Trial and Conviction OP JACE HEYNOLDS FOR THE HORRIBIrE MURDER OF WILLIAM TOWNSEND, Compiled by A. H. HUMMEL, from the Stenographer's Notes. N E W Y R K : TRADE SUPPLIED BY THE AMERICAN NEWS COMPANY, 117, 119 & 121 Nassau Street. 1870. SEYMOUR DURST EDtered, according to Act of Congrege, in the year 1870, By A. H.. HUMMEL, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States tor the Southern District of New Tori!. •KP 21? M 85 BAKER A GODWIN, PRINTERS, PRIKTINO-HOUSE SQUABB. ^ V ! ^ |S 3 / AVERY THE TEIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS ^♦■^ The trial of Jack Reynolds for the atrocious murder of an inoffensive grocer named William Townsend, on a quiet Saturday eve, was an- nounced by the New York journals to take place on Monday morning, February 21st, 1870, at half past ten o'clock. The morbid curiosity to witness the murderer was so great that the court-room of the Court of Oyer -and Terminer, which is the largest in the new County Court House, was crowded to excess long before the trial commenced. A large portion of the assemblage was composed of persons belonging to the upper classes of society, including, strange to say, many elegantly attired ladies, who watched the proceedings witli the utmost interest. When Reynolds en- tered the court-room he was escoited by two deputy sheriffs, and the audience at once arose to their feet, so great was the anxiety to obtain a view of the reckless culprit. His miserable, dogged appearance, and ex- pressionleps countenance, astonished every one, and a close inspection re- vealed a head unnaturally formed. Throughout the entire trial he seemed to pay but slight attention to the details of the evidence, and his counsel rarely consulted him. The widow and children of the murdered man occupied prominent seats in the extremity of -the court-room, and remained present until the conclusion of the trial. Punctually at half-past 10 o'clock Honorable Daniel P. Ingraham, Justice of the Supreme Court, ascended the bench, and the crier an- nounced the OPENING OF THE COURT, after which, the District Attorney having moved on the trial of John Reynolds for the willful murder of William Townsend, in the city of New York, on the 29th day of January, 1870, the prisoner, amidst breathless silence, was placed at the bar. The Jury was next duly empanelled, and the trial commenced. TILE ASSIGNED COUNSEL. Mr. William F. Howe, was assigned by the Court to defend the accused, and had evidently made extensive prepMrations to prove his client " wo/i compos'''' at the time of the commission of the awful deed. OPENING REMARKS OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY. Distiict Attorney, the Honorable Samuel B. Garvin, opened the case, and said : Gentlemen of the Jury : This is an indictment presented by the grand inquest of the City and County of New York, against John Reynolds, 4 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. charging him with the high crime of murder — the highest crime known to our laws; and the examination of this case should not only involve your patience and your judgment, but it will involve, for time and eternity, the interest of the individual who is on trial before you. The crime with which he stands charged to-day, was committed under circumstances of great atrocity; so much so, that the whole public were not only amazed, but astounded, at the manner in which this crime was committed. We have been, from day to day, from week to week, and month to month, in this community, astonished by the character of the crime which pervades not only this city but neighboring cities. It seems to be spread- ing all over the country, so that crime at this juncture of our history seems to be almost epidemic everywhere. A man can hardly walk along the street; he can hardly go to bed in his farm-house in the country; he can- not go to his home in the city, without being assaulted either in the form of murder, or with an attempt to rob, and take from his person every- thing he has. Now, gentlemen, I only glance at this condition of things for the pur- pose of impressing upon you the importance giving this case your care- ful and candid consideration ; and, gentlemen, when we get through with this case, if you are satisfied that this is a case of murder, I ask you, by all the holy ties which bind you, that you will give a verdict in accordance with the evidence in this case, and show by your verdict, that when murder is committed in the city of New York, it will be surely punished by the jury. No matter how much courts may do, or how much the prosecuting officer may do, or how often we summon witnesses into the courts of jus- tice, or how fairly and freely they testify, it all comes down in the end to a jury of twelve men. Unless the public assist, it is impossible to administer justice. Now gentlemen, in this case, I shall be able to show you, as I am in- structed by the witnesses I shall call to the stand, that, on the 29th of Jan- uary, 1870, this man, Mr. Townsend, was sitting in his own house, sitiing there as he had a right to do on his own premises ; and without any sort of provocation on his part, directly or indirectly, this poor miserable man came into his room, sat down in his premises, and refuses to go out after he was told that there was no room for him ; and Townsend, gently laying his hand on his shoulder, said, " you must go away, I havn't room here for my own family," and instantly, before Townsend could say another word, he took a knife from his pocket, and plunged it into Townsend's breast, from the effects of which he died" in the space of ftbout 20 minutes. Now gentlemen, if I give you this stjfite of facts, and if you see no reason to doubt the statement of the witnesses, I shall ask you for a verdict of murder in the first degree, I do not now propose to dwell upon this state of fcicts, or to discuss the question of law, hut I will have you go through the case with the evidence in regard to this transaction, and let the evi- dence itself make such an impression on your minds as to what your duty commands you to perform. THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 5 THE DAUGHTER OF THE MURDERED MAN. Lydia Toiunsend was then called, and having been duly sworn, testified as follows : Q. [By the District Attorney.) How old are you, Lydia ? A. Thirteen years. Q. When were you thirteen years old ? ' A. The 10th of December. Q. Have you any brothers and sisters ? A. I Lave one brother. Q. He is a child ? A. Yes, sir. Q. How old is your other sister ? A. She is eleven. Q. Where did you live in the latter part of January last ? A. I lived in 192 Hudson street. Q. In the city of New York ? A. ITes, sir. Q. What was your father's name ? A. William Townsend. Q. What is your sister's name ? A. Harriet. Q. What do you call your little brother \ A. Alfred. Q. What was your father's business ? A. He was a tailor, and kept a grocery store. Q. At his place in Hudson street ? A. sir. Q. Was it a basement ? A. Yes, sir. Q. How many steps did you have to go down to get into your father's grocery ? A. About five. Q. Do you remember the afternoon or evening of the 29th of January? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was in your place at that time ? A. About six o'clock, father, Harriet, the baby, and myself, were sitting in the place. Q. Are those the only persons who Were there ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now will you tell whether you ever saw the prisoner there before that day ? A. No, sir. • Q. About what time did" he come there ? A. About six o'clock. Q. He came down into the basement. A. Yes, sir ; right into the base- ment. Q. Do you recollect whether he rapped ? A. No, sir ; he did not rap. Q. He opened the door and came in without rapping. A. Yes, sir. Q. Where was your father when he came in ? A. Silting by the table. Q. In the front room ? A. No, sir ; in the back room. Q. Did you see him when he came into the door ? A. He walked right into the room, and sat down on a chair by the stove. • Q. In the back room ? A. Yes, sir ; where my father was. Q. He sat down on a chair ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now state what he said, if any thing? " YOU ARE MY BROTHER." A. He said : " You know me, I am vour brother ; 1 want to stay here all night." Q. State what else he said ? A. Father said, " No, sir ; you are not my brother ; and you cannot stay here all night." Q. State what else he said ? A. Father said, '* I haven't room in my place, and won't you please go 6 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. out?" and he went out and sat on a milk can, and father went out and laid his hand gently on him. Q. He said, " you are not my brother, and will you please go out ? " A. Yes, sir. Q. What did he do then ? A. He went out into the store and sat on a milk can. Q. What did your father say ? A. My father said it was no us 3 in sitting there, and said, " Come, good fellow, please go out." Q. He laid his hand on his shoulder ? A. Yes, sir. Q. State what then occurred ? A, He dragged him out on the steps. Q. Dragged whom out ? A. Father. Q. The prisoner dragged your father out on the steps ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see with what he stabbed your father ? A. No, sir. Judge Ingraham. Was it light or dark ? A. It was just dusk. Q. Was the store lit up ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Gas ? A. No, sir. Q. Lamps ? A. Yes, sir. Q. {District Attorney.) What occurred after he dragged him on the steps ? ^. I do not know, sir. . ' Q. Where did you go ? A. 1 was sitting up stairs with the baby. Q. Who else was present when this occuiTed ? A. Harriet, my sister. Q. Any body else ? A, No, sir. Q. How long after that before you came down ? Q. I came down, and my fatker was dead. Q. Where was he ? A. In the back room. Q. Where? A. On the bed ; after father was stabbed he came in and sat on abinch in the store. Q. Did you see where he was cut ? A. No, sir. Q. Was it on the breast ? A. Yes, sir. Q, The left breast ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it bloody ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Then you went up stairs ? Yes, sir. Q. How long before you came down ? A. About fifteen minutes. Q, Now, at tbe time he dragged your father to the steps, did any men come there 1 A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they take this man away, — ^just describe what you saw? A. Some men came to take the man away from father. Q, Did they take him away ? ^. I do not know, sir. Q. When your father came in, you went up stairs ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you seen the prisoner since that time ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you see him here, now ? A. Yes, sir. (The witness here pointed to the prisoner.) Q. Do you know how long your father lived after this occurrence ? A. Fifteen minutes. Q. You left him sitting on the bench ? A. Yes, sir. Q. When you came down he was dead ? A. Yes, sir. THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 7 Cross-examined by Mr. W. F. Howe: Q, Did this man remain with your father after he was down on the steps ? A. Yes, sir. Q. That was after he had stabbed him ? A. Yes, sir. Q. He did not let go his hold of your father ? A. No, sir. Q. lie continued to hold him ? x\. Yes, sir. Q. For about how long ? Do you remember ? ^. No, sir. Q. Some little while, was it? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then some men came and took him away ? A. Yes, sir. Harriet Townsend sworn and examined for the prosecution : Q. {By the District Attorney.) How old are you, Harriet? A. Eleven years old. Q. Where do you live now ? ^.192 Hudson street. Q. "What was your father's name ? A. William. Q. Is your mother here ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember on the 29Lh of January last, anybody coming into your father's place ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you see him here now ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Wherels he? A. There (pointing to the prisoner). Q. When he came in what did he say or do — ^just go on and tell ? A. He came in, sat down on a chair, and fither asked him what he wanted, and he said that he wanted to stay all night, and he was my father"* s brother. , Q. What else ? A. Father said, no, sir ; he did not have room enough for his own family. Q. What else? A. My father asked him if he would not please go out, and he said no, that he wanted to stay there, and father said that he hadn't room enough for his own family. Then he got up and went out, and sat on a milk can in the store. Q. That was the front room ? A. Yes, sir. Father told him that there was no use in sitting down, that he could not stay, and he put his hand gently on his shoulder, and asked him if he would not please go out. Then he got up and stabbed my father, and dragged him out on the steps. Q. What' next? THE KNIFE. A. Then a man came up, and the prisoner had a knife in his hand, and th^ man tried to get the knife out of his hand, and he got it out of his hand, and took my father up, and took the min away. Then my father came in and sat down on a bench, and then he went back into the room and lay down on the bed, and tol^ me to go and fetch my mother. Then when I came back my father was dead. Q. Did you see the place where he stabbed your father? A. Yes, sir ; right here (poiuting to her lefi breast). 8 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. Cross-examined hy Mr. W. F. Howe : Q. You saw this man stab your poor father? A. Yes, sir; and he had an overcoat on him, and -he had the knife in his hand, and he took his hand out to stab my father, and I went to take hold of my father's arm, ^ind he (Reynoldi^) knocked me down. Q. After he stabbed your fatlier, did he not keep hold of the knife ? A. Yes, sir ; and ihe people tried to take it away. Q. He would not let the people take it away? A. No, sir. Q. He clenched it tightly? A. Yes, sir. Q. He held possession of it, and would not let the people take it away from him ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he struggle with the people, this man ? A, I think he was laying down when the men tried to get the knife out of his hand. Q. He would not give it ? A. No, sir; he held it so tightly. Q. Did you hear what he said after he had stabbed your father. A. No, sir. THE SHOEMAKER'S TESTIMONY. Thomas Hudson sworn and examined for the prosecution. Q. {By the District Attorney) Will you state what you know about this case ? • A. January the 29th, the prisoner came down into the basement where I was to work. Q. What is your number ? A. 188 Hudson street. "* Q. City of New York? A. Yes, sir. Q, What is your business ? A. Shoemaker. Q. Have you a shop there? A. Yes, sir. Q. This prisoner you recognize as the man who came in there ? A. Yes, sir. . Q. About what time? A. Six o'clock. Q. On the 29th of January ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you to work ? A. Yes, sir. Q. State what he did, if you please ? A. He came down into the basement, and opened the door and walked in, and he asked me to give him a job, and I told him I could not, because I was on the last job I had ; and he sat down on the bench, and I asked him what kind of work he had been accustomed to, and he s-iid, pegging. He said he was a Scotchman, and I said, "You have been in the country a long while ;" and he said, yes ; and for a good while he had been out of work, and hadn't a friend in the country; and he got up and bid me good- night and went out. Q. How far is your place from Townsend's place ? A. The next basement but one on the same side of the street. Q. When did you see him next ? A. On Sunday, about two o'clock. Q. Where ? A. In the police station. Q. Did you miss anything from your shop after he went out ? A. No, sir. Q, Was anything missed from there ? THE TRI^iL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 9 THE STOLEN WEAPON OF MURDER. A. After Mr. Arnold came in he went to cut a parcel, and he missed his knife. Q. What kind of a knife was it ? A. It was one with a red handle; it had been broken but was fixed again. Q. It was your knife ? A. Yes, sir. • Cross-examined by Mr. W. F. Howe : Q. You never saw this man before that day ? ui. No, sir. Q. What time in the day was it ? A. Six o'clock in the evening. Q. Did he talk rationnlly to you ? A. Ye-, sir ; very quietly. Q. He said the place of his nativity was Scotland? A. Yes, sir. Q. He asked you for work ? A. Yes, sir. * Q. How long did he remain in your premises ? A. About three or four minutes. Q. He talked quietly during that time ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you notice anything peculiar about his appearance or language ? A. No, sir ; but his face seemed to be somewhat scarred. Q. That w^as the only peculiarity you noticed. A. Yes, sir ; that is alL Q. Do you remember the last words he spoke to yoQ ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What were they ? ^. He said, " Good-night.'" Q. Then left ? A. Yes, sir. When he went out, I turned the key, bat cause he was in drink, and I thoufjht he might come back. Q. Your place of business is situated how ? A. It is in a basement. Q. He had then to ascend how many steps to leave ? A. About five or six. Q. Did you watch him leave ? A. Yes, sir. Q. He went directly up the steps? A. Yes, sir. Q. And away ? A. Yes, sir. Thomas Arnold sworn and examined for the prosecution : Q. (By District Attorney). Where were you w^orking about the 29th of January ? ^.188 Hudson street. Q. Did you sometimes go into the shop of the last witness ? -A. Yes, sir ; I work there ; it is my place. Q. Do you recollect going in there in the evening, about six or seven o'clock, and missing any property of yours ? A. I went out just before six o'clock to a finding store in Greenwich street, and I think I was gone about a quarter of an hour, and when I came b;ick the door was locket), and I said to my workman, " What have you the door locked for? and he told me that he had a customer there that he did not much like from his appearance. He said that he bolted the door so that he should not come back ; and I then sat down and was about to cut a parcel which I bought — and previous to- that, when I was going up, I heard there was a man stabbed, but I did not know who it was, and did not ask — and I mi-sed the knife, and asked him if he knew anything about it, and he said "No ;" and he said this man (Reynolds) had sat in my seat; 'and I looked again, but could not find it any where; and I said, " Surely, he has not stolen my knife." So I coiild not find my knife, and when I made inquiries I found' it was gone. 10 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. Q. Do you see the knife ? A. Yes, sir ; I see it now. (The witness was shown it.) Q. Is that your knife ? A. Yes, sir. Q. How was it when you left it? A. It was fastened with a piece on it. Q. When you saw it again it was broken ? A. Ye', sir. Q. Where did you first see it after it was taken ? A. 1 saw it in the police station. Q. Was it there in your shop when you went out to the finding store? A. Yes, sir ; it was on my bench. Q. When you came back it was gone ? A. Yes, sir. (No questions by Mr. Howe.) Thomas J. Belcher sworn and examined for the prosecution : Q. {By the District Attorney) Where do you reside ? « A. 66 Varick street. Q. Did you reside there on the 29th of January last ? A. No, sir. Q. Where then ? ^.189 Hudson street. Q. State what you first saw of this? A. I heard a distressing cry opposite 189 Hudson street, and I thought some one was run over; and I went out of the house, and there was a car going along, and I looked across the street and saw a scuflSe going on, and I went across ; and as I was putting my foot oa the curbstone I saw Town- l^nd on the prisoner. THE MURDERER CAUGHT. As I got up to him the prisoner freed himself from Townsend, and then I caught him. Q. You caught the prisoner? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is this the man ? (pointing to Reynolds). A. I did not know him at all ; I saw him at the coroner's inquest. Q. St^te what further happened. You say that he freed himself from Townsend ? THIS MAN STABBED ME. A. Yes, sir ; and I asked what was the matter, and he said " This man stabbed me," and he opened his shirt, and he was all covered with bloody and he (Townsend) asked me if I could hold him (Reynolds), and I said I could, and the prisoner then made an attempt to get away, and he said : *' If you will give me a sight, I can lick two like you." Q. What else was said or done? A. lie tried to get away from me, and he struck me twice on the shoulder. Q. Twice, you say ? A. Yes, sir ; twice on the left shoulder. Then I threw him, and we fell on the sidewalk together, and I held him there till the oflScer came. Q. State in what condition he (Townsend) was in ? A, I went to Townsend and asked him was he hurt much, and he said he was ; and one of the oflScers came along and wanted him to make a charge against the prisoner, and Townsend said he was not able to go around to the station-house ; and he picked up a piece of the knife and he said, "That is a piece of the knife that he stabbed me with.'! THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 11 Q. Townsend picked up the piece of the knife? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it anything like this? (pointing to the knife). A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it tiie piece or the knife he picked up? A. It was the blade. Q. Do you know whether any one in the meantime took the knife from him (Reynolds) ? A. I did not know it until afterward. Q. You do not know who did that ? A. No, sir. Q. Wh:it was then done ? A. He (Townsend) went into the back room and lay down, and I gave him a drink of water, and his legs and feet were hanging on the floor ; and I leaned against him, and he said that I hurt him. While 1 tried to open his shirt to see the wound, he said I hurt him. (Mr. W. F. Howe here objected to witness testifying to his conversation with the deceased. Objection overruled and exception taken«) Q, Go on and state what he said ? DEATH OF MR. TOWNSEND. A. He said, "My God, I am suffocating! Give me air." I think those were the last words he said. Q. How long was it before he died ? A. From the time I left the street till I got into the basement, I think it was about six minutes. Q. This was 192 Hudson street ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What was Mr. Townsend's business ? A. Grocer. Q. How long had he been ihere ? A. 1 do not know, sir. Cross-examined by Mr. W. F. Howe : VIOLENCE OF THE PRISONER. Q. You say the prisoner resisted you very violently ? A, Yes, sir. Q. Did you hear him say anything? A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did it take you to overcome him? A. About two or three minutes, I suppose. Q. Did he offer you any violence? A. He did. Q. You had to overcome that by violence yourself? A. Yes, sir; 1 had to throw him to keep him. Q. Had he the knife in his hand at the time? A. No, sip; I did not see it with him. Q. Did you see Mr. Kline there ? A. Mr. Kline was there ; there were two gentlemen there before I went. Q. The prisoner was quite frenzied ? Yes, sir. WAS HE FRENZIED ? Judge Ingraham. What do you mean by frenzied? A. I thought the counsel meant rough. Mr. Howe. Was he violent? A. lie was. Q. Was he rough? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he wild? A. He was about as wild as any criminal could be. Q. Have you ever seen any criminals in a wild state? (Laughter.) A, Yes, sir ; I h^ve seen the prisoner quite wild. 12 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. Q. Didn't this man attack you ? Haven't you said so ? A. Yes, sir ; while I had hold of him. Q. Did he speak to you ? A. He did. Q. What did he say ? SHOW ME A SIGHT. A. He said, "Show me a sight you son of a , and I will lick two like you." Q. Did he threaten to kill you ? A. He did not. Q. W^hen you overpowered him, to whom did you cocsign him ? A. To the officers ; a sergeant and a roundsman. Q. Was his appearance anything but that of a wild man, as you stated at the time ? A. T could not say; it w^as dark, and under the excitement I did not know him in half an hour after that time. Q. Since you have told us that he was rough and wildy vi'iW you tell us- if you noticed anything else about his appearance ? . A. I thought he had been drinking. Q, That was but a thought ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he act like a sane man ? A. Yes, sir ; I think he was sane. Q. I did not ask you that. I asked you how did he act? A. W^ell, he acted in a violent degree. John Scnlly sworn and examined for the prosecution : ; Q. (Bt/ the District Attorney) Where do you live ? ' A. 21 Bethune street. Q. Were you in the neighborhood of 192 Hudson street on the 29th of January ? A. Yes, sir. • Q. What were you doing over there ? A. I was going for my wife. Q. State what attracted your attention, and what you saw ? A. I was passing up and saw two men in contact with each other at .192 Hudson street, and I saw Mr. Townsend having hold of the prisoner in the scuffle, and some persons came up and asked what was the matter, and Mr. Townsend said — THE FATAL BLOW. , " This man is after stabbing me." Some one then took a knife out of his (Reynolds') hand. Q. Do you recollect how the knife looked ? A. Yes, sir. Q, Perfect or broken ? A. Broken ; it was broken when I took it out of his hand. Q. What kind of a knife was it ? A. It was around handled knife, and over an inch long. Q. Did you see the knife afterward ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that it? (The knifq was here shown to witness.) A. Yes, sir ; and some one sang out and asked what was the matter, and Mr. Townsend made the reply and said, that man (R.) was after stab- bing him, and then an officer came up and got hold of the prisoner, and I gave part of the knife to one of the officers, and he took it to the station THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 13 house, and I weut to the station-house and gave evidence, and I had to come back that way to go home, and on my way back, I found that Mr. Townsend was dead. Q. He died on his b^d in his own housp. A, Yes, sir. Judge Ingraham. Where was this scuffle ? A. About two or three steps down from the sidewalk. Cross examined hij Mr. Howe : Q. This prisoner held the knife very tightly in his gra-p, did he not. Q. Yes, sir. A. And when you tried to take it from him he resisted ? A. Yes, sir. Q, Held it with tenacity ? A. Yes, sir. Q. That was some time after the unfortunate .deceased had been stabbed. A. Yes, sir; some minutes. Q, [District Attorney.) Do you see the prisoner here now ? A. Yes, sir. William Wuhh sworn and examined for the prosecution : Q. [By District Attorney.) Were you present when this transaction took place ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Where were you ? A. I was at 202 Hudson street. Q. What attracted your attention to this thing first ? A. I heard some screaming, and I ran to the place, and I saw Mr. Townsend on the two upper steps, and Reynolds was lying on his back and Townsend on top of him, and two other citizens were there at the time, and I saw^ them struggling, and I did not know what was the matter at the time; and I caught hold of Reynolds by the collar and looked in his face, and I said "What are you holding on to him for," and I said "get up off him ; " and I had hold of hi in by the collar, and he got up the two steps, and I got the prisoner up on the top of the steps ; and Townsend said, " My God, tliat fellow has stabbed ms and I don't know what for; " and I saw the blood on the vest of Mr. townsend, and I said "Oh, God, you are stabbed to' the heart," and he said " Is there no one to do anything for me? " and I w^ent to get hold of the prisoner, and two other citiaens had him, and I held on to him, and two officers came across, and I attracted their attention, and they came and threw him down, and I helped them to take liim to the station-house, and I took hold of his legs, and he cursed several limes, and asked for a fair show on the way down. When I got back to the store I saw the man was dead. Q. When you got back to his (Townsend's) house you found him dead. A. Yes, sir. Di'd you see any more woundS than the one on his breast? A, Some one passed the remark that he had a cut on his arm. Q. You did not notice that yourself? A. No, sir. Q. How long were you down to the station-house ? A. About fifteen minutes. Q. He died then in about twenty minutes afterward? A. Yes, sir, less time than that. Cross-examined hy Mr. Howe : Q. The prisoner did not say anything about having stabbed the deceased. -/I. No, sir ; he did not. Q. Was not this prisoner quite frenzied at the time ? A. Well, sir ; he acted like a rough. Q. Where did you see roughs act ? 14 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. A. I see them when they commit things out of the way and against the law ; that is what I term a rough — I mean a man that don't do justice. Q. That is your definition of a rough ? A. Yes, sir. Q. "What injustice did you Fee this man do ? A. I saw Mr. Townsend and him fighting on the steps, or tussling on the step=i ; I saw them holding on or clenching each other on the steps. Q. From that you call him a rough ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was his manner peaceable, or was it wild ? THE MURDERER WILD. A, Well, sir ; it seemed to -be wild. ■ Q. Did he try to assault you ? A. He tried to get away from me, sir. Q, That is not an answer to my question ; did he try to assault you ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Had he the knife in his hand then ? ^. I do not know, sir. Q. Did you see him delivered to the police ofiicers ? A. Yes, sir ; I helped to take him to the station-house. Q. Did he talk going along to the station-house ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did he say ? A. He made several attempts to get away from us; he asked for a fair show. Q. What else ? A. He called the officers, and us who w^ere with them, sons of Q. Are you as sure of tbat as anything else you have sworn to ? A, Yes, sir. Q. Are you sure he applied that epithet to the officer ? A. Yes, sir ; to the officer, to me, and another man. Q„ Did you say that before the coroner?' A. I am not quite sure ; I believe I did say so, or something to that effect; jjo, sir ; I did not! Q. Did he talk wildly and incoherently ? A. He talked savagely to get away. Q. Did he walk ? A. We carried him down as far as Laight street, and I got his legs up in my arms, and we dragged his feet out of his boots, and we finally dropped him on his feet, and he w^alked from that dow^n to the station- house. A, He resisted all the time? A. Yes, sir ; several times. Q. Did you see him put in the cell ? A. No, sir; but I stood while the charge was being taken against him^ and saw the officers taking him away. Q. When he was taken to the station-house, did they place him against the railino^ immediately in front of the captain's desk ? A. They did, sir. Q. Did the prisoner stand in front of that railing? A. Yes, sir. Q. Alone ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see the police sergeant behind the desk ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the police sergeant ask the prisoner his name ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he give it? A. Yes, sir; Jack Reynolds. Q. Did ^ the sergeant ask him where he was born ? A. Yes, sir. THE TRIAL OF JACK EEYNOLDS. 15 Q. What reply did he make ? A. United States. Q. Was his fige asked ? A. I believe it was, sir ; but I was in conversation with the officers at the time. Q. You did not hear a reply to that ? No, sir. Q. Did the sergeant apprise him of the charge made against him ? A. I did not hear that, sir. Q. Was that all the conversation which transpired ? A. He asked him what his occupation was. Q. What did he say ? A. lie sai, sir. Q. I presume so much so, that you had to exert yourself to get it from him ? A. Yes, sir. Q. His mouth was clo=e to you ? A. Yes, sir ; not very close. NO LIQUOR. . Q. You say there was no perceptible smell of liquor upon him ? No, sir. Q. Nor were his actions those of a drunken man ? A. He did not ap- pear so the time he jumped up. * THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 17 THE POLICE SERGEANT. Matthew Tuck swoin and examined for the prosecution : Q. {By the District Attorney.) You are a police officer? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you so on the 29th of January last ? A. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you been on the force ? A. Four years. Q. State what attracted your attention to this place, and wh-.U yoa saw and heard ? A. A few minutes after 6 o'clock, on the 29th of January, I was stand- ing in Hudson street, nearly opposite 192, and I heard the cry of a man being stabbed, and I went across the street and saw a crowd there; and I saw Mr. Townsend standing there, bleeding; very much from the breast, and some one in the crowd said, " This is the man." I then Tol- lowed Reynolds, who was at this time struggling to get away, and he said tome, " Give me a fair show," and I conveyed him to the station-house. On the road he acted violently, and some one said, " Hang him ! " They proposed to hanor him right there, and he made the remark, "Hanging is played out ! Hanging is played out I " I took him to the station- house, and afterward returned, and saw Townsend laying dead on his bed. Q, Is this the mm you took to the station-house ? ^4. Yes, sir. Q. Where were the wounds ? A. About three inches above the nipple of the left breast. Q. Any other wound ? A. I did not see any other, except small scratches on his face. Cross excunined by Mr. W. F. Howe: Q. Did you notice the appearance of the prisoner a]; the time you ar- rested him ? ^-1. I did, sir. Q. Does he not look quite respectable to-day, to what he did then ] A. Yes, sir. He was all dirt, on account of his having been on the ground before I got there. Judge Ingraham. Was he in liquor? A. I think he was under the influence of liquor. Mr. Howe. Sergeant, you were in the 16th X. Y. Cavalry, I believe .- A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you ever know any of your men to have epileptic fits? A. No, sir ; not while I was in the 16th. Q. Whilst you were in any other company or corps ? A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever see a man with an epileptic fit in your life : A. Yes, sir. Q. Was this man peculiarly wild ? A. Well, he looked and acted like a man who was trying to make his escape. Q. Does a man who is trying to get away, present any difierent ap- pearance to any other man ? A. When a man gets excited, he has a dif- ferent appearance. RATHER EXCITED. Q. Then this prisoner was excited ] A. Yes, sir; I guess he was, rather. Q. Now sergeant, when you say " rather " excited, you mean very greatly excited. 18 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. A. Yes, sir ; lie looked like a man who was trying to free himself^ Didn't he look as if he was very much excited ? A. Well, he did. Q. He talked incoherently ? jfi. I did not hear him speak only twice. Q. Weren't you with that witness who said that he called you and him opprobrious names ? A. Once he said " Give me a fair show," and next, " Hanging is ayed out." Q. You didn't hear him, on the way to the station-house, call you those names the other witness mentioned? A. No, sir. * Q. In the station-house, was he placed before the railing in front of the sergeant's desk? A, Yes, sir. Q. And int«rrogated in the usual manner ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were the questions propounded by yourself? A. No, sir; by another sergeant. Q. Did you hear hira answer the questions ? A. Yes, sir ; some of them. Q. In what manner did he answer them ? A. I heard him say, when the sergeant asked him what he did for a living ; he said he was was a thief. Q. Any more than that ? A, He gave his name. Q. What name ? A. Jack Reynolds. Q. Was he asked for his residence? A. I did not hear-that part of it. Q. That is usiiial, is it not? A. The sergeant behind the desk generally pays more attention to that. Q. Is that sergeant here ? A. I do not see him. Q. You do not know whether he said he had a residence, or not ? A. No, sir. Q. Now, how long was he, what period of time was he, before that desk? A. I should say three, or four, or five minutes. Q. He stood up in front of the railing there ? A. Yes, sir. Q. He was not held up ? A. No, sir. Q. You mean by that, that he was sober. A. A man may stand up, and yet be drunk. He was slightly under the influence of liquor, as I heretofore stated. SLIGHTLY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR. Q. Others differ with you ? A. I speak from my own knowledge. Q. Was he in that condition, that if you had met him in the street, you would have arrested him as a drtmken man ? A. No, sir ; I would not. Q. Then he was not what you call drunk ? A. Not helplessly drunk. He was under the influence of liquor. Q. You said, before the coroner, slightly ? A. Yes, sir. Q, You difler with the last witness ? A. I did not pay any attention to it. Q. You didn't smell any liquor upon him? A. I did. THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 19 Q. Could you tell what liquor it was? A. Well, I coukl not. I smelled something like whiskey. I went down to the cell afterward, and smelt it on him. Q. You say it was like whiskey ? A. I know the smell of whii^key. (Laughter.) Q. Did you see the knife in this man's hand ? A. I did not. Q. Was he violent in the station-house ? A. No, sir. Q. Quiet? A. Yes, sir. Q. Quite tractable and quiet in the station-house ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Going along very wild ? A. Yes, sir ; he was, at first. Q. He was put into a cell in the station-house ? A. Yes, sir. Q. What time ? A. I think about 15 or 20 minutes after C. Q. Was he visited by any of your ofiicers ? A. He was visited by me. Q. Did you find him asleep ? A. No, sir. TDE MURDERER SLEEPS. Q. What time did he go to sleep ? A. I can't tell what time he went to sleep. Q. What was the last time you saw him that night ? A. About an hour after he was locked up. Q. Was that the last time you saw him ? A. That was the last time I believe that I saw him that night, Q. Did you see him in the morning? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he awake then ? A. Yes, sir ; he wa«. Q. Do you know what officer visited him during the night ? A. I do not ; the doorman is instructed to look after them. Q. Do you know what officer awoke him from his sleep ? A. No, sir. Q. (Bu the District Attorncij.) You said he was quite wild ? A. Yes, sii-. Q. You mean that he attempted to get away ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Tliat is what you mean by callino- him wild ? A. Yes, sir. Q. [Mr. Howe.) He struggled and hit out? A. Yes, sir; he did,- Frank W. Robb sworn and examined for the prosecution : Q. [By the District Attorney.) How long have you been connected with the Police Department? A. Three years. Q. Were you present at any |»art of this aff'air ? A. I came up when they had hold of the prisoner on the sidewalk iu front of the place where this aftair occurred. Q. Did you see the knife ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did any one hand it to you?. A. Mr. Scully handed it to me. Q. It was a knife like this? (The witness was here shown the knife in question.) A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that the knife ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Di^l you take the^knife to the station-house? A, Yes, sir. . Q. {Mr. Iloive.) Did you take this man to the cell? A. No, sir. 20 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. THE UNFORTUNATE WIDOW. Mary Townsend sworn and examined for the prosecution : Q. [By District Attorneij.) What was your husband's name ? A. William Townsend. Q. Where did he reside? A. 192 Hudson street. Q, Were you home on the occasion of this occurrence ? A. No, sir. Q. AVhere were you ? A. I was down to Mr. Taylor's, the baker. Q. What was the condition of your husband when you went away ? A. He was in perfect health, playini^ with the children. Q. How old a man was he ? A. Fifty- five years of age. Q, Those two little girls who were on the stand are your children ? A. Yes, sir. Q. This little one is yours? (pointing to a babe). A. Yes, sir. Q. When you came back, in what condition did you find him. A. I found him dead. (Sensation in court.) Q. How long had you been gone? A. Not more than ten minutes. Q. Did you see this prisoner ? A. Yes, sir ; at the inquest. Q. Did you ever see him in your house before ? A. No, sir. Q. Do you know of your husband being acquainted with him. A. No, sir. Q. Do you know your husband's relatives ? A. Yes, sir ; but he has none in this country. Q. Did you ever have any acquaintance with this prisoner in any way? A. No, sir. Q, Never saw him before ? A. No, sir. (Mr. Howe said he would not ask this witness any questions.) Dr. William Shine, sworn and examined for the prosecution: Q. [By District Attorney.) Did you make a post-mortem examination of William Townsend on that evening? A. The day following, sir. Q. What time in the day did you make it ? A. Eleven o'clock. Q. Where? A. At his residence, 192 Hudson street. Q. State to the jury what you found? A. I found a stab wound, penetrating the walls of the chest, traceable from the chest. I found that the heart had been penetrated, and the knife entered into the substance of the heart. There was a second wound on the back of the left hand, half an inch in depth. The third was a slight wound in the neck, and the wound in the breast was the cause of death. Q. The stab was in the left breast ? A. Yes, sir. (No questions by Mr. Howe.) The District Attorney said : If your Honor please the prosecution is closed and we rest our case. Judge Ingrahcim to Mr. Howe. Mr. Howe you will proceed with the defense. OPENING OF THE DEFENSE. Mr. Howe. If your honor pleases, I do not propose to make any formal op?ning, but I shall call my witnesses and then address the jury. THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 21 Mr. Howe then called to the witness-stand, Captain Jeremiah Petty ^ who was then sworn and examined for the defense by Mr. Howe : Q. You are Captain of the 5th Precinct Metropolitan Police ? A. I am, sir. Q. It was your station-house to which th^'s prisoner was brought ? A. Yes, sir. Q. You visited him in tlie cell, did you not ? A. Yes, sir. Q. About what time of night was that ? A. It w^as betwjeen eleven and half-past eleven. Q. The cell door was locked ? A. It was. Q. And the prisoner was then asleep? A. He was laying on the bunk, apparently a'^leep. Q. You were accompanied by another person, weren't you ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know how long he had been asleep. A. I do not, sir. Q. You shook him and woke him ? A. Yes, sir. THE PHYSICIANS' TESTIMONY. Dr. William A. Hammond sworn and examined by Mr. W. F. Howe : Q. Dr. Hammond, you are a physician ? A, Yes, sir. Q. Professor ? A. Professor of diseases of the brain and nervous system, in the Bellevue Medical College. I pay especial attention to diseases of the nervous system. Q. Doctor, at the request of the District Attorney of this county, did you examine the physical organization of this prisoner ? A. I have examined him twice. I examined him on Sunday, the 6th of February, and yesterday. Q Now, sir, in ref^-rence to the organization of his skull, did you find any peculiarity about the frontal eminence I A. I found the left frontal eminence rather more deprcs^^ed than the right, or the right is more prominent than the left, but not very great. Q. That is a peculiarity ? AN UNSYMMETPvICAL SKULL. A. It is an " umymmetrical skull,'' as we call it. Q. Is that a malformation in a physical sense ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Doctor, you have made, as you have said, insanity and diseases of the mind a study, an especial study ? A. Yes, sir ; for a number of years. MEDICAL WORKS. Q. Will you tell me if you esteem Taylor a good authority on that I A. Upon the subject of insanity ? Q. Upon psychology, upon the mind ? A. ILi is an authority, but he is not one cf the best. Q. You say he is an authority ? A. "Yes, sir; he is an authority, particularly upon general medical jurisprudence. Q. But it embiaces th:"ucei's or tlie shoemaker's? A. I don^t know, sir. Q. What brought you into the grocery store ? A. I don't know what I did. I don't know, sir, that I was in it at all. Q. Where did you sleep the night before ? A. I don't know where I did sleop the night before. Q. Where did you sleep the night before that? A. I think I slept outside. Q. Outside where ? A. On the street. Q. On the unorning of the murder had you vour breakfast ? A. I had. Q. When you entered the grocery first, where did you go ? A. I can't say. Q. Do you remember going into the shoemakers store ? A. No, sir. Q. You (Jo not remember going in there ? A. No, sir. Q. Don't you remember having asked the shoeniaker for a knife ? A. That I do not remember, any more than what the captain told me. Q. Did you take a knife from .the shoemaker's store ? A. I don't know. This closed the t'^stimony on both sides, and Mr. W. F. Howe pro- ceeded to address the jury as follows : May it please the Court, and you, Gentlemen of the Jury : To say that I feel acutely the responsibility of this case, is but to convey feebly to you the impressions and w(.rkings of my heart at this moment; for I cannot di- vest myself, gentlemen, of the solemn knowledge, tha' to me, to some extent, is confided the life of a human being. But, thank God, not to me alone is that responsibility confided ; it is a common one, in which we all partici- pate ; and, for some good reason, known only to IIim " through whom we live, and move, and have our being," it is left to-day to. you, by your ver- dict, to say whether this poor, wretched, animated piece of ruined nature," one, certainly, of the poorest of God's creatures, is, upon testimony, such as has been introduced, to be strangled by the cord of the hangman, when a powerful indication of insanity is there, defying science, fallible as it has proven itself in many instances — defying doctors — defying district attor- neys, and, in the monitory voice of God, telling you, in a portion of God's own image, that you should not h iny an insane man. Genilemen, that a most revolting crime — murder, if you please — was perpetrated ; that the sympathies of all of us mu-t be extended to the ut- most to the widow and the orphans, I. a Imit ; that the horrid circum- stances, the details of which ma le us all shudder, in sympathy with the living, sorrow for the dead, and, perhaps, at first, indignation against the ac- cused, are true, there is no doubt; but in proportion to the horror of the crime, in proportion to ihe atroci^v of the revoking details, so do I positively and with confidence urge, that the greater the enormity the more extrava- gant the horror, so here, gentlemen, is that man's proportionate insanity evidenced. Ask yourselves this question : " Would any sane man," shall 1 say, would less than fiend, without revenge, without malice, without gain, without notice, have committed so horrible a crime ? And in entering upon the consideration of this case, start with that 86 THE TBIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. point. The weakest of us never act without motive. The hand is never lifted to the head vviihout design or motive. It is motive which actuates each aciion in our daily lives; and I start the coiisideraiion of this case by- asking " What was the rao'ive of this man, if sane, for the commission of so heinous and cruel a murder ? " . But I am prepa'ed in the discharge of my duty, and it is one from which I will not shrink, notsvitlistnnding public inaiguation and prejudice, to demonstrate to you as men of common sense^ as men who have in your hands this man's life, that the testimony, from beginning to end, even to the last scene upon that stand, proclaims in mighty voice, that permeates your understanding, and never will be eradicated from ycur minds, when you retire for deliberation, that "Jack Reynolds" as they call him, who, without cause, and as the District Attorney properly said, with no provo- cation, plunged a knife, which he had stolen, into the heart of a man whom he believed to he his oivn brother, is an insane man. To detail the testi- mony would be almost unnecessary, for it is fresh in your minds. You heard from the lips^ of those poor litiTe orphans, the circumstances of the di ed. You heard the testimony of Kline who caught the prisoner on the step, on the top of his victim, and you will remember he stated that he found the knife in Reynolds' grasp, long afier the perpetration of the fatal deed ; held the prisoner wiih a tenacity of purpose which speaks volumes that he was insane ; for the District Attorney must tell you that those who murder do not retain the evidence of their guilt. The first impulse of the '* SANE " assassin is to destroy the evidence of his crime, and not cling to it, as did this imbecile, when outside the scene of blood and long after the perpetration of the deed. Stepping from the scene of the knife and walking along the street, he resists. Would a sane man, without a friend near, act thus ? Take the case of a murder committed in this couit-room by a stranger here, with- out a friend, surrounded by the police — would he attempt an impossible escape ? That W( s resisting insurmountable power. He resists upon the street, and as one witness described it, " this frenzied manj'' and he used the word, but with a subtlety which crept into his mind, and wiiich may be excus^able, thinking it was his duty to say all he could against this wretched man, he said it was not exactly " frenzy," but he was wild and rough. Oh, but gentlemen, in going along, he uttered not a word about the deed ; but he said, "I can Jick any two of you," resisted and struggled, hopeless maniac as he then was. He was taken to the station-hou«^e. He stands in front of the desk, and in reply to the in errogation of the sergeant, says his name is "Reynolds," that he was born in the "United States," after ten minutes before, tellinir one of the witnesses (the shoe-maker, if I am correct) that he was a Scotchman ! — and there was no necessity for these discrepancies ; they only go to evidence his wandering mind, if mind he had. " Your occupation ? " " Thief !" Do sane people degrade themselves? Has my friend, the learned pros- ecutor, than whom a more zealous or faithful official never existed, in the course of his long experience, ever yet have arraigned at his bar, or known a person accused of crime, to say, " / am a thief. ''^ Oh, no ! They cloak, they shroud, they conceal their occupation ; and they urge, and sometimes THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 37 ■with good effect, their extreme respectability. But why did this man enter the slioi-maker's shop; why steal tiiat knife, of no value except for the inter()r^-trition which I shall give by and by, supported by medical authority ? You may remember, gentlemen, the question I put to Dr. Hammond, as to the sight of deadly weapons eng«mdt-ring the desire to kill. And I do believe that wretched t'cing, as he was then, and is now, if he can feel remorse or sorrow, if he has mind yet left to feel that — wiiich I doubt — maniac as he wms then, the sight of that knife created the desire to kill, and he stole that knife to take the life of some one, whom he cared not. For whether it was epilepsy, whether it was mania, whether it was im- pulsive insanity, — let it have assumed what form it might, — let science designate it with her fancied appellations, and all the learning with which to dignify disease, disease was there ! A diseased mind, which prompted the taking the knife I A diseased mind, ivhich prompted the Viking also of the life of Townsend ! But there is a conversation at the shoemaker's. See if this is not important. You are told by one of the policemen, Sergeant Tuck, that this man appeared'''' to have been drinking, and that he smelled his breath, and that there wa> some smell of whiskey; but the conversation in the shoemakers forbids that construction. I say that the prisoner was sober at the time, and he had a sober conversation with the shoemaker, and I asked how many steps he ascended, and he said " three or four." He watched him walking soberly up them, then he came to the scene of this homicide. The first words he uttered to the deceased were, " You are my brother ^ Was that a delusion ? To that, my friend, Dr. Nealis, has told you to- day that this man had no delusion ; but I say the evidence contradicts the do.'tor beyond a doubt, because it is sworn here to-day that he said, " You are my brother.^'' What reply will be made to that ? It was unqu'^'stionably a d.du-ion I Pray, gentlemen, what purpose could he have in telling a string -r, — a man of fifty years of age, — a hale, hearty, stout, corpulent man, unlike this lunatic prisoner in features, — unlike him in physical development, un- like him in every aspect, — for what purpose, I repeat, would a p )or, miser- able, dirty, filth v, half savage, half idiotic wietch, go into that house and tell the deceased that he was his brother ? If sane, gentlemen, could that operate ■ upon one of you to admit relationship which never existed? Could it have been for the purpo-e (-f extortion, wnicli may bo suggested? But that idea must be at once repelled, because it is a'>surd upon tlie face of it, for there is no evidence, or even suspicion, of any attempteil extortion ; so thatvwi'.h the delusion, I say, that Vns man was his brother, he entered that store ; he sits down upon a milk can — and I suppos.^, gentlemen, you can picture that scene. This wretch^id being there, mooJy, dejected, his braiu disease I fiom one of the causes to which I shall cfdi your attention. You remember Dr. Hammond spoke of the quality and poverty of blood generating disorders. You remember my asking one of the witn esses if this man's appearance had not improved since his entrance to the Tombs. Even prison fare, antimony discloses that monomania generally assumes one of two forms : either the thoughts are lively and gay, or they are oppressed with gloomy melancholy, as was poor Reynolds when seated dejected -in the store. In the first state, the persons will fancy themselves to be kings and THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 39 queens. In the second (as in Reynolds) we find silence, seclusion, sorrow, dejeclion. The latter condition is called '■^ melancholia and is by no means an uncommon thing. Melancholia frequently leads to acts of suicide or murder. In the lighter form of the disease there is no sign of mental aberration, and the patient will go through his usual routine of duty, but always witii some desponding air. In other cases, the delusion is so well concealed until the act committed (as in this case) leads to the in- <5UIRY AS to the sanity. My learned friend, the District Attorney, asked Dr. Ilammond as to homicidal mania, and Dr. Hammond agrees with Dr. Taylor. Uomicidal mania is a state," says Taylor, " of partial insanity, accompanied by an im- pulse to the perpetration of murder^ and is called impulsive manias There may or may not be evidence of intellectual aberration, but the destructive impulse, Lke a d<^lusion, cannot be controlled by the patient. It dominates over all other feelings^ and leads a person to destroy those to ivhom- he is most fondly attached. Now, please do not forget in this application, the opening words of this poor fellow to the deceased : " You are my brother." Sometimes the impulse is long felt, but concealed and restrained ; there may be mental signs of depiession, loss of appetite, and then only for the first time when the act is committed, to appear. Then we are led to con- clude, certain peculiariiies of language and conduct, scarcely noticed before- hand, which must have been the symptoms of insanity, and an act of mur- der is perpetrated toith great deliberation, and appa7-enlly with all the signs of sanity. These cases are rendered so difficult by the fact that there may be no distinct proof of any disorder of the mind, so that the chief evidence of the mental disorder is in the act itself. Is not, then, the act of Reynolds stab- bing the man whom he mistook for his brother, the special, demonstrative, positive evidence of Reynolds' insanity at that lime ? Now, gentlemen, an erroneous notion may prevail that a homicidal mania is easily to be distinguished from a sane crane, by certain infallible signs and characters, which it is the duty of the medical witness to display in evidence ; but a perusal of the evidence given at a few trials will satisfy those who hold to this opinion that each case must stand by itself. Here it is: Dr. Ilammond says, '■'■Each case must stand by itself.''' Each act must have its own signification to the jury ; and that you may draw the distinction between the bui'glar who breaks into your house at night and intends to rob, and when detected in the act, turns around and fires the pistol or strikes you with a dagger ; there, the motive of escape to avoid detection and punishment is the answer to the commission of the oflense, because that is the motive. So, the man who finds that the partner of his bosom has committed adulterous intercourse with a friend, buys a pistol and shoots the adulterer who has deprived him of that which is dearer than life, invaded his domestic home, and made that which was happy, forever miserable. There, the motive was both jealousy and revenge. "But," says Taylor, " each act must judge for itselt," for Reynolds had no motive to murder Townsend. He had taken nothiqg there ! He had stolen noth- ing there ! He was not going to be arrested ! He had not even been •hurt ! Townsend, instead of oficring him an indignity, spoke in terms of kindness, and mildly expostulated as to the delusion which actuated him.* 40 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. " Yon are mistaken," said poor Townsend. " You must leave my house ; and then he killed him. Is the motive there? Ask tliat question ^gain and again to yourselves. At each point of your deliberations, when you come to consider, K-t that intrude! Do not fail in this, but ask, "What motive?" But I had pieviously said, g^^ntlemen, that in words of mild forbearance, the poor deceased said, ''Please go out ; and for tliat kindness of expression he caused the blow of death without any earthly attributable reason ; and yet you are to be asked to find that he had a motive, because three doctors, subpoenaed by the prosecution at this trial, and this alone, and whom the prosecution did not dare to co//, and who have been taken by me from the enemy's camp, say they did not find prisoner actually insane at the times they examined him. I do feel justly and honestly defiant on this point, and I beard science in its own den, and the authorities I now produce, and which I shall ref-r to hereafter, the facts of the case, and the inspection of that wretched man himself, all now potently unite and compel you to admit that this wretched, demented prisoner had no motive for the assassination of Townsend. Gentlemen, look around this vast assemblage ; scan each visage in this court-room with care and with deliberate scrutiny, and I tell you, wiihcut fear of cont adiciion, and I will hazard this verdict upon the position I advance, that there is none here to-day (and if I am not complimentary to some at the extreme end of this spacious court-room, I may be pardoned) amongst one of the not most select audiences in the world, upon whose face, upon whose " uiisymetrically formed cranium^'' as Dr. Hammond has called it, can you find the delineation of insanity, as is plainly visible in this little miserable maniac, Jack Reynolds! You cannot, amongst this great concourse, find one who can descend to him in appearance or intellect. He is abjectly poor ! He is abjectly friendless! He is abjectly demented ! He was placed upon the stand. Why did I do that \ '1 he District . Attorney, than whom, as I before told you, none abler preceded him ; an experienced criminal lawyer long before he became our public prosecutor; could have cross-examined that man, could have gone back to his history from his cradle ; and with his skill, and pardon me (I know he will, for using the word '' subtlety in the sense I mean), and with his subtlety^ if that man had been sane, why, gentlemen, none so able as Judge Garvin in putting a dozen pertinent questions to have demonstrated that beyond a doubt. I threw down the challenge, and why ? Because I was fortified, that idiot as he is, one of you, or the District Attorney, would have dis- covered in a few que^ions if his sanity — if sane he were — and that from his own lips, you should learn whether he committed this murder, knowing^ that he was doing wrong. And believe me, gentlemen of the jury, in the course of a somewhat lengthened experience at the bar, I have never known a man accused of murder submitted to the examination of the jury, and of the District Attorney. Tiiis poor imbecile, oblivious to-day of the enormity of the crime he has committed — in fact, entirely forg«-tful of the perpetration of the horrid crime at all — has been by me submitted to the prosecuting officer for ex•^mination ; and I can well understand why my learned friend, the District Attorney, refused to avail himself of the opportunity. He was ^afraid! Afraid of an imbecile! But I was immeasurably gratified, when- in honest sympathy and in integrity of purpose, one of you, gentlemen,. THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 41 qiic^tioned this poor maniac as to the circuimtances ; and my auricular faculties beiiifl^ pretty g"0d, I lieard one gentlemen of the jury suggest to another, "See if he remembers going to the shoemakeis?" And, indeed, a pertinent question it was. 1 might almost say, that to an extent, did his life hang on that answer. But Gocl had perhaps ordained that the idiot should not give an apparently sane answer to that question; and he told you, in reply to the intt^rrogatorv," / f/on^ remember bting there at nlL^^ I cannot imitate him, for he is *' Nature's Madman," and he has told his story. It is God who is speaking in him, in volumes of powerful eloquence and dictatorial language, to spare the madman, and the Divine interposi- tion will be proclaimed by your verdict, that a lunatic shall not be hanged ! Now, gentlemen, with regard to the absence of motive, L-t us earnestly and carefully consider the doctrines laid down by our ablest recognized au- thorities and able judge*, and amongst them one of the presiding ju>tices on the bench. (Here the ler.rned counsel read, at great length, from Kay, Taylor, Trou-seau, and Maudesly, on insanity.) The criminal (continued Ml'. Howe) never acts without a motive; it may be the avoidance of some personal inconvenience, or the acquisition of pioperty, or it may be the gratification of revenge, which I illustrated, as in the ca'se of the shoot- ing the seducer of a man's wife ; but it is always to accomplish some selfish object. The " Monomaniac," as distinguished from the criminal, always acts without motive, or one so meagre as to be itself direct evidence of de- rangement. With the criminal, death is, therefore, a means by which he seeks to accomplish some ulterior end; but, with the insane, it is entirelv divested of that character, and becomes the end in view, or that which must be so regarded, in a sane person. Hence, the criminal never sheds more blood than is necessary for the attainment of his object; whilst the monomaniac often sacrifices those within his reach, and is never satisfied with the first craving of his destructive propensity. Do you remember that I a«.ked Dr. Vance as to the unnecessary cuts (there having been no re-istance by poor Townsend), and the clenching of the knife, — the retaining of the evidence of the deed c f blood long atler the assassination had been com- mitted ? The act of the prisoner was, beyond all doubt, the act of a mad- man, regardless of time, place, or witnesses. Was not the act of this man regardle s of time — regardless of place — regardless of witnesspss — careless as to who saw the deed committed ? A sane man, in broad day, without provocation, without motive, could never have committed this crime ! A sane man, to murder for revenge, would never have perpetrated the a?sa>sination with witnesses loi)king on ! But here this poor demented, God-forsaken wretch, knowing nothing, entirely oblivi- ous to all the senses and faculties of the human mind, went there, in pres- ence of numerous people, and stabbed poor Townsend ; and, after the stab- bing, inflicted two unnecessary wound<, and retained clenched, for some time after, the instrument with ivhich the death was effected! ! AVhat will you say when I tell you of a fond father, who, tenderly attached to his wife and children, in a frenzy savagely murders them? A fond mother destroys her infant! Would you not unhesitatingly proclaim each insane? Gentlemen, permit me now to revert to the favorite auiiiority of Dr. ^ Hammond, Ray on Insani/y,^^ in regard to irritation of the brain, which. 42 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. you may remember the medical witnesses admitted, may have arisen from very many causes, and which it was testified to miglit exist, and be subdued afterward, and no science tell that it ever had its place there. Now, it is conceded lliat this disorganization, this «ffection or irritation of the brain, producing these insanities, nui^ have a beginning. Then, of course, as with a fever, or with a cold, which you and I take, we know that at the commencement the symptoms are slight, the affection is less painful than after two or three days, when it increases with vigor; and then medical aid is called in, it goes along, gradually descending and subdued. So with the irritation of tlie brain ; so t hese instances tell you, — endorsed by the medical witnesses, — that cerebral irritation may have existed in this poor fellow^ and yet not he discovered I ! ! Will you dai e convict in so extreme a case of doubt ? Remember, gentlemen, I implore you, " that cerebral irritation^ suffi- cient TO PRODUCE INSANITY, may endure for years, and death occur at last from other causes, without our being able to discover any morbid appearance at the timey That w\ns the question I put to Professor Hammond, aud it was answered (as the stenographer's notes will inform you) aflSrmatively by Lim. jNow, pray, say, if you can, why insanity, produced by ""cerebral irri- tation,^'' did not-exist, when Reynolds, without notice, plunged the knife into the heart of Townsend ? You must bear in mind, gentlemen, that when cases of this description are subjected to judicial inquiry, it is difficult to satisfy a ji'iry of the genu- ineness of the disease, because it may have then existed, and since abated and disappeared entirely, and you can only judge of its existence from the facts, namely, the delusion that deceased was prisoner's brother, and the entire absence of motive. Now, gentlemen. Professor Ray tells us that volitional insanify^^ occurs in a manner precisely similar to the acts of the prisoner; and the learned Professor mentions an instance of a syphilitic patient, who, having recovered from his disorder, was about to quit the hospital, when, suddenly, without the least premonition, he began to vociferate and destroy the fui'niture of his room. He stripped off all his clothes, tore out his hair, beat his head against the walls, and tried to bite and strike all who approached him. He seemed to be excessively frightened, as if pursued by somtebody who sought to take his life. His pulse was hard and quick, his body was covered with a cold sweat, he frothed at the mouth, and trembled violently. In the course of a couple of hours — not eight days — he came to himself, and was perfectly calm and cool. Apply that case to this prisoner, and form your own opinion ! I will now read from page 152 of Ray : "A sober aud industrious shoe- maker arose early one morning to go to his work, when his wife was struck by his incoherent discourse and wild looks. He seized a knife and rushed upon her, when the neighbors seized him and prevented any damage. His face w^as red, pulse frequent afid raiher full, body covered with sweat; his eyes flashed, and his look was wild. About noon he became calm, and slept. In the evening he had recovered his faculties, but had no idea of what had happened him^ Connect that case with the answers which this poor wretch gave you, and see if that is not identical. But, permit me to apply another case : "A young man laid down one evening in good health. Some persons entering the room, he threw at them whatever he could lay THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 43 his hands upon, until he fell back upon ins bed exliausted with fatiijue. He sang, cursed, and tried to get at liis sword, lie knew nobody, llis face was not red, nor his head hot, but his eyes were wild, and his pulse rather full. The next day he had not the least recollection of what had hap- pened." * Now, genLleinen, on*e of the witnessess ?poke of this man Reynolds as being " \Yild ; " although, since Reynold's advent to this court-room, he needed no witne>s to tell you that ! At no moment during this iiivesiigation could you have looked upon him without seeing the wild, the vacant, the the idiotic, the imbecile appearance. Let me now present to you another case from that book which Judge Garvin holds in his hand, Mr. Rny, the author so proclaimed by Dr. Ham- mond. "A tailor of sober and industrious habits, after returning one morn- ing from a walk, sat down, refused to eat, then suddenly began to upset everything in the room, and finally rushed upon his wife, when the neigh- bors came in. The next day he had no recollection of the occurrence." " One day while passing along the street, says Dr. Ray, I was request- ed to come in and see a man of a bilious, nervous tempe-rament, very sus- ceptible of impressions, but robust, and free from any bodily ailments. He was breaking the furniture, tearing up his clothes, and endeavoring to as- sault his wife. His faced was flushed, his eyes wild, veins and muscles swelled. He cried and sang. On seeing me, for whom he had long felt a great regard, he seated himself near a table, which he kept striking with his fist. We learned from his friends that nothing had occurred to which this outbreak could be attributed. He soon after came to himself and promised to be quiet. In the evening he had no recollection of the occur- rence." If Dr. Nealis had been called in to that man that uight, lie would have said, " / find no evidence of insanity in him,'" and yet he breaks the furni- ture and assaults his wife ! ! ! The learned counsel here cited the case of " i^rm^ia??," in which Secre- tary of State, Sew^ard, was the counsel, and argued that there was greater reason for attributing insanity to Reynolds than to Freeman. Mr. Howe continued : — Now, gentlemen, we liave a shocking ca-e in regard to absence of motive, given us by Ray in these words : " In a respectable house in Germany, the mother of the family return- ing home one day, met a servant against whom she had no cause of com- plaint; she begged to speak with her mistress alone, and threw herself upon her knees, and entreated that she might be sent out of the house. Her mistress astoni.shed, inquired the reason ; and learned, that whenever this unhappy servant undressed the lady's child she was struck by the whiteness of its flesh, and experienced the almost irresistible desire to tear it to pieces. She felt afraid that she could not resist the i7npulfe, and preferred to leave the house." Here is yet another from the same authority : " A young lady experi- enced homicidal desires for which she could assign no motive. She was rational on every subject, and whenever she felt the a]-»p?oach of this dread- ful piopensity she shed tears, aud eijtreated to have the straight-waistcoat put upon her." Another yet succeeds, gentlemen, on all fours, \\ith my case : " A cur- rier belonging to the bailiwick of Freudenstadt, who had quitted his family 44 THE TRIAL OF JACK KEYNOLDS. in perfect health, was suddenly attacked by a paroxysm of furious madness, on the route between Aalen and Genunde. His first insane act was to shut himself up in the stable with his three horse's, to which he gave no fodder, and when departing he harnessed only two of his horsess, accompanying the carri.jge mounted on the other. At Moglengen he abused a women ; « at Unterbobingen he alighted and walked before his horse with a hatchet in his hand. On the route between the last place and Hussenhoffen, the first person he met wiih was a woman whom he struck several times with his hatchet and left her lying in a ditch by the road side. Next he en- countered a lad thirteen years old, whose head he split open ; and shortly after he split the skull of a man thirty years old, and scattered his brains in the road; and after hacking the body, he lefc the hatchet and c-irriage and thus proceeded towards Hussenhofen. He tnet two Jews on the road whom he attacked, but who, after a short struggle, escaped him. Near Hussen- hofen he assaulted a peasant, who screamed till several persons came to his aid, who secured the maniac and carried him to Genunde. They after- ward led him to the bodies of his victims, when he observed, " It is not I, but my bad spirit, that has commited these murders." Professor Dean cites the following extraordinary case of " volitional insanity : " "William Brown was tried at Maidstone, England, in 1812, for strangling a child whom he accidentally met one evening while walking in the coun- try. He tO( k up the b3dy and laid it on some steps, and tlien went and told what he had done, requesting to be taken into custody. On the trial he said he had never seen the. child before, had no malice against it, and could assign no motive for the dreadful act. He bore an exemplary character, and had never been suspected of being insane." Marc, the distinguished m.edical jurist, relates, tliat passing over a bridge in Paris one day, he observed a lad sitting on the parapet of the bridge eating his breakfast, when he was seized with an almost irresistible desire to push him into the river. The idea was but a flash, but it filled him with such horror that he rapidly crossed over to the opposite trottois, and got out of the way as soon as possible. Talma, the actor, also assured him, on hear- ing the story, that he had experienced the same propensity under very similar circumstances." Professor Dean also furnishes us with another case, which I will now read : " Almira Brixley was a married servant in a respectable English family ; and one day, in the spring of 1815, while the nur^e was out of the room, she obtained a knife from the kitchen and cut the throat of her master's infant child. She went down stairs and told what she had done, inquiring, ■with some anxiety, whether she would be hanged or transp )rted. No delu- sions were detected (precisely poor Reynohrs case), nor had she manifested any other mental peculiarity, except some vjolence of temper about trivial ma'ters a short time before. See had expressed a little dissatisfaction with her share of her mistress' cast-off clothing, but beyond this there did not appear to be a shadow of a motive. There was some proof, though not very definite, that she had labored under some menstrual disorders. She was acquitted and sent to Bethlehem hospital." Now, gentlemen, I will refrT you to Trousseau, the celebrated French auThr-ritr,"in which he says: "The records of courts of justice are full of THE TKIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 45 cases of murder attributed, by medical men, to cerebral defects and epi- lepsy." The learned counsel here quoted several cases from Professor Trousseau's work on epilepsy, and then continued : Now please bear with me whilst I take you back to Dr. Hammond's testimony, and to that of Dr. Vance, that epilepsy might ex'i^t at one time, and tbe traces of it 7riiffht remain, or might diaaj^pear, and then apply the evidence given on ti)is trial, and tell me if you can attribute the deed to anything but insanity ? Dr. Vance says he has two cases of epileptic mania now under treatment, in which the symptoms remain ; but whether they would remain for eight days, he would not undertake to tell you ; so that let us see if all these cases of insanity, in their various forms, to which I have referred, may not, nay, do not, exist in this poor, wretclied man. And yoti will remember that Doctor Vance did not examine Reynolds until eight days after the tragedy. Gentlemen, you must reason this case amongst yourselves, in your own c jmmon-sense way. You must not be distracted by the medical terms you have heard, or the subtle reasoning of science, or the artificial interpretation sought to be arrived at from ihe circumstances, as they have existed in this case. You must take the fact, and never lose sight of it, that this poor ivretch had the delusion that the murdered man was his brother ; next, that he was treated kindly by the murdered man, and that he stabbed him with- out motive, and then retained possession of the wcapjon. They are the prom- inent facts of the case ; they are facts that must strike your minds as they do mine, and upon them must you find your verdict. Never m nd the doc- tors. They cannot displace them, nor can they contradict their existence. Remember the introduciion of that beautiful machine, designated the " op- thalmoscope," which science had invented, and which is paraded before us as a new discovery. When I put the question " Was this fallible ? " " Oh, yes," was the answer, "it may be fallible, but it is one of recent appliance, and has never been known to err;" which almost seemed to me that men of science attempted to attribute to that instrument made by human hands, the power of Omniscience, — to know the secret workings of the humanbrain, — which, I say, none but One eye can see, and He alone. xVn army of surgeons could never tell me, nor shall they tell yoii, as common-sense men, that it is not a matter of careful consideraiion, whether this prisoner is sane at this moment, aside from the time he committed this crime, opthalmoscope or no opthalinoscope I Look at the case cited in Trousseau, of the judge who left the bench and urinated on his carpet in his chamber. You may remember it was given in testimony by Dr. Hammond ; and, said Dr. Hammond, as that judge went on with the hearing of his case, passed upon it, listening with reason, he had no recollection of the peculiar act which he had coymnitted. In reference to that case, Trousseau makes this remark, and hear how it ap- plies to this case : "Now, had this patient quarrelled with and killed a man in the streets, would a magistrate have believed that an individual who, five minutes before and five minutes nfier, was remarkably intelligent, and who, during this pretended nervous seizure, seemed to have his free will, could commit murder under the influence of. an irresistible impulse?" These words seem to liave been written by Supreme ordination for this case. Says the learned Proftssor Trousseau : " Had he quarreled with a man and killed him in the street, would a magistrate have believed (let me 4:6 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. substitute yoM, gentlemen of the jury, for the word magistrate) that the individual, wlio five minutes before and five minutes afterward^ was remark- ahly intelligent^ could commit murder under the infiuence of an irresistible impulse P"* And thni reminds me, gentlemen, of the case to which I re- ferred, when General Hammond was giving his testimony. It was the case of ex-senator Cole, tried at Albany before the learned judge who now pre- sides. Cole had a pistol, or procured one somewhere, before the commission of the deed, when he had time to reflect, and went the next day with de- liberation to the hotel where Hiscock was, and shot him dead ! Oh, but then^ gentlemen. Professor Hammond was a witness for an ex-senator,''^ I believe. Professor Hammond, at all events, was a witness for a man of vast property — of high standing in the community — who commanded the highest intellect the bar of the country afforded — who was surrounded by professional skill ; but who, never thehss, committed that act with premeditation and deliberation ! He deliberately shot a human being, and in that case he was pronounced insane ! ! ! Sane a moment before, and insane at the commission of the offense, and sane a moment after-, ward ! ! ! Judge Tngraham (interrupting). Sane before the commission of the offense, and sane after ; but the jury were in doubt as to his sanity at the time of the perpetration of the murder. Mr. Howe (continuing). Very well; I accept the amendment. All the better for my comparison. This rich man — this rising man — this intel- lectual man with a finely-formed head ; he hadn't "an unsymmetrical SKULL," was pronounced by the jury, as the learned judge told you, to be not guilty, for the reason the judge gave you ! ! ! And shall it be said that in Albany they let go the rich and powerful, whilst in New York, where they dont bring to justice with speed, at all events, the powerful and the influential assassin, that you twelve men, singled out from this great com- munity, will hang this idiot for his poverty ? That you, in opposition to all precedent, will say, we have no doubt of his insanity ; will say, by your oaths^ that he was sane at the time he committed this deed, a poor, for- saken, friendless man, with the malformed skull — the vacant, dejected im- becile. Oh, yes ! Hang him, and let the ex-senator go ! ! ! And then, " Over the stones, rattle his bones. He's only a pauper, whom nobody owns." But I am greatly mistaken in you, if in this case that result ever hap- pens. Gentlemen, I have, to the best of my ability, reviewed the testimony. I have cited medical authorities, showing cases where conversations and acts of peculiar and extraordinary nature, and even homicide, have been committed, when people have been unconscious and temporarily insane. I have brought cases right to this man's door, and I have gone, as I belore said, into the camp of the enemy. I am alone, unaided, save by the patent fact, which they cannot deny, permit me to reiterate, of this man's idiocy. I have placed him upon the stand ! You have heard the circumstances of horror under which this deed was perpetrated. It now becomes your duty to consider this momentous question — was he, BEYOND ALL DOUBT, a sane man when he committed that motiveless deed ? And inasmuch as you cannot answer in the affirmative, you must not, you dare not, convict this prisoner ! THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 47 The learned District Attorney may, and probably will, with his power and his eloquence, appeal to you as I could— nay, not as I could, but as they themselves — those dear little children and that poor widow. They are here to-day, to tell you, gentlemen, of their father's murder, and I am not in error when I sav, with ihe District Attorney, tluit no eloquence can depict the sad reality before you. They are entitled to and they must have your sympathies and mine. But you should not convict this idiot, because your sympathies are, as mine are, with ihose orphan children and their widowed mother. I warn you, and I implore you, and whilst I feel it is, indeed, a hard task to ask you, as fathers, for the time to disregard their sufferings, the same human- ity, gentlemen, the same propriety of feeling, the same humanity which prompts that undeniable sympathy for these little ones, asks this, also, for him who made them orphans I and I tell you wdiy : becau-^e it is not a cold-blooded assassination of premeditation — of malice — of revenge — of purpose — or of motive ; and because it was a horiid deed, perpetrated by a lunatic, and one icho knew not ihe effect of his act ; who knew not the snffering he was entailing wpon them ; and I verily believe, now, that the ordeal through which we all have passed, has had no more el3ect upon that piece of vitalized clay (here counsel pointed to the prisoner), than upon this chair which is beside me. He seems to have no terror for the consequences of the deed he committed ; but his entire demeanor, gentle- men, endorses the question put by the juror, that after the commission of that deed, as Hamlet says, " Tlie rest ivas silenceP Oh, how much there is in that ! No knowledge of the wrong, but un- conscious of everything — knowing nothing of the past, and alone in the world 1 Let me ask you w hat will society gain by strangling an insane and lunatic human being ? I acquiesce with the District Attorney, most coidi- ally, that when murder has been committed, let juries be prompt to render their verdict; let the assassin be taken from the couit-room, and if you please, within a few brief weeks, let law vindica'e justice ; let the executioner perform retributive justice for society, but be sure, gentlemen, oh, ba ter- ribly sure, that you hiiXQ 2i culprit and not & victim /// Be sure, I say, about it, and no doubt, fur your conscience' sake, and for your everlasting peace ! 1 1 Oh, gentlemen, your position is, indeed, an awful and responsible one 1 It is the most painful, the most trying that has ever happened ; and I s-^y, without fear of contradiction, it is the most painful ordeal through which y^ou will ever pass. This case now rests with you ; I have discharged my duty to the best of my ability, and according to the dictates of my con- science. This poor outcast has no paid advocate to defend him. I am speaking for him for charity, for humanity, and for justice. Oh, gentlemen, do not deem me rude or oflensive when I tell you to discard the doctors ; discard the language of the District Attorney, and with all deference, even the dictates of the learned Judge. Con- sider the common-sense facts of this case, and take with you to your room the picture of that idiotic, imbecile man ; and if, amongst you twelve, one or two suggest, " Oh, convict him ; hang him ! " then k t his picture, pho- tographed upon your minds, obtrude itself, and you will silence the mai^ 48 THE TRIAL OF JACK BEYNOLDS. who a«ks for a conviction. Oh, do not mistake lest you may think that I urge that you should let loose upon society, one who may be dano-erous to us, as has been proven. Let me call your attention to the words of the statute on the subject : "Upon any indictment of any oflfense consisting of different degrees, the jury may find the accused not guilty of the offense in the degree charged, but may find the prisoner guilty on any degree of such offense in- ferior to that charged in the indictment." Now, gentlemen, in this case, with all its bearings, you may find that poor wretch, if you please, if you can reconcile it to the evidence, and to your consciences, guilty of murder in the first degree, and murder means the killing of a human being, with premeditation and malice — knowing that he was killing — knowing that he was doing wrong. I am sure 1 may safely discard that in this case. You have the power and the privilege to find him guilty of murder in the second degree. For that this poor pitiful object may be immured with- in the dungeon walls for the term of his natural life ; and in that event I predict that when within his coffined tomb of stone. Death claims it's victim, and when after death, an examination of the brain proclaims insan- ity, you will remember the scene in this court-room, you will remember my feeble voice proclaiming disease within that malformed skull, and then how great! oh! hpw happy, will be your' congratulations that you did not hang the poor lunatic outcast — that you did not hang, as a victim for all the refined and cultured criminals of great New York — the poor beggar who is " out in the streets.''^ Oh gentlemen, to violate the living temple which the Lord hath made, — to quench the human flame within a human being's breast, — is an awful and a terrible responsibility ! And I tell you, that if you improperly con- demn this wretched man, and consign him to an iejnominious death, and a post-mortem examination shall hereafter reveal his brain diseased; then gentlemen, the recollection of this day will never die within you. Your crime, for so it will be, — will pursue you with remorse, like a shadow through your crowded walks. li will hover beside you on your pillow. It will sit at your table. It will ever be present through the remainder of your lives; and at the Great Last^^ taking the form of this man's spirit, it will rise to sink and condemn you before the Judgment Seat of God ! ! I At the conclusion of the foregoing speech the District Attorney, Honorable S. B. Garvin, spoke as follows : May it please the Courts Gentlemen of the Jury : I have, through the period of a quarter of a century, tried a great many cases of great importance, not only civil but crimmal. , And in all such cases I have found that sensible men always sympathize with the prisoner. They consider his position and hi^ condition more than that of any other pers(;n, for the reason that he himself is present, a living man, to answer for himself. But in all these cases, gentlemen, you must remember there is one who is absent. He is gone. He never appears on the stand. He cannot tesii- fy ; his mouth is " sealed in death.^^ He is away from his own famiiy, ^nd his children who were around him are with him no more. THE TRIAL OF JACK KEYNOLDS. 49 You must remember that when lie sat at liis fireside, he sat as you and I sit in our own houses, under our own vine and fig tice, with the right of no man to invade it. And, gentlemen, it is protection that we want for your wife and mine, your children and my children, when we come forth every day to prosecute the ordinary business of life. We do not know whether we shall be safe when we sit at our own table with our children, after a hard day's work, to enjoy a season of rest. Now, gentlemen, I make these observations, that you may be called back to consider this terrible deed — an awful deed — because the prisoner's counsel does not stand up here for one moment to say but that this prison- er did not inflict the blow that sent Townsend to his long home with- out a moment of preparation. He went unannointed into the presence of his Maker, by the hands of this prisoner, whose face he never saw before. And he knew it when he went into the house, just as well as he did when he went into the shoemaker's shop, and stole the knife with which he committed that deed of blood. In considering this case, I trust you will do it yourselves alone, without any aid from me, after hearing such observations as shall strike me as per- tinent to the case. It is not for me alone to say that this man shall be convicted or acquitted ; but yoa yourselves, every man on his conscience, shall say whether or not the case is made out against him. You are responsible. You are responsible to yourselves ; you are re- sponsible to the community ; you are responsible to this great people ; you are responsible to Him before whom you must soon appear, be it longer or shorter. The time will come when you must give an account of your conduct here to day, whether it be for good or evil. Now, gentlemen, as I said before, in considering this case, the court will say to you, I have no doubt, what the rule of law is in regard to cases of this description. I walk up to my friend and take his life with a knife, or a ball, or dagger, or by any physical force, and who is going to punish me ? Not the District Attorney, nor anybody ; but a jury of twelve men, they are to say whether or not crimes of this kind are to be tolerated. We come down to the jury of twelve men in all the great transactions of life, civil as well as criminal. Men hang by the jury's verdict ; men hold their property by the ver- dict of a jury ; society is protected by the verdicts of juries. You are protected, by night and by day, by the verdicts of juries. Why is it then that the law has said that when a man takes the life of another he shall forfeit his own life? It is just to inflict the highest penalty known to the law, which is life tor life. If you take life you shall be executed. If you take your neigh- bor's life you shall be executed. It you take the life of any human being, no matter who he is, whether the highest or the humblest man in the community, you shall forfeit your lite lor his. My life is as dear to me as is yours. It' is God's honest rule; it was ordained by heaven. It should be observed by all men, and no sickly sentjimentality should 4 50 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYN0LD8. deter von, when satisfied tliat murder, foul murder, has been committed, from (loinir your duty. Is iliere any doubt I'.bout this case ? The case is clear on the part of the pe(>ple. What is the defense which they set up? It is, that this pris- oner is insane, therefore not responsible. Have they given us a single fact as to his former liistoiy ? Have they given us a single fact as to where he has bien ? what he has been doing? or what has been the course of his life ? No foundation has been laid by the witnesses for the prosecution, or the prisoner, upon which to found such an opinion. Nothing on that subject; and ihjit is the leascn that when I rested the case for the prosecu- tion, I had not a single douht as to his mental condition, character, state of sauiiy, or otherwise ; and the court will charge you that sanity is always to be presumed unless there is some evidence lo the contrary. That is the rule of law. All men are presumed sane until there is some evidence to the conirary. Thus we stand. Prisoner's counsel says there is no motive for what he did. Motive! Why, some of the veiy cases that he reads here to-day arose fiom personal inconvenience. It may be from a sudden miff. It may arise from laying a hand on a man's shoulder, — this depraved condition of the human mind bursts foith, resulting in violence. What did this prisoner go in there for? He did not say, "You are my brother;" the evidence is, "I am your brother." . Was there anything strange about that? The great Lord Chatham said to a colored man, "You are a man and brother." How often is it that men say to each other, " My brother ? " Is ihere any delusion about it? Is that one of the things upon which a man can stand defended in a court of justice ? That won't do. Did this prisoner talk like an insane man? Did he act like an irre- sponsible being ? Was any portion of his conduct like that of a man who did not know what he was about — the difference between right and wrong ? He went down into the basement, five steps, and walked right through into the store, seated himself on a chair, and says, "I am your brother. I wish to stay all night." And Townsend told him, "You cannot stay here; I liaven't room enough for my own family. I can't keepi you ; you must go. Please go." In tlie mildest possible manner, " Please go out." Prisoner went ijito the fiont part of the store and sat down on a milk can. Mr. Townsend seeing that he was not going out, walked up to him again, and said, " Please go out," and put his hand gently upon his collar or shoulder. Is ihere anything, even the slightest evidence of insanity, thus far ? Then prisoner turned around and stabbed him to the heart in a moment ; but by leason of the great strength and vigor of Townsend, a man of fifty years of age, he carries ihis prisoner, by main strength, to the steps, and he there falls down from the loss of blood fnom the wound which this prisoner had ])erpetrated. ^ He killed him because he would not keep him all night ; because he would not recognize him as a brother or as a man. Motive ! Take the case of Kodgers. What did he do ? Rodgers was walking with two of his comrades in the street, in this city. He met a gentleman walk- ing with his wife, and ran against them, and the gentleman asked him why he did so, and Piodgers turned around and slabbed him to the heart. THE TRIAL OF JACK EETNOLDS. 61 He died instantly on the ppot, and went to the God who made him, without a struggle, or a groan, on the streets of New York. I Msk you what pos- sible riiotive could Rodgers have for such a murder ? He was tried, con- victed, and executed. The motive he had in commilting crime was maUcious, and the law says it is malice. The jurors say it is maljce. All the civilized world say?, if a man takes the life of another, he does it through malice, unless he can show to the contrary. Again, take the case of Friery, who was tried in this city. He went into Lazarus' place, and said, " You are a good fellow," and he put his arm round his neck', and plunging a knife into his neck, killed him. What was the motive ? Friery was tried, convicted, and executed. Now, again, genilemen, was he (Reynold.'^) insane? Was going into the shoemaker s shop any evidence of it. ? What does he say when there ? " Have you got any work ? " " Where have you been to work ?" and he says, I haven't had any work for 60 many months. "What kind of work do you do?" "Pegoed work." The man say, *' I have no work for you." A little consultation takes place between the parties, and he goes away. Before he goes, he steals a knife, and puts it in his pocket. The next place he goes into, he sees if he cannot get something else, and he says so in so many words. When he goes into Townsend's, he has the knife in his pocket, and is told, " I cannot lodge you." You must recollect that he had been stealing. Perhaps he did the same thing in several d fferent places during the day ; and he comes along after six o'clock, when darkness had come over the earth, and he says to Townsend, in the basement, " I am your brother," and, " I want to stay all night; " and he was told that he could not stay there, and he leaves the back room, and Townsend follows him, and puts his hand gently on him, and says, " You must go," or " Please go," or whatever was the form of ex- pression ; but I think it was the latter, and he stabbed him. What else does he do ? He resists with all his strength. The officer is unable to take the knife out of his hand. Does the coun- sel know any reason why ? Do you know any reason why ? Has any sane man any doubt as to the re^ison why ? He expected to get away, and he did not mean to leave that evidence of his guilt behind him. One of the witnesses swears that he lay perfectly still for a few mo- ments, and then suddenly jumping up, tried to run away. On his way to the station-house, some one said, "Hang him," and he said, " Hanging is played out." Did he not understand what he was doing ? Perfectly. Did he not know what the penalty for his crime was? Perfectly. What did he have on his mind when he said, "Hanging is played out 2 " The crime he had committed — the murder he h>id done. Again, gentlemen, when he goes to the station-house, what doe> he do ? Is it very lemarkable that a man, when he stands up before a c ipiain of police, and is charged with some offense, and is asked what his business is, to say he is a thief? The counsel thinks so — I do not. 62 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. I have heard hundreds say the same thing in court. Bring a man up on an indictment. Are you guilty or not guilty ? " Guilty." He takes the chances of going to the State Prison, and hundreds of them admit every day they arc thieves and burglars, in our courts of justice, and this man said only, "I am a thief." That is liis business — a thief; and yet it is said, " Acquit him." Again, what is the medical evidence on this subject ? Now, the counsel on the other side says, I did not call the medical wit- nesses. Why should I call them ? I have proved that Townsend was alive and well, and on the 29th of January he died, and this prisoner killed him. I made out my case. But why should I have the doctors subpoenaed ? because, the counsel, when the prisoner was arraigned in this court a few weeks ago, said that his defense would be insanity. What could I do, as the prosecuting officer, but to subpoena medical men to attend, and have this prisoner examined, and to Converse with him ? and if Dr. Hammond had reported to me that this man was insane, I would have said, let him go. The medical testimony is certainly entitled to some weight. I did not call it out. I haven't called these witnesses. I should not have called a witness at all on that subject, but when they were on the stand I examined them. Dr. Hammond says : " I have had two conversations with this prisoner of an hour each." The result of those examinations you have heard. Had he been insane before that ? Had he had any disease of any de- scription ? You have the declaration of the prisoner that he had not. The Doctor now says we would not take his word for it. " We went on to examine him, and we found everything in a natural condition." Dr. Nealis says that he has examined him every day since he has been in the Tombs, and talked witH him every day, and saw no signs of insanity whatever. He has attended 700 or 800 to 1000 cases, and he has not found one single indication of insanity in this prisoner at all. Now, gentlemen, all the facts in the case go to show that the prisoner is sane. The law is, that if a man shall murder another lie shall forfeit his life for so doing. What have you got to say about this case. I do not propose to talk to twelve men about it for any length of time. I propose to discharge my duty, and then let you do yours. Gentlemen, the facts are against this prisoner ; the medical testimony is against him ; common sense is against him; but" the counsel stands up here to-day, and asks you to find him insane. He is guilty of murder in the first degree, or else he is not guilty of anything, and must be acquitted. Let me say to you — you give this man his liberty, and let him go, and you give license to every scoundrel and cut-throat in the city of New York, to butcher anybody they see fit to, and all they have to do is to go into a court of justice and plead insanity, and then be discharged. I say, again, that when crime is as rife as it is at present in Philadel- phia, in Boston, in Brooklyn, and all other large cities in this country, and seems to be spreading and permeating the whole country from one end to THl£ TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 63 *tlie other, and a case is clearly and fairly made out, is it right that the prisoner should be acquitted ? Such a course is fatal to the safety of this metropolis. I can stand it, perhaps, and you can, but v^hen you do it, rersember that every time you walk out after dark, the assassin may be upon your heels for the purpose of taking your life. When you leave your wife and children in the morning, to attend to your daily avocations, you do not know but when you return you will find them ail dead. It may be with you as it was in the case of Townsend. When you go up to your bed at night, it maybe to find a burglar with- in your room, and if you resist him your life will be taken. I tell you, gentlemen, there is blood in the air, and unless you put a stop to this carnival of crime by your verdict, there is no knowing where it may end. This is not the first time that I have addressed a jury in this city in im- portant cases. A year ago to-day, I stood here before a jury, in the ca=e of John Real. That case has been pressed by the utmost eflforts of the Dis- trict Attorney, and he lies in the Tombs to-day on an appeal to the Court of Appeals. It is not my fault, or the fault of the public, but it is the law^s delay, and we cannot help it. He has a right to all the forms and delays the law gives him. Other cases which have been of long standing are in the Tonabs. In one case a commission has gone to Liverpool, and another some where else. One witness is being examined on the Island of Cuba in another case. It is not for me to tell you why men are not tried. 'AH cases will be tried when they are ready, and not before. AYhen prisoners are ready for trial, we bring them for trial before a jury ; and I ask you, as sensible men, not to be led away by this sort of nonsense. When a man plunges a knife into the bosom of another and kills, he must have some other evidence of insanity besides this theory of astute coun- sel, read from books, without any facts to sustain it, before the prisoner can be acquitted. You have this case. I have done my duty, and I ask you to do yours ; and I ask you ^to do it courageously, and as high-minded, cammou-sense men, and give us such a verdict as will satisfy your own consciences, when you shall stand in that awful presence where the secrets of every soul shall be revealed, and a light like that of ten thousand guns shall illuminate the inmost recesses of every heart. Judge Ingraham then delivered his charge to the jury, as follows : Gentlemen of the Jury : You have, no doubt, a solemn duty to perform. Solemn, because it af- fects the future welfare and well-being of the man who is on trial before you, and to him it is indeed a solemn and important occasion. lou have also a solemn duty to perform to yourselves, because you have taken an oath to decide this case according to the law and the evi- dence which is presented to you. You have sworn that you will find a verdict. Whether that verdict shall be for or against the prisoner. The solemn- ity not only extends to the prisoner but to yourselves, and it is just as im- 54 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. port ant that you should discharge this duty on your own behalf as you should to the piisoner. No external influences should interfere with you in this matter. Your verdict must rest on this evidence and this evidence alone, and you need not go to anything else or suffer any other considerations to in- fluence you, because if you do, you will do a wrong to yourselves, and fail in the performance of your duty. Nor should you suffer passion or prejudice, or any other thing to in- fluence you at all in this matter. Neither fear nor favor, neither public clamor, nor any other considera- tion should enter into the minds of the jurors, when called upon to pass on a question such as this. Nor should you suffer ideas that some entertain in regard to capital punishment, to weaken your judgment or affect your decision. You are called upon here to decide simply the question whether he' is guilty of the crime charged upon him. You are to decide upon the guilt or innocence of this man, and if you find him guilty, I have but to pronounce that which the law pronounces. It is the law, not you or I. With these remarks then, let us endeavor for a few moments to with- draw your thoughts from everything except the matter which you have to dispose of, and let us look at the evidence and the law applicable to it, and let us ascertain what the decision should be. There may be, gentlemen, and there often are, doubts remaining in the minds of the jury in regard to the proof which is furnished for the purpose of convicting a pi'isoner, and the rule of law is that, when such a duubt exists, it shall be given to the prisoner; or, in other words, it is the duty of the public prosecutor to prove to you the case which he attempts to make out against the prisoner. If he fails to do so, then the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal. The prisoner is charged with the crime of murder. Murder in the first degree is killing a human being without any justifiable or excusable cause, and the person committing the act has determined to take his life. It is not necessary that that determination should have been made any length of time previous. The determination may be made the time the deed itself is committed. If, at the time the blow is struck, the prisoner has determined to take the hfe, and then strikes the blow and takes life, it is murder in the first degree. There is no pretence here that it is justifiable or excusable. It is hardly worth while for me to refer you to that. There is no doubt about the case or the person who committed it. There is no doubt about the weapon by which it was done ; and there is no doubt as to the consequences attending it. Now I think, therefore, that I may confine myself to a few remarks I have to make as to the defense of insanity which is set up here. Insanity, gentlemen, relieves a man from all responsibility. If any act is done through the existence of insanity, the law does not permit such a person to be tried or punished for such an act, when he is insane. So careful is the law of the life of a human being in this respect, that it THE TKIAL OF JAOK REYl^OLDS. 55 neither permits him to be tried or punished for such an act while insane, and the question Ij^re for you is to decide whether this man, at the time of the commission of this act, was laboring under any degree of insanity^ to make him irresponsible. Now the legal definition of insanity, and the definition of insanity by physicians, dift'er. A physician considers a man insane who does anything out of the regu- lar order of nature — anything which diff'ers from the normal state in which men ought to be. The law does not consider that difference. A man may be insane upon one particular point, and not insane upon any other point. But tLie rule is this, that if a man knows that he has committed an act unlawful and morally wrong, he is responsible for such an act. That is the rule which has been adhered to by our court, and the courts in England, and has been repeated invariably, from time to time, in all times. There is nothing shown here to us that at any time previous to the commis>ion of this act, the prisoner had ever sustained any injury to pro- duce insanity ; that he had any of the diseases which the learned counsel has read from the books, or that he fiad on any occasion offered any evi- dence of insanity. Sanity is to be presumed : it is always to be presumed that a man is in the natural condition in which he was born, and that insanity is to be proved otherwise. Take that as a rule, and down to the time when this offense was com- mitted, there is no evidence whatever. There is no pruof to show that he was ever insane, or ever afflicted with any disease which would produce insanity. When you come to the trans- action itself, what was there in that? The prisoner, certainly, through the whole of that transaction, showed knowledge in regard to what he was doing. His first act was to go into the shoemaker's, and when he sat down on the shoemaker's bench, he converged for a while, and then secretly con- cealed the knife which he found on the bench, and with it he left the place. Then he went into the next basement — the grocery store — and there he went through the front part of the store into the back, where Mr.Townsend was silting, and he addressed him in the words which have been repeated two or three times, calling him a brother, and said that he wanted to stay there. In all this there was nothing unusual. He was told that he could not stay there, there was no accommodation for him ; and he saw in that place at the time two little girls and a baby, and no others were there. I feel some hesitation in saying to you, but it seems to me tliere is some evidence in the case to which your attention has not been directed. After this act was committed, this man was asked by the ofiicer whether he went there to steal, and he said that he did ; and on examination before the sergeant in the evening, at the police office, when asked what his em- ployment was, he said he was a thief. Now, if there is any truth in these remarks, it then opens a road to the motive. 56 THE TRIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. He saw no one in that place but Towusend and tliese little children ; and if his object was theft, it was easily to be gratified after the destruction of Townsend. ^ AVh ether that was his motive or not I cannot say ; but I feel that I am doing no more than my duty by calling your attention to it in this case, because it is in the evidence before you. He did not succeed, because the strength of Townsend was sucb as to enable him to bring him to the door after injuring him. After he (Reynolds) was down on the steps he remained quiet ; and Townsend was taken or got up from him, and he (Reynolds) watched his opportunity and attempted to escape. Then, in his passage to the police station, he was with the officer, and we have no evidence of anything tending to shoio insanity. Now, this»is the history of his actions, and it is from his actions we can judge of the sanity or insanity of the prisoner. The physicians have examined him, each of them two or three times, and each and all of them have testified, without any hesitation, that they never seen anything insane in any way. They all pronounce him, from that time, the 6th of February, to be a sane man. Now, gentlemen, this is the evidftce on this subject, and there is no doubt, perhaps, about what has been, written in the books which have been read to you. It is seldom that you will find a case where a man is sane one moment and ins^ane the next moment afterward. I do not know that there even have been cases where such occurred. This is the only question which is between you in the decision of this case : Was there a motive sufficient to justify it, or was it a mere aberra- tion of the man's mind ? Now, with all the evidence before you, you are called upon to decide whether this man was insane or not. I need hardly call your attention to the fact of a law which allows you to convict the prisoner of lesser degrees of the same crime. This is not murder in the second degree, because murder in the second degree is killing a man while engaged in the commission of a misdemeanor or felony. Something has been said about the three cuts upon the hand, as has been explained. Those cuts might have been accidental, but the main blow is the one toward the heart, and the others might have very easily taken place on the steps, when he was dragging the man out. Gentlemen, I think I have now said to you all that is necessary, and will leave the case with you. It being now 2.08 P. M., the jury retired, but returned for instructions at 3.05 P. M. Norman J. Reeves, a juror, said : Have we a right to bring in a verdict of a less degree than the fii^^ ? Judge Ingraham. Killing a person without the due authority of law, is murder in the first degree. Mr. Howe. I ask your honor to charge the jury now, that they have the power to convict of murder in the second- degree. ' That such a verdict would be valid and lawful. This the court refused to do. By a Juror. What is the punishment for the second degree ? THE TKIAL OF JACK REYNOLDS. 57 Judge Ingraham, Imprisonment for life. The jury then retired a second time (4.10 P. M.) Judge Ingraham said : One of the jurors (Charles Jones) wants to know whether there was any evidence, direct or indirect, showing that the pris- oner was insane at the time of the commission of the deed. The only answer I can give you to that is, that there ivas no evidence at any time ivhatever that there was any insanity. The learned counsel, Mr. Howe, has asked you to infer that from the transaction itself; but there is no evidence at all that this man ever was insane at any time, and the physicians all say that he was sane when they examined him. Chas, Jones {Juror). I take this view of the case, because I want to do justice, Judge Ingraham. As I said be'fore, there is no evidence that he Tvas insane at any time, and the only thing that the counsel furnishes you with is that of his acts during the transaction. Juror. Is it not possible that he was insane at that particular time? Judge. That is for the jury to decide. If, from the examination of the circumstances, you come to the conclusion that he is insane, you have a right to say so. The jury then retired, and returned again at 4.55 P. M., and the Clerk called their names. They were then requested to arise, and asked to look upon the prisoner, and the prisoner upon the jurors. They declared that they had found the prisoner guilty of murder in the first degree. The jury was then polled, and declared that the above verdict was their's, individually. Assistant District Attorney Fellows^ who was present, arose and spoke as follows : May it please your honor, I move that the judgment of the law, which this sentence carries with it, be imposed upon the prisoner, John Reynolds. Mr. Howe said: May it please your honor, having now discharged my duty, so far as this tribunal is concerned, for this friendless man, I ask your honor, as is usual, that you will defer the passing of the sentence until I may resolve in my mind what course I shall adopt in reference to this man, and as to what motion I will have to make in arrest of judgment. I only ask until to-morrow morning. Judge Ingraham. Let the prisoner be remanded till to-morrow morning. The court then adjourned at 5 o'clock P. M. THIRD BAY.— Wednesday, February 23d, 1870. The court reassembled at 10.30 this morning, and the prisoner having been placed at the bar of the court, and duly interrogated by the clerk of the court, what he had to say why sentence of death should not be passed upon him according to law ; and making no reply — Judge Ingraham said: You are to be sentenced, Reynolds, for killing Townsend, a man with whom you had no difficulty, and for whose killing there was no excuse. Before doing it you went into another place, and there took a knife and concealed it, keeping it concealed until you found an op- 5 58 THE TRIAL OF JACK KEYNOLDS. portiinity of stabbing him, in his own house, among his own chiklren, with none others present. What your motive for doing it was we do not know, but there is some suspicion that it was for the purpose of doing other wrong and improper acts. You have been tried by a jury of very intelligent men, who have given your case a very thorough examination ; listened attentive- ly to the testimony, and have agreed that you are guilty. AVith that ver- dict the court does not at all differ. /The murder was a cruel one on your part, entirely unprovoked ; and there is nothing to excuse or justify it. You don't now offer any excuse ? Prisoner. I don't know anything about it. Court. Your conduct shows you did know. Prisoner. I don't know only what they told me. Judge Ingraham. You may have been excited by liquor, but that don't excuse you. If a man is allowed to indulge in drinking and then kills his fcjllow-man, he is not excused on account of drinking. The law does not excuse you ; it holds you responsible ; and I have no other duty left for me now but to pronounce upon you the sentence of the law. It is not the sentence of the court, but the sentence of the law, and the law makes your life forfeit to the country for taking the life of another. And now I advise you, before pronouncing that sentence, to lay aside any hope that you may have that this decision may be altered or extended. The character of your offense, as well as the great number of offenses of a similar kind that have been perpetrated continually in this city, calls for the execution of the law, not only iu your case, but in others when they shall have been convicted, and instead of looking for hope here, I urge you to prepare yourself for the event that is before you. When the time comes which will be fixed for the execution of your sentence, you will be executed, and you will pass from this world into another. In the meantime you have the opportunity afforded you to prepare for that event. It is not too late for you to make that preparation, and I advise you, therefore, to lay aside the hope of getting pardoned, and seek for that preparation which is neces- sary for you before the time comes which is fixed for your execution. The sentence of the court is that you be carried hence to the prison from which you have been brought, there to be confined in close custody until the 8th day of April, and that on that day you be hanged by the neck until you are dead, between the hours of 8 and 2 in the afternoon, and may God have mercy on you. The clerk of the court, Mr. Vandervoort, then read the death warrant, and delivered it to Deputy-Sheriff Isaiah Rynders, who has charge of the condemned. At this announcement the doors of the court were ordered to be barred, to prevent the egress of the vast audience, and the condemned man who seemed in no perceptible manner affected by the sentence, was conveyed to an adjoining room, and from thence to the street, but before gaining the Tornbs, the crowd again flocked around him, and amidst the hootings and yelling of the gamin he was lodged in his dark cell on the lower tier of the prison, moody and dejected, to receive such spiritual comfort as would prepare him for the next world. i