defense. There is Dr. Healey. They lived 
 side by side; they frequently compared notes. Dr. Healey tells you, 
 in reference to this occurrence, that they talked this thing over ; and 
 yet Dr. Healey tells you that be never heard it whispered ai n >• «t a pis- 
 tol in Mr. McKaig's hands until he came into this court. Now. is not 
 thai remarkable? Is it not singular? How, upon any known princi- 
 ple of human action, is it to he accounted for? 
 
 I pay again, this question of sell-defense was an after-thought, not, 
 dreamed of by t In* respectable people of Cumberland, till the com- 
 mencement of this trial. The gentlemen say we have not brought any 
 person here to attack the character of their witnesses upon the ques- 
 tion of self-defense. The answer to that is (hat they had no character 
 to attack ; no one knew them as to character, either for good or had. 
 
 And now, gentlemen of the jury, let us pause for a moment, and 
 pass in review before our minds the ground over which we have 
 traveled, and the conclusions to which the human judgment is neces- 
 sarily driven by a proper examination of this cause. We have shown 
 that the deceased, W. VV. McKaig, on the morning' of the day named 
 in the indiei 1 1 lent, in the city of Cumberland, came to his death by the 
 hand of violence in a most cruel and revengeful manner, and in a way 
 that could only have been prompted by a coward's heart. We have 
 shown you that this deed was perpetrated by the prisoner, Crawford 
 Black; that he did the deed with a specific intention to take life, and 
 that the taking of that life upon that morning was preceded by such 
 lying in wait as the statute law of your State solemnly enacts shall he 
 murder in the first degree. Standing upon this law and these facts 
 the case is plain and clean - . 
 
 Our attention has been next called to the answer attempted to he set, 
 up to such a case as this, and in that connection we have examined 
 the question of seduction, the theory that he acted under that belief, 
 and the theory <>t self-defense. Upon this question of seduction I have 
 shown you, gentlemen, that, for the. first time in the history of this 
 case, when they were called upon to act, when the time of talking had 
 passed, and the time for action had arrived, and they had been told by 
 the ruling of the Court in relation to the letter, that they were at lib- 
 erty to go into evidence of those faeis connected wilii (lie charge of 
 seduction communicated to the prisoner, we are then gravely told by 
 thecounselon the other side, for the first time, that the question of 
 seduction is not in (he case, and they think, from the efforl to prove 
 it — for you are to hear in mind, gentlemen, that while the Court said 
 that seduction, as an issue to be tried, was not in the case, they also 
 said that, as &faet which had been communicated to the prisoner on 
 the Sunday, il was in the case, and as a fact so communicated it was 
 admissible in evidence, che same as the letter. Now, while I am here 
 to confess that I am as yet unable to understand clearly the legal prin- 
 ciple Upon Which that letter is made admissible. I am hen* to say that 
 the ruling of the Court, making that letter admissible, opened wide 
 
 t he doors to the prisoner's counsel to make good their groundless asser- 
 tion-, hi lered upon all occasions during the trial, and though urgently 
 requested by the prosecution, they as steadily and persistently de- 
 clined to enter. Driven from this stronghold of their defense, we have 
 next examined their position as they entrenched themselves be- 
 hind the theory that In* acted under that belief; and we have 
 
166 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 shown you that, from the evidence, it is impossible he could have 
 entertained any such belief at the time he committed the homi- 
 cide; and thai no reasonable grounds existed for any sane, sensible 
 man to have entertained any such belief. We might have gone 
 further, and shown you that, had he even acted under such a belief, it. 
 would, be to him uo shield of protection under the law, bul would be 
 only evidence going to show a motive for committing a cruel and re 
 vengeful t.\cri\. But, gentlemen, in a case like this, so barren of evi- 
 dence to support the alleged facts, it seemed to me but an insult to 
 your intelligence to consume your time and exhaust your patience in 
 reading from the law books, tor the purpose of showing what is a legal 
 provocation, which, it' acted upon at the moment, maysei*ve to reduce 
 the crime from a higher to a lower grade. No such legal provocation 
 existed in this ease, and none has been attempted to he established. 
 Passing from this question of belief, we have next examined the 
 theory of self-defense, endeavored to ascertain where and when it, 
 originated, and to show how entirely inconsistent it is with the relia- 
 ble testimony in the cause. We have ^~r]i how utterly inconsistent 
 this defense is with that which was so boldly announced in the open- 
 ing statement of Mr. Syester; how the two are necessarily antago- 
 nistic one to the other, and how utterly unreconcilable it is with the 
 statements of the prisoner, when he stood by the dead body of his vic- 
 tim, with everything fresh upon his mind, and before time had been 
 allowed for able and ingenious friends to manufacture a defense. 
 Having done this, gentlemen, in my humble judgment, the case is be- 
 fore you in all its bearings. Jts legitimate points of argument have 
 been presented, and the other matters upon which so much time and 
 eloquence have been expended are but foreign and collateral to the 
 real and true issues in the case. 1 am well aware, gentlemen, how, in 
 desperate causes, able and ingenius counsel seek to raise false issues, 
 that may Serve to disturb and distract the mind of the jury, and en- 
 deavor to lead the counsel upon the other side into a discussion of 
 those rather than the true questions involved in the decision of the 
 case. Gentlemen, I, for one, have ho intention of being thus lead 
 into such an error, and be drawn from a consideration of the plain 
 principles upon which this cause, should be determined. 1 have en- 
 deavored to lay those principles before you, and upon you, gentlemen, 
 must, rest the responsibility. But, gentlemen of the jury, many col- 
 lateral questions have been brought into the argument of this cause by 
 the counsel upon the other. side; and allow me to say— anil I say it 
 with the greatest respect to the distinguished ability and learning rep- 
 resented upon the other side — that, in my humble judgment, their 
 entire arguments, With but slight exceptions, have been devoted to a 
 discussion of these collateral matters, that arc foreign to the true issues 
 in this cause. 
 
 Before leaving the case in your hands, however, gentlemen, it is 
 proper that 1 should call your attention to some of those suggestions 
 that have been made, and I beg you to bear in mind that I do it not 
 as a matter of argument of what 1 conceive to be the true questions 
 involved in the merits of this case, but to caution you lest your minds 
 may have been disturbed by their introduction into the case. First 
 it has been loudly declaimed against that this cause has been removed 
 from Alleghany county to this for trial. And pray, gentlemen, what 
 have you to do with that fact? How does that bear upon the question 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. m'kAIG, JR. 167 
 
 of guilt or innocence? What element, either in point of fact or 
 law (Iocs that removal furnish you, to assist you in arriving at a cor- 
 rect conclusion F But it is said that the prosecution was afraid of the 
 public sentiment <>l' Cumberland. Gentlemen, he was not to be tried 
 at the bar of public opinion; that had given forth its verdict on the 
 day of the burial, when the native city of the deceased was dressed in 
 mourning, her business suspended, and her population turned out en 
 masse to attend his funeral. But, gentlemen, he was to be tried be- 
 fore twelve men, eight of which had been selected, when the State's 
 attorney of that county made his affidavit that he believed the State 
 could not have a Fair and impartial trial. It has been asked why 
 should I his wealthy and powerful family, the McKaig's, seek some 
 other locality. Gentlemen, they had no more to do with it than either 
 one of you upon lhi> panel ; they had no voice in the matter. It was 
 the action of the State through its official, acting under the responsi- 
 bility of his official oath, and adding to that bis special affidavit that, 
 in bis opinion, a fair trial could not be had before the men already 
 selected. And, gentlemen, the counsel who last addressed you, Mr. 
 Voorhees, has even gone so far as to announce it as his opinion that 
 the law authorizing such a removal is unconstitutional, and be lias 
 cited from that instrument to show that every man is entitled to be 
 put upon his trial in the locality where the occurrence took place. 
 Gentlemen, is it possible that the learned counsel has forgotten that 
 the very instrument he reads from, the constitution of Maryland, guar- 
 antees this right of removal; that it is a right standing higher than 
 any mere law of the legislature — it is a constitutional power, and if 
 the Slate's attorney of Alleghany county bad failed to call into exercise 
 thai power, in a proper case, he would have been recreant to his duty 
 and false to the oath under which lie acted. Gentlemen, it is nothing 
 new in the history of Maryland. It has been done by her former at- 
 torney general, when eleven jurors were sworn, and the Court then 
 asked by that officer if it was expected of him to lay the case before 
 that jury. But what, gentlemen, have yon to do with this question? 
 The prisoner is constitutionally here, and you are sworn to try the 
 case upon the law and the evidence. Will you do that, or will you devote 
 your time in trying the propriety of the action of the State's attorney 
 of Alleghany county, and the court of that county in removing this 
 case. No, gentlemen, this is one of those false issues they have at- 
 tempted to raise. Let it not, like a false light, serve to mislead your 
 judgments. 
 
 But, gentlemen, another thing has been commented upon, and that 
 is the presence ol the McKaig family during the trial. Gentlemen, 
 this i< no common and ordinary ease ; the life of this son and brother 
 has not, only been taken, but an unauthorized and unjustifiable attempt 
 has been made lo throw over his grave the mantle of shame, and 
 they are here, in this temple of justice, as [heir son was, when he 
 sought a judicial tribunal to vindicate the truth. Gentlemen, that 
 
 effort COSt him his lite; but I can say to the counsel upon the other 
 side, that come life or come death, while that aged and sorrow- 
 Stricken father, that bOSOUl-Companion of former years who has t rav- 
 eled so tar onward with him in the pathway of life ; those brothers, 
 hone of the same bone, and flesh of the same flesh, nursed at the same 
 breast, rocked in the same cradle, and taught the same prayers beside 
 the same mother's knees, so long as they shall live not a stone will be 
 
1G3 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK 
 
 left unturned to vindicate the memory of the. dead and do justice to 
 the living he has left behind. 
 
 No. gentlemen, if w. \V. BlcKaig had never appealed to a tribunal 
 of justice to have the truth vindicated, you never would have been 
 called upon to try this case. He did call upon it, and ii became ne- 
 iry for a defense to be prepared, and it was prepared, and pre- 
 sented points of brevity and cruelty never before excelled in the his- 
 tory of civilized society. 
 
 Again, a day and a half was consumed by the defense in his effort 
 to establish a good character. In some, cases of extreme doubt, 1 ad- 
 mit, this becomes of the utmosl importance, and I would nor be un- 
 derstood as underrating its full value ; but in a case like this, how far 
 docs ii bearupon the true issue involved? The fact of the killing has 
 been proved, it is admitted. No probabilities are to be weighed and 
 considered, in the weighing of which character may be considered. 
 An act admitted to be done is the same whether committed by a man 
 of good, or by one whose character is unknown. I can not better illus- 
 trate the li : tie importance to be at tached to this than by referring you 
 to the ruling of the Court (Judge Bowie dissenting) when we offered in 
 evidence the good character of the deceased. They had offered evi- 
 dence of good character of Black to rebut the theory of the State, that 
 he made an attack upon MeKaig ; they then put in the plea that 
 McKaig made an attack upon Black, and upon the same ground we 
 offered the same evidence, to rehut the same theory, and the majority 
 of the Court ruled it out. [f the Court had supposed il of much force 
 in behalf of the prisoner, they certainly would not have denied it to 
 the State, when in the one ease it stood precisely upon the same legal 
 grounds as it did in the other. 
 
 Gentlemen, 1 have briefly called your attention to some of these co- 
 1 ate nil matters that have been brought into this case. I trust I have 
 not done it in such a way, and to such an extent, as to lead your 
 minds from the true questions that are involved. There is much more 
 I would like to say, and many comments I would like to make, 
 especially upon the opening statement of my friend, Mr. Syester; but 
 I feel such a course would serve rather to confuse than enlighten, and 
 I must, the re lore, leave thi< case in your hands. Gentlemen, a terrible 
 crime has been committed, human rights have been trampled upon, 
 the laws have been grossly violated, and society has been outraged. 
 A fellow-citizen, in tin,' prime of life, in the full vigor and strength of 
 his manhood, one beloved and respected by those with whom he had 
 been associated from his boyhood, has been cut down in the public 
 streets of your sister city, Cumberland; a homicide unparalleled in 
 cruelty and ferociousness has been committed upon one of her leading 
 citizens, a man largely engaged in business, the head of a family, and 
 a most useful member of society; and, gentlemen, the perpetrator is 
 before you. Do we live in a land of law and order? Is human life of 
 any value? Has it any security? Have our homes any protection? 
 Will the government under which we live discharge its obligations ? 
 Shall we continue to pay taxes to support our courts of justice? Is a 
 premium to be paid for lawless violence? Is this fearful tragedy com- 
 mitted in Cumberland to be ended in a disgraceful farce in Frederick? 
 Gentlemen, in the verdict you shall render will be found an answer to 
 these several questions, and to that verdict will the people of your 
 State look for the lesson they are to be taught. For its teachings they 
 
FOR KILLING COLONEL W. W. M'KAIG. 169 
 
 will hold you responsible, and its influence will descend upon your 
 
 children and your children's children. Pause ere yon deal lightly 
 with the rights of society, and reflect, lesl you allow the Government 
 
 under which you live to prove recreant, to its most solemn obligations. 
 Gentlemen, I have endeavored to discharge my duly in fairness and 
 candor. I have left much unsaid that 1 should have said, and I must 
 trust to you to supply the omissions ; and I trust, gentlemen, that, you 
 will so discharge the high and responsible duties resting upon you. 
 that when the wintry winds of fourscore years and ten shall have 
 whitened your heads wiih their frosts, when the heavy hand of time 
 shall have Lowed your forms, and your tottering footsteps shall linger 
 upon the confines of the grave, when, according to the laws of nature, 
 you shall begin to live amid the memories of the past, forgetting the 
 things of yesterday and remembering those of years gone by, yon may 
 look hack upon this scene ami thank your God that you have been the 
 humble instrument, in his hands of upholding the dignity of the laws, 
 and vindicating the immutable principles of justice and of truth. And 
 I trust that the verdict you may render shall be such an one as shall 
 carry a sense of security to every household in the land, and shall 
 stamp you as men, who, knowing your duty, dared perform it. 
 Gentlemen, the case is in your hands. 
 
THE ACQUITAL. 
 
 Ami now we conic to the last day*.- proceedings. Jr is the 10th day 
 of the trial and will be the last. A few hours and the prisoner walks 
 forth free among his fellow men, or is doomed to an early, awful 
 death. He will scon step from the prisoners box to the. enjoyment of 
 Liberty and the cordial congratulations of a large circle of friend-, or 
 will leave it to ascend the giddy, terrible height of the scaffold. It is 
 a clear, beautiful day, the 21st of April, 1871, and what will be the re- 
 sult of this long investigation will soon be revealed to the throng of 
 anxious inquirers present. 
 
 Long before the hour designated for the opening of t lie court the 
 largest crowd ever witnessed in the hall of justice in Frederick county 
 had gathered there, and hundreds pressed the outer door, unable to 
 gain entrance. Within the bar •were many distinguished legal gentle- 
 man from different parts of the country, and a number of Senators 
 .n\d Members of Congress, taking advantage of the adjournment of 
 Congress, had arrived to witness the finale of this important trial. 
 
 A.S the bell in the court-house dome announced the hour of nine, the 
 three judges entered. At ten minutes after nine Chief Justice Maulsby 
 let fall the gavel, and breathless silence at oncereigned over the vast 
 issembly. Justice Maulsby asked if all were ready. to proceed, and 
 lirected Mr. Voorhees toopen his case to the jury. 
 
 Mr. Voorhees arose, and paused as though oppressed by a sense ot 
 ; he great responsibility resting on him — at once all eyes of that vast con- 
 course were riveted upon the spot where he stood — and, (bra moment, 
 .due-- was absolutely appalling. Then, as it were, gathering up 
 the resources of his splendid genius and marvelous oratory, in a clear, 
 firm voice, Mr. Voorhees proceeded to address the jury, dwelling first 
 somewhat al length upon the remarkable character the boy at the 
 bar had developed, even by the mouths of adverse witnesses. With 
 bless eloquence and consummate skill he reverted to the dif- 
 ference in position and circumstances of the families of McKaig and 
 Black— i he influence and wealth of the one. the simple integrity and 
 respectability of the other. For three horn-sand thirty minutes he 
 held the audience spell-bound, moving thin often to tears. A- he 
 dosed, a very audible movement of applause was promptly checked by 
 !>•• Court, and Justice Maulsby proposed a recess for a few minutes. 
 
 At fifteen minutes before one o'clock the court re-assembled, ami in 
 
172 TRIAL OF HARRY CRAWFORD BLACK. 
 
 five minutes Mr. Whitney began his closing address to the jury, s] 
 ing two hours. The case was given to thejurya few minutes before 
 three o'clock, and they retired. 
 
 Thai was a moment of profound and eager interest. None who wit- 
 nessed but shared, none "who shared can ever forget. Amid the in- 
 tense emotion and excitement of that hour, perhaps no one was, out- 
 wardly at least, more self-possessed and composed than the prisoner, 
 who sat pallid, but calm and quiet. 
 
 At five minutes after lour o'clock the bailiff entering, notified the 
 Chief Justice that the jury had agreed upon a verdict. Justice Maulsby 
 directed them to be brought in, and they entered at eight minutes after 
 lour o'clock. 
 
 When they were seated the clerk directed the prisoner to stand up. 
 lie stood erect and firm, with his clear black eyes looking full into the 
 faces of the jurors, the audience scarcely seemed to breathe, and the 
 stillness was painful when the jury Mere asked if they were agreed 
 upon a verdict. The reply being in the affirmative, the clerk said: 
 ''Gentlemen of the jury, look upon the prisoner at the bar and say 
 is he guilty or not guilty ? 
 
 In a distinct voice the foreman. Mr. William Feaga, replied, " jSTot 
 GriLiv ! " 
 
 The pent-up emotions of the crowd could he no longer controlled by 
 the forms of judicial demeanor. One deafening yell shook the build- 
 ing from dome to foundation, and like a resistless torrent the entire 
 assembly rushed forward, as if to seize him in their arms, and bear 
 him out of the court-room. Sheriff Lamon embraced him with tear- 
 ful affection. Releasing himself as soon as possible from the crowd 
 that seemed unable to find words to express the admiration and deep 
 feeling with which his conduct, during the trial, had inspired them, 
 Barry Black rejoined his mother, who stood weeping within the bar. 
 The joy of that gentle, much-enduring mother's heart, who can tell, 
 in this, the hour of her son's triumph, the hour that, gives him hack- 
 to her almost from the jaws of death ? Let us draw a veil before emo- 
 tion so sacred — joy so profound. 
 
 Going to the hotel from the court-house he was visited by hundreds 
 Of friends and acquaintances eager to congratulate him, and to assure 
 him of his deep, firm hold upon their esteem and affection. T5y his 
 countrymen and his country's laws he has been purged of the crime 
 for which he was tried. lie, with freedom, treads the walks of peaceful 
 life again by their consent. In true christian spirit, let the past, with 
 all its fearful memories, be forgotten h3 r all, and the future looked to 
 as the time wherein all wrongs may be atoned and youthful virtues 
 ripened into holy attributes. 
 
^MILTON )VhITNEY. ^Sq