USA > Indiana > Early Indiana trials: and sketches. Reminiscences > Part 2
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62
15
DR. BRADBURN'S TRIAL.
[THURSDAY MORNING, JULY 9, 1857.
DR. BRADBURN'S TRIAL.
AMONG the first of the great tragic trials in this State, was that of Dr. John Bradburn, of Fayette county, on an indictment for murder. I was at the time County Prosecutor for the State. The facts of the case were briefly these : Dr. Bradburn was an eminent surgeon, a man of great muscular power and of the most indomitable personal courage. I have scareely ever seen a more athletic man, and I never knew a man of greater bravery. He lived some four or five miles from Connersville. In general the Doctor was highly respected, but it seems that he had given some real or imaginary cause of offense to several young men of equal respectability in his neighborhood, who took it into their heads that they would take the Doctor from his house in the night, ride him on a rail to the water and then duek him. The Doctor by some means got wind of what was going on, and prepared himself with weapons for defense, among which was a long dissecting knife with two edges. The young men, unaware of his preparation, fixed upon a dark night to carry their plan into execution. Capt. Robert L. Broaddus was selected as their leader. About twelve o'clock at night the party silently approached the dwelling of the Doetor and tried to open the door, but found it fast. The Doctor was in bed in an adjoining room, wide awake, with his large knife under his pillow, cool and prepared. The outside party placed an iron crow-bar, which they had brought with them, under the door, threw it off its hinges and entered the room, carrying with them the ropes prepared to tie the Doctor before they took him from the house. In the meantime the Doctor remained silently sitting upon his bed, with his knife in his hands. The room was dark. The party advanced, feeling their way, until the foremost, young Alexander, about eighteen years of age, reached the bed, when he received a fatal stab with the knife, turned, rushed to the door, stepped out, and fell dead in the yard. Not a word was spoken. The next, young Caldwell, about twenty years of age, advanced, evidently not knowing the fate of Alexander, until be came within the grasp of the Doctor, when the fatal knife was thrust through his side, penetrating his heart. He uttered a loud groan, turned, fled to the door, passed a short distance into the yard, fell and died near the body of Alexander. The groan of Caldwell alarmed the others, who immediately retreated for the door, pursued by the Doctor, and one other of the party received a severe, but not a mortal wound. Capt. Broaddus told me that at one time the Doctor was between him and the door, and as he passed to go out the
16
EARLY INDIANA TRIALS.
Doctor struek at him with his knife, and just grazed his side. It was very evident that but for the groan of Caldwell, not one of the assailants would have left the house alive. Such was the awful tragedy at the house. The young men killed were of the very first families of the county ; indeed of the State. The excitement was intense ; the Doctor gave himself up, and was put in jail. While the inquest was sitting over the dead bodies, he was calm and composed, and stated all about the transaction, and I have no doubt truthfully, for he was a man of truth, although his life was at stake. He had been my client, and on this, the most trying occasion of his life, he insisted that I should defend him. I told him I was the attorney of the State. "You get hut $120 a year, and I will give you $500 for this case alone." I however, at once told him that no fee could induce me to forsake the State at such a juncture, and declined further conversation with him. He sent to Brookville for John T. Mckinney to defend him. The eourt met ; the grand-jury found a bill for murder ; the trial came on ; the facts substantially as stated were proved, with the admission of the Doctor. The court-house was crowded with an excited population. ? General MeKinney made a strong speech in the defense, but it evidently fell upon unwilling ears. My closing speech was again and again applauded by the crowd, and the applause as often reprimanded by the Court and the sheriff. It was evident that the jury, and the audience were with me, and had the ease gone to the jury without any charge from the Court, Doctor Bradburn would have been illegally convicted, I have no doubt. But Judge Eggleston, as we say, had the "closing " or last speech, and nobly did he sustain his high character as a judge on that occasion. He took up the case calmly but firmly ; examined 1 its principles, and laid down the law of self-defense, or excusable homicide, that governed the prosecution, step by step, until, I am satisfied, there was neither lawyer, juror, nor bystander in the court room that did not acquit the prisoner before the jury left the box. The jury retired but a few minutes and returned a verdict of not guilty, on the ground of self-defense. So ended this long-to-be- remembered case in old Fayette.
TRIAL OF YOUNG.
IN the year 1824 I was appointed by Governor Hendricks Circuit Prosecutor for the Third Judicial Circuit, and for the succeeding two years I rode with Judge Eggleston into every county and attended the courts twice a year. Our Southern Court at that time was held at Vevay, and our Northern at Fort Wayne. The judge was rather
17
DR. BRADBURN'S TRIAL.
delicate, but I had an iron constitution. There were no bridges over the streams, but we rode good swimming horses, and never faltered on account of high water, but plunged in and always found the opposite shore somehow. During the two years that I served as prose- cutor, there was not a single court held or a grand-jury impanneled in my absence on our eircuit. On one circuit I heard nine men sentenced to the penitentiary and four to be hung that I prosecuted. In the continuation of these reminiscences I propose to sketch some of these eases. Before doing which, however, let me present the great and exciting trial of Alexander Young for killing John Points, in the Rush Circuit Court. The ease was prosecuted by James Whit- comb and myself, for the State, and defended by Charles II. Test, James Rariden and James T. Brown for the prisoner. The facts of the ease were these : Young was a justice of the peace of Rush county, who had a beautiful and beloved daughter, about seventeen years of age. Points was a fine-looking young farmer, the son of a respectable man in the neighborhood, but somewhat wild and reckless. IIe had for some time been attached to the Squire's daughter and had asked the consent of the father to their marriage; but was rejected and denied the privilege of longer visiting the house. The young couple then arranged for an elopement, to get married at a neighboring village ; the father got wind of their intentions and determined at all hazards to prevent it. He loaded his rifle and hung it up at a con- venient place, to be taken down at a moment's notice of the approach of young Points. The Squire was absent one morning from his house, when Points rode up on horseback ; the daughter was ready, stepped to the block and sprang up behind him, and off they bounded on a cirenitous path round the fields to the public road leading to the village where they were to be married, and their earthly joys to commence for life. They left the house full of life, with bright hopes of the future, and the ultimate reconciliation of the parents, as they had both been readers of romance, and imagined this was to be a noted adventure, like escaping from a castle by young lovers. But alas for their dreams ! the Squire returned a few moments after they had left, and seizing his rifle ran across the fields to the road, and took his position near the roadside-behind some tree, where the young couple & had to pass. They soon approached at a rapid pace, wholly unconseious of impending harm. As they were directly opposite the tree, where the Squire was concealed, he raised the rifle, the erack was heard at the house by the mother. The ball grazed the head of the daugh- ter, and young Points fell from his seat a corpse, leaving the intended bride in her seat on the horse. She returned to the house with 2
18
EARLY INDIANA TRIALS.
her father, and was the principal witness against him on the trial.
The case created great excitement throughout the whole country. The coroner's inquest charged Young with the murder of Points. The Squire was arrested and confined in the jail of Rush county. The grand-jury found a bill of indictment for murder in the first degree. The clergy visited him in his cell repeatedly. He expressed the most poignant regret, and the deepest sorrow, so as to make a profound and lasting impression upon all who visited him-among the rest, upon my venerable friend, the Reverend James Havens, who took a deep interest in the trial. The court-house was crowded, and surrounded at every window, during the trial, with the most anxious countenances I ever saw on any occasion ; and while the daughter testified, the crowd seemed almost to cease breathing, such was the silence that surrounded us. The daughter related the whole facts and circum- stances of the case briefly and calmly, but evidently with great feeling, and so far as we could judge, withont any disposition to withhold auy thing material because her father was on trial. However, the tragedy proved too much for her strength. She gradually sank into a state of partial alienation of mind, from which she was never relieved by all the treatment of the most eminent physicians, and she is now alive-a confined maniac.
The case was argued with all the ability the eminent counsel on both sides could bring to hear upon it. Mr. Whitcomb for the State, and Mr. Charles H. Test for the prisoner, especially distinguished themselves. The appeals to the sympathy of the jury were not in vain. A verdict of manslaughter, two years in the state-prison, and a pardon from the Governor, were the final result, but I learned that Alexander Young never smiled afterward.
.
19
SLANDER CASE.
[FRIDAY MORNING, JULY 10, 1857.
SLANDER CASE.
As I was on my return home from Indianapolis, accompanied by my friend, the late George H. Dunn, we stopped at a little shanty tavern in the woods between Big Blue River and Rushville, to stay for the night. The landlord I call Perry Laden. We had a good open log fire, a tolerable supper, and took our seats. We were evidently strangers at the inn. The landlord, who was a small, frisky, run- about fellow, eyed us for some time, and at last drew up his " splint- bottomed chair " and commenced : "Are cither of you lawyers?" " Yes, both of us." "Then you are the very men I want to see-I have a lawsuit for you." "What about ?" " The man that keeps the tavern in sight down the road (whom I call Elzy C. Lec), has slandered me the worst kind." "Indeed, what did he say of you ?" " He said that I fed my travelers on stolen pork." " Perhaps he was only in fun." " Not he, it was all done to get the traveling custom to his tavern." This looked plausible, and as I practiced in the Rush Circuit Court, the matter began to assume a serious, business-like character, as I thought myself somebody in slander cases, although " Starkie on Slander," in two volumes, had not then met the eye of the profession. We generally carried with us, on the circuit, " Espinasse's Nisi Prius." and " Peak's Evidence," with dog-ears turned down at each heading. Judge Dunn was my senior in practice, and had some experience in the difficulties that sometimes embarrass counsel upon the trial, when, for the first time they learn that their clients only told the truth as far as they went, but forgot to tell the whole truth, which alone would enable them to meet the true state of the case before the court. " One question more Mr. Laden," said Judge Dunn, "did you ever kill anybody's hogs by accident and bring them home, out of which your neighbor might have made up this story against you ?" " Never ! I never killed a hog in the woods in my life ; besides I can prove my character from a boy, by Captain Bracken." This settled the matter in favor of the action. Judge Dunn, living at Lawrenceburg, and not practicing in Rushville, the case was given up to me ; the fcc agreed upon, twenty dollars certain, and one half the damages contin- gent. The case was brought at the next term of the court, and Capt. Bracken subpenaed to prove the good character from infancy of my client. My expectations were high of the large damages that I was to divide with my client ; I had read of $20,000, $10,000, $5,000, and such verdicts in aggravated cases of slander. The court came on, my case was called. " A rule for a plea," says I. " Plead instanter,"
20
EARLY INDIANA TRIALS.
says James Rariden for defendant. "Hand the plea to me, Mr. Clerk," says I. The clerk handed over the plea. A single glance satisfied me that there was trouble ahead. The plea was a " justifica- tion " of the words, and charging the stealing of two hogs on my client, the property of some one unknown. I told my client the sub- stance of the plea. "It is all a lie, they can't prove it, and if they do Capt. Bracken will clear up my character." Of course I took issue upon the plea. A jury was called, and Mr. Rariden and Chas. H. Test called to the witness-stand a girl that had lived with my client at one time, but had been discharged some time before the trial. She swore positively that my client had killed two hogs in the woods, skinned them, cut off their heads and brought them home before daylight on a sled ; and said that he could kill enough for his winter's meat for the whole family. " How is this," I whispered in his ear. "Ask her what I said when I came home." I put the question. " He said as he had cut off the heads and legs of the hogs, and had skinned them, nobody could tell whether they were deer or hogs." My client seemed pleased with the answer to his question. "Now call up Capt. Bracken, and he will give my character." " Capt. Bracken, stand up and be sworn. Are you acquainted with the plaintiff, and how long have you known him ?" " I have known him from a hoy." " What is his character ?" Well, he always dealt fair enough with me." "But for honesty ; you never heard any thing against him for honesty ?" " Well, I can't exactly say that; he stole a fine hog from me that I had killed and hung up in the smoke-house; I tracked him the next morning, and found the hog at his house, and he paid me for it." Rariden laughed aloud, and my head fell at least forty degrees. The case was closed before the jury. The proof was positive. I sprang to my feet, and addressing the Court, "I ask the Court to instruct the jury, that before they can find for the defendant the evidence must be so strong that if the plaintiff was on his trial for stealing the hogs, they would send him to the penitentiary ?" "I admit that to he the law ; let the jury take the case," said Mr. Rariden. The jury retired to their room, and the Court adjourned. I walked silently to the tavern, amid the jeers of the lawyers, and the exultation of my competitor for the verdict. The jury were out all night, and just as the Court met in the morning, returned with a verdict of " one cent damages for the plaintiff." The defendant rushed up to me and tendered the cent. Mr. Rariden most indignantly stepped up to the foreman, " How could you find such a verdict ?" " Upon your own admissions." " What did I admit?" "Mr. Smith said if we found for the defendant, we must send the plaintiff to the peniten-
21
TRIAL OF MONROE.
tiary, and you admitted that to be the law ; so we could not think of sending a man well-off, and with a good tavern-stand, to the peniten- tiary, for stealing two little hogs, and poor at that." Judgment was rendered for one cent in damages, and over $300 costs. All my imaginary income from the verdict vanished, and the next time I heard from the parties, the tavern of the defendant was advertised by the sheriff to pay the costs. This case has occupied more space than I would have liked, but it contains a professional moral worth remembering.
TRIAL OF MONROE.
SOON after the above case, came on, in the same court, the trial of Hugh Monroe for murder. The case was prosecuted by James Whit- comb, for the State, and defended by Charles H. Test, James Rariden, James T. Brown, and myself. Hugh Monroe was a native of North Carolina, but had resided some time in Rush county. He and the deceased had been for several months on had terms, when they met at a shooting-match. While the deceased was fixing the target on the board, Monroe fired, and the ball passed through him, and he fell and died without a struggle. Soon after the occurrence I was sitting in my office, at Connersville, one morning, when a venerable man, uncommonly fine-looking, with hair as white as snow, finely but plainly dressed, entered and took a seat. IIe informed me that he was from North Carolina, and was the father of Hugh Monroe, then confined in the jail at Rushville. " I have come to see you, and see whether you think you can do any thing for him." "I can try." "Oh, if I could have brought with me William Gaston, of our State, I would have been satisfied. I offered him a deed to my farm to come with me and defend my son, but he could not leave home. I must take you, and hope for the best." I was the only counsel feed by the father. My colleagues were employed by the son. Hugh Monroe was indicted for murder. A strong case was made by the testimony against him. It was at least a ridge case that would have justified a verdict of guilty of murder. The venerable father sat by the side of his son with his eyes suffused with tears. The argument lasted two whole days. The counsel for the prisoner were well trained in the field of advocacy, and I never, to this day heard a case more strongly defended. The charge of the Court, though just, was against us, and as the jury retired the old father rose from his seat and advan- ced to where I was standing, took me by the hand, the tears rolling down his furrowed cheeks, "Oh, Mr. Smith, if they hang my son I
-
22
EARLY INDIANA TRIALS.
.
shall go home and tell his old mother that Mr. Gaston could have done no more for him than you have done." His utterance was choked, and with the squeeze of the hand we parted. The jury returned a verdict of manslaughter, sixteen years in the penitentiary, so strong was the evidence against him. As the verdict was pronoun- eed, the father said, " Thank God, his life is spared !" and the tears gushed from his eyes as he approached and threw his trembling arms around the neck of the prisoner. Hugh Monroe was pardoned by the Governor and returned to North Carolina to his aged parents, where he was received like the returning prodigal.
TRIAL OF A REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIER, ETC. 23
[SATURDAY MORNING, JULY 11, 1857.
TRIAL OF A REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIER.
SAMUEL FIELDS, a Revolutionary soldier, was indicted in the Franklin Circuit Court for murder, for killing Robert Murphy. I proseeuted the case, William R. Morris and John T. M'Kinney appeared for the prisoner. The facts were briefly as follows : The deceased, a constable, in the attempt to serve a writ of ca sa on the body of Fields, received a mortal wound with a shoe-knife which Fields had in his hand, of which wound Murphy languished for some days and died. Fields was arrested and confined in jail at Brookville. Court met, and the grand-jury found a bill of indictment for murder against Fields. There was mueh excitement at the trial ; officer Murphy had many warm friends, and the services of the Revolutionary prisoner plead strongly with the people. The jury that tried the ease was one of the most seleet that I have ever seen in one box. The evidence was elear and conclusive, leaving no room to doubt. The defense set up was that the crime was committed under a frenzied state of exeitement, to which it was answered by the prosecuting attorney and eharged by Judge Eggleston, who presided, that the knowingly killing of an officer, in the discharge of his duty, armed with legal process, and the faet made known to the execution defendant, is murder in the eye of the law. The jury rendered a verdict of guilty, and the court sentenced the prisoner to be hung ; the day of the execution was fixed by the court. In the meantime a number of distinguished eitizens of the county sallied forth in every direction with petitions for his pardon. Thousands signed them in consideration of his Revolutionary services. The day of the execution arrived ; the county in mass surrounded the gallows ; the last moment had come, when Gov. James B. Ray stepped upon the scaffold, commanded silence and handed the prisoner a pardon. Great was the sensation ; Fields was taken from the platform and conveyed to his home, to live a few years longer to repent of his deeds; and the audience retired with evident disappointment in their countenances at not seeing a man hung.
A GOOSE CASE.
SOON after the above trial I was distinguished by being employed in one of the most interesting, if not important cases that ever occurred in the county. It was an action for slanderons words spoken, charging the plaintiff's wife with stealing the goose of the defendant's wife. The parties were highly respectable. The neighborhood was about equally
24
EARLY INDIANA TRIALS.
divided, and separated into classes, holding no intercourse with each other. The declaration charged that in consequence of the slander the neighbors had refused to have any intercourse whatever with the wife of the plaintiff. Damages $5,000. The case was called. Col. Wallace, Gen. Noble, and Gen. Mckinney for the plaintiff ; William R. Morris and myself for the defendant. Pleas " not guilty," and "justification." Witnesses on separate sides of the court-house, a few to prove the words ; some as to the good character of the parties, which nobody disputed; but the most of the witnesses were females, to prove the identity of the goose in question, as that seemed to be the great point of the case. The law was clear. The speaking of the words was not denied before the jury; but who was the owner of the goose? It soon became evident that the case must turn upon that question, and the utmost tact and ingenuity were displayed by the attorneys, with many side-bar remarks, as the trial progressed. The plaintiff proved by a host of witnesses that he was the owner of the goose- in fact that she was hatched his. We proved that the goose was ours-that we owned her mother and her grand-mother, that they were all white, and had a peculiar propensity to take to the water as soon as they were out of the shell. The case seemed to be about balanced. Court adjourned for dinner with the remark of the plaintiff's counsel that they had but one witness to examine in rebutting. Court met-the plaintiff called his witness, a very respectable looking lady of some seventy years. She took the stand, all eyes were upon her, for she seemed like the President of the Senate about to give the casting vote upon a tie of that body. Plaintiff's counsel : " Madam, how long have you been acquainted with geese, and do you know who owns the goose in question ?" It was a bold question and was conclusive to our minds that the counsel knew before they put the question what the answer would be. We felt that all depended upon the answer. The witness raised her " specks " and rubbed the glasses with her hands, and a strong firmu voice answered : "I have been more than sixty years acquainted with geese, and I know that this goose belongs to the wife of the plaintiff." This was direct and positive, and the counsel for plaintiff rested. " Take the witness," says Col. Wallace, the leading counsel, triumphantly. Now came the trying question on our part. Should we ask a single eross question. I thought not, but was overruled by my associates, and the fatal question was put, " How do you know that that particular goose belongs to the wife of the plaintiff?" " Because she was a white goose and paced. I owned her great-grand mother, and she paced, and so did all that breed." This was eonelusive; no more questions were asked.
25
KEEPING ORDER IN COURT, ETC.
The case was argued at great length and with unusual ability, especially on the side of the defendant, but we were unable to get over the evidence that this was a " pacing" goose. Verdict, one dollar damages. The most remarkable fact in the case was that it did not occur to one of the counsel for the defendant that there never was a trotting goose, until it was too late, and our opponents had triumphed.
KEEPING ORDER IN COURT.
BEFORE I left Versailles there was one other case in which I was employed, but got no fee. We elected a big two-fisted Kentuckian a justice of the peace. He had been a great fighter in his young days. I call him John Lindsay. Soon after he was elected, there was brought before him a man I call Jim Boice on a charge of assault and battery. Jim soon became boisterous, and began to abuse the justice. Squire Lindsay directed him to be quiet; but Jim grew worse and worse until the Squire could stand it no longer. "Jim," says the Squire, " I know little about the power the law gives me to keep order in court, but I know very well the power the Almighty has given me, and so shall you." At the moment the Squire sprang upon Jim, knocked him down and kicked him out of the office. Jim got up, and went to Squire Hodges, his brother-in-law, made an affidavit of the assault and battery, and had Squire Lindsay arrested. I went with him to the justice, and moved to dismiss the case, on the ground that the justice was a brother-in-law to the prosecutor. My motion was sustained, and the justice entered a judgment of acquittal. Boice then went before Squire Leopard and filed another affidavit. Lindsay was again arrested and taken before Leopard. I again appeared for Lindsay, and moved for his acquittal upon the ground that he could not be put in jeopardy twice for the same offense under our Constitution. The justice sustained the motion and the Squire was finally acquitted, and from that time forward there was as good order in the office of Squire Lindsay as in the Supreme Court-room at Washington, where the marshal opens the court with " O yea, O yea," and closes with "God save the United States, and this honorable court."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.