The civil, political, professional and ecclesiastical history, and commercial and industrial record of the county of Kings and the city of Brooklyn, N. Y., from 1683 to 1884, Volume II, Part 155

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909, ed
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: New York, W. W. Munsell & Co
Number of Pages: 1345

USA > New York > Kings County > Brooklyn > The civil, political, professional and ecclesiastical history, and commercial and industrial record of the county of Kings and the city of Brooklyn, N. Y., from 1683 to 1884, Volume II > Part 155

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).

" If a dozen men were beating and kicking him, his firing a pistol at the time was so nearly, if not entirely, justifiable that it takes away all basis for the claim, up to that time, of premed- itated malice on his part. Well he might run from such a body of men. For aught that appears, he may have supposed that the officer who seized him was one of the mob who first attacked him, and was trying to detain him until the remainder of the mob, who were approaching, could overtake him."

Yates was again hrought to trial, and after a long contest was convicted of murder in the second degree, and sentenced to State's prison for the term of twenty years.

THE PEOPLE vs. FANNY HYDE.

THE history of American criminal law has nothing in it more interesting than the case of The People vs. Fanny Hyde, charged with the murder of Geo. W. Watson. It was tried in the Kings

County Court of Oyer and Terminer, in April, 1872, before Hon. A. B. Tappen, one of the justices of the Supreme Court, and associate justices Voorhees and Johnson.

Mr. Watson was & prominent manufacturer of Brooklyn, and a citizen of respectability. He was a married man, the father of five children, and, at the time of which we are writing, about fifty years of age. He was an extensive manufacturer of hair- nets, having a large number of employees; many of these were ladies, of whom Fanny Hyde was one.

On the 26th of January, 1872, there were working in the principal room in Watson's factory, two or three men, Fanny Hyde and one or two other ladies, Mr. Watson being present. About ten minutes before twelve, Watson left the room, according to his custom, to go to lunch; a few moments before he left, while he was putting on his overcoat, Fanny Hyde left the room through the same door through which Watson was to make his exit. The doorway led to a flight of stairs down to the second story. Soon after Fanny went out, Watson also went out.

A few minutes after twelve o'clock, Mr. Watson was dis- covered lying dead at the head of the second flight of stsirs; he was on his back, his feet by the partition, his head lying out beyond the stairs, his body against the riser of the first stsir. He was bleeding profusely from a bullet hole in his hesd, back of his ear. Fanny Hyde was standing not far from him, watch- ing him with intense interest. In a moment all was confusion and alarm in the factory. In due time the body was removed. Fanny was at once suspected of the murder; indeed, soon after " the occurrence, she admitted she killed Mr. Watson and sur- rendered herselt to the authorities, alleging that she committed the deed in self-defense, that is, in defending herself against an outrageous and indecent assault made by Watson upon her at the head of the first flight of stairs we have described. It was alleged, however, on the other side, that Fanny shot her victim in revenge for certain charges which he had made against her character, these charges having led to several altercations between herself and Watson ; that she left the room a few moments before he did, knowing that, according to his usual custom, he would soon follow her on his way to his lunch; that she lay in wait for him at the bottom of the first flight of stairs and shot him as he was descending them. We shall see hereafter further grounds on which the prosecution predicated this theory. We give the theory of the defense in the following history of Fanny Hyde.

Fanny Hyde, when a young girl a little over fifteen years of age, entered the employment of George W. Watson, & manu- facturer of hair-nets, in the city of Brooklyn. She was s child of remarkable promise, intelligent beyond her years, pleasing in her person and attractive in her manners. She was born at Nottingham, England; when very young she lost her mother, and though she was well brought up, it was without & mother's care; she was a Sunday school scholar and gave promise of future usefulness. It was said that "among all of Watson's female employees, Fanny Hyde was the fairest." He was a married man with several children, and about forty-five years of age. With the exterior of a gentleman, plausible, insidious, always carefully presenting his best side to the public, Fanny had not been long in this man's employ when he determined to work her ruin; the manner in which it is alleged he effscted his object, stamps him a man without principle. From that time on, even up to the hour of his death, he continued his illicit intercourse with her. Fanny Hyde was not impure at heart, and often struggled hard to free herself from the coil which her heartless seducer had thrown around her. Her relations with Watson, however, were known only to herself and to him, and she still moved in respectable society. Her besuty and attrac- tive manners brought her honorable suitors, one of whom was at last accepted. About the time of her engagement, she dis- closed to Watson the new relations in life which shs proposed, and on her knees begged of him forever to kesp their relations

1261

BENCH AND BAR OF BROOKLYN.

secret, and to cease them now, forever. She told him that it was her determination to be a pure and exemplary wife to her affianced husband; with face bedewed in tears and broken down with sorrow, she told Watson her relation with him had been s source of continual, almost heart-breaking sorrow, from the time of its commencement, and begged him to aid her in her determination to hereafter live a pure and virtuous life.

He listened to her, apparently much affected by what she said, and putting his hand on the Bible, deliberately swore that he would never molest her again. In a short time after this, Fanny was united in marriage to a respectable and indus- trious young man by the name of Hyde. Relying on the aolemn oath which Watson had taken never to molest her sgain, she continued as fore-woman in his service, with many other ladies, married and single. It is natural to believe that, under his oath, under the sanctity of the marriage vow, and the holy relations that now existed between Fanny and the man she loved, Watson would have encouraged the young wife by example, by his own family relations, by everything that is pura and sacred, to carry out the resolution she had adopted. But, slas! the man who had once destroyed her virtue and committed towards her the greatest of crimes, forgot his oath, or disregarded it, and, disregarding every sacred thing that should have restrained him, determined to dishonor the young and now pure wife, and compel her to again enter upon her former relations with him. It would seem as though Fanny- now Mrs. Hyde-protected and shielded as she was by her huaband, strongly entrenched as she was in her new resolution, and pure as her life now was, would never again become the paramour of the man who had first ruined her. She never for a moment thought he would make the attempt, and if he did, she felt sure of her ability, under the strength of her new reso- lution, to effectually resist him. He, however, made the attempt, and she did reaiat him, as a pure and true wife should have done, snd when he found himself foiled he resorted to another and dreadful mode of compulsion. He threatened, if she per- siated in her refusal, to acquaint her husband with the full extent of their previous relations. This was a terrible alterna- tive. To put her husband in possession of these facts was next to desth; the struggle was fearful; but Watson triumphed, and the misery of the young wife was complete. She was again in the toils of the man who had blighted her young life, and by him was compelled to dishonor her husband. "Must I submit slways to this course of life?" she asked herself, in her agony. "There is one mode of escape," she said. "I will unbosom myself to my husband; will tell him ell; I will prostrate myself before him for his forgiveness; if he casts me off, I must submit; if he forgives me he will protect me against the man who is destroying my very soul." She carried her resolution into effect snd confessed all to her husband. She was as dear to him as his own heart's blood, and he forgave all and promised protection. He told her to defy the wretch if he ever again approsched her-to tell him that she feared him no longer, as her husband knew all and had forgiven all. It was not long sfter thia before the occasion came for her to make this state- ment to Wataon. She did so; and when he found she no longer had any fears of her husband, he resorted to another course; and then came the fatal end.

On the trisl, Fanny was sworn as a witness on her own behalf, and smong other things testified as follows:

"I met Watson at the top of the stairs; asked him as I was going up the stairs, if he was going down ? he said no; when I got to the top of the stairs, he seized me in a very indecent manner, and wanted me to go to a room with him somewhere. I told him I would not, and then he said, 'You shall go.' We had quite a struggle; I got free from him, and he seized me the second time as before; I tried to break loose from him, but could not; I had my pistol with me and shot him; I did not take aim, but shot as I could."

She was indicted for murder in the first degree, and, as we have already said, brought to trial for her life. Few cases have ever elicited more interest, not only in Brooklyn, but everywhere. It summoned to the forum the most distin- guished members of the Brooklyn Bar. Mr. Winchester Britton, then District Attorney for Kings County, conducted the case for the people. Hon. Samuel D. Morris, I. B. Cat- lin, Thomas E. Pearsall and Patrick Keady appeared for the defense. The learning, skill and eloquence which the trial called forth, has certainly never been excelled at the Brooklyn Bar. Three defenses were interposed by the counsel of Mrs. Hyde: 1st, that there was not sufficient evidence that she com- mitted the deed; 2nd, justification, in that Watson seized her person with an intent to make an indecent assault, and in an indecent manner, that, to free herself from his grasp and escape from his power, she discharged her pistol at him, regard- less of consequences; 3rd, temporary or partial insanity-upon this defense much time and learning was spent.

The case for the defense was opened to the jury by General Catlin. Those who heard that remarkable address will never forget its impressive eloquence, its masterly array of facts, the learning which marked it, and the perfect manner in which the jury were put in possession of the whole history of the case. " A cause well opened," Ogden Hoffman used to say, "is more than half tried," and General Catlin's opening in this case emi- nently proved the truth of Mr. Hoffman's remarks.

At the close of the evidence, Judge Morris summed up for the defense. If this effort was the only one that this distinguished lawyer had ever made, it would have fully established his repu- tation as an accomplished legal speaker, a finished and well- learned lawyer. Judge Morris' argument adopted the theory for the commission of the crime we have already given, that Watson, having first ruined her, having her, by force of circum- stances, largely in his power, compelled her against her inclina- tions to continue the relations begun in her first departure from virtue ; that, notwithstanding his promise not to molest her after her marriage, he compelled her to continue her illicit relations with him, under threats of revealing all to her husband and friends. This terrible state of things shattered her intellect, producing one of the stages of insanity; that she herself in- formed her husband, and under his advice defied Watson, and when he found himself foiled in that direction, he attempted to use force, and she killed him in the attempt, and that the killing was justifiable. This was the outline of Mr. Morris' argument; but it was most admirably conjoined and elaborated, forming on the whole a very perfect structure.

Mr. Britton closed the case in a masterly argument in behalf of the people. We have referred to his theory of the case: that the killing was premeditated-done in cold blood-with a design of revenging herself for reports that she believed Watson had circulated against her, and for accusations made to her by him of criminal intimacy with other men, of which he threatened exposure.

Mr. Britton insisted that the evidence in the case, except her unsupported testimony, inconsistent in itself, pointed almost in- dubitably to this view of the case-to malice aforethought, to intentional, premeditated murder ; that the illicit relations be- tween Fanny Hyde and Watson had existed with her free assent for a long time; that he was a man old enough to be her father; that she was becoming wearied of the relation, and was receiving the addresses of other men, which rendered Watson jealous, causing him to bitterly upbraid and denounce her, and to make threats of exposure. According to her own testimony, at the very time of the homicide, he accused her of having just been with another man. She admitted this to several persons. When asked why she shot Watson, she replied, because he had abused and insulted her, called her names, and accused her of being down stairs with a man, and threatened to discharge her, and then she shot him. That the act was premeditated is shown by

1262

HISTORY OF KINGS COUNTY.

the fact that she had frequent quarrels with Watson; that some days previous she had induced her brother to procure a pistol for her; that when he gave her the pistol there is almost positive evidence-at least, the strongest kind of inferential evidence- that she informed the young man what she intended to do with the pistol, from the fact that immediately after the killing of Watson, while Fanny was still standing by his body, the young man came hurriedly into the room and at once accosted her, say- ing: "Fanny, I told you not to do this." This showed plainly that she had made the young man acquainted with her design to take the life of Watson.

Again, the manner in which she left the room, just previous to the time she knew he was going to his lunch, shows she had placed herself in waiting for him when he should descend the stairs. The fatal wound was inconsistent with a close personal struggle; there was no stain of powder on the neck at the place where the ball entered, as there would have been had the pistol been discharged, as she alleged, while she was struggling with him. Again, the course of the ball shows conclusively that the pistol must have been discharged when she stood below him, at the foot of the stairs which he was descending; the ball entered the neck just below and back of the ear, taking a course upward and backward, so that if it had force enough it would have come out at the top of the head. The fact that the ball entered below the ear, and the angle it traced, showed that that side of his head was turned towards his assailant. Evidently he caught sight of her as he was descending the stairs, with the fatal weapon in her hand, and, turning to avoid her, he received the bullet as he did. Her story of the assault at the head of the stairs is wholly inconsistent-first, because a man in his senses would never un- dertake such an act in a place so public, where every moment the door was liable to be opened by some one; secondly, it will be remembered that, before leaving the room, he put on his over- coat, which would embarrass him in any unlawful attempt, and it is hardly possible to suppose that a man would attempt to drag a woman against her will to any place for an unlawful pur- pose; a single cry from her would have compelled him at any moment to release her, and there would have been no use for the pistol. She does not allege that she made any cry or any alarm. Finally, Mr. Britton contended that there was not the least tan- gible evidence of her insanity, and that her premeditated guilt was painfully and terribly apparent.

After a remarkably able, lucid and impartial charge by Judge Tappen, in which the law touching the case was learnedly re- viewed, the jury retired for deliberation, and after a long con- sultation, during which they came into court for further instruc- tions, they finally, after being out all night, came into court and announced that it was impossible for them to agree, whereupon they were discharged. It was understood that from the time they retired to the close of their deliberation, ten were for ac- quittal and two for manslaughter in the third degree. Fanny Hyde was remanded to jail, and after remaining there some time, a nolle prosequi to the indictment was entered, and she was dis- charged.

THE PEOPLE vs. RUBENSTEIN.

THIS was a case that produced a profound sensation through- out the nation, and, in fact, in Europe, for its great atrocity, the singularity of the circumstances attending it, and the ability with which the prosecution and defense were conducted.

The trial commenced on Monday, January 31st, 1876, at, Brooklyn; Hon. Calvin E. Pratt, of the Supreme Court, presid- ing; Hon. Henry A. Moore, County Judge of Kings County, Hon. Henry Wolfert, Hon. Andrew Mckibben, Justices of the Sessions, and associate justices composing the Court of Oyer and Terminer.

Winchester Britton, District Attorney, and Henry Snell,

Assistant District Attorney, appeared for the people. Hon. Wm. A. Beach and John O. Mott appeared for the defendant. The trial lasted several days.

On the morning of the 14th of December, 1875, the body of a woman was found on the farm of Dedrich Wessella, in the town of New Lots, Kings County; it was lying behind a corn stack in the lower end of a field. This field was bounded on the side by the common highway or plank-road.

The stack was situated in that part of the field farthest from the road, near a fence. The body of the woman was lying on its back, covered with a light snow, which had fallen the night before and was frozen to the ground; the throat had been cut with such violence that the head was nearly severed from the body. She lay in a pool of blood, which was frozen about her. This discovery produced great excitement. The constabulary of the city, and of the city of New York, immediately entered on the work of investigating this dreadful tragedy. It was soon ascertained that the murdered woman was Miss Sarah Alexander, who resided in New York City. Further investigation fastened suspicion upon Pasach N. Rubenstein, who had been somewhat intimate with the lady. The antopsy revealed, among other things, the fact that the young woman was at least five months towards maternity. Circumstances soon developed which tended to connect Rubenstein with the murder, and he was promptly arrested and committed to prison to await the action of the coroner's inquest. Among the circumstances that fastened suspicion upon Rubenstein was the fact that, some days before the discovery of the body, a man by the name of Kramer, a resident of Williamsburgh, met Rubenstein in com- pany with a young woman in the road nearly opposite the place when her body was found. Some remarks passed between them, and Kramer passed on. After walking a few rods, he was startled by the cries of some one in distress, and distinguished the words, "Help! help!" He turned and listened, but as the cry was not repeated, he passed on. Kramer, afterwards, went to the field and saw the murdered girl, and at once recognized her as the girl he had seen with Rubenstein. The body was further recognized as that of Miss Alexander by her brother, who also testified to some intimacy between his sister and Rubenstein. Several witnesses were called who identified the man and the body of the young girl as those seen by them in a car from the ferry-house to New Lots, some days before the discovery of the murder.

Immediately after Rubenstein's arrest, he was taken to the headquarters of the police department of Brooklyn, where his boots were examined; upon the upper surface of one of them a thin scale was discovered; the boots were there taken, with the shoes of the murdered girl, to the scene of the murder. There was, at the time of removing his boots, two kinds of mud adhering to them on different parts of the boots; one piece of the mud compared exactly with the mud found in the city of New York; the other compared exactly with the soil where the body was found, which was so soft that the tracks of persons walking there were plainly indented in it. On placing the boots in these indentations, or tracks, they were found to fit exactly, not only in regard to the peouliar nails in the sole of the boot, but in & certain patch on the boot. The scale found on the shank of the boot, on minute examination, proved to be a portion of corn husk, and adhering to the husk was discovered a minute piece of the fringe of the shawl worn by the girl. The corn husk and this bit of the shawl were encrusted in what a chemi- cal analysis decided was dry blood. The examination of the shawl showed that while it lay on the mud some heavy substance came upon it and pressed it into a sort of hardened fold; this, it was contended, was done by one of the prisoner's feet in stepping upon the shawl as it lay on the ground among the corn husks, and in this way the scale we have desoribed came to be upon the boot. A knife was found near the body-an unfinished knife-evi-

1263

BENCH AND BAR OF BROOKLYN.

dently a new one. Two witnesses testified to having seen this knifs in the possession of the prisoner not long before the dis- covery of the murder. The foregoing, with a few other circum- stances, were relied on by the District Attorney as abundant evidence for the conviction of Rubenstein. The defense, how- ever, powerful and masterly, made by a master spirit, contended that the prosecution had failed to show any motive for the per- petration of such an awful crime; that they had failed to prove that Rubenstein was in any degree intimate with the girl, while ths defense proved that she was in the habit of receiving the visits of a man by the name of Levy; that the evidence of the man Kramer was too inconsistent for belief, who relates that he heard the cry of "fire! fire !" and no cry of " murder !" that it was singular there should be a cry of fire at such a time. As to the scale on the boot, it was altogether too indefinite-too doubtful a circumstance to attach any importance to; and as to the fitting of the boot in the track, the influence of the weather, the falling and melting snow, must have changed the dimensions of the track so that the witnesses must have drawn on their imagination for the fact of the fitting of the boots to the tracks. It is proved that the prisoner was seen in company with the de- ceased on the cars; that this was so long before the enactment of the tragedy that no importance could be attached to it. Aside from this, a great number of witnesses testified that Rubenstein was at a party in New York at the precise time he was said to be seen in New Lots. There were also other strong circumstances which the defense seized upon as proof of Rubenstein's inno- cence. After an exhaustive and powerful address to the jury by Mr. Beach, followed by an equally eloquent, logical and impres- sive address by Mr. Britton, Mr. Justice Pratt proceeded to charge ths jury. Of this charge it may well be said that it was one of ths moat learned, close and well-reasoned judicial productions ever delivered from the bench at Oyer and Terminer. The practicing lawyer, the student and the lay reader will find in it great interest, much instruction, and a clear analysis of the law touching circumstantial evidence. After the charge the jury re- tired, and after an absence of one hour returned into court with a verdict of "guilty of murder in the first degree." Sentence of death was then pronounced by Hon. Henry A. Moore, Associate Judge. The prisoner was sentenced to be hanged on the 24th of March, 1876. The case was removed to the General Term of the Supreme Court on a writ of error, on which a stay of execution had been granted; but on the 9th day of May, 1876, the citizens of Brooklyn were startled by the report that Rubenstein had died in his cell in Raymond Street Jail, about nine o'clock on the morning of that day. The report proved true; he died of in- cipient pulmonary tuberculosis, hastened by his self-deprivation of nourishment and general nervous prostration.

Thus ended one of the most interesting trials of the present age-a trial in which the importance and effect of circumstantial evidence is most strongly and impressively exhibited. For this reason, and others, it is most important in this history.

HOPE vs. ENGLISH.

A CASE which forms an important incident in the history of Kings County, touching the law of libel, was that of George T. Hope against Stephen English, which was tried at Brooklyn, March 6th, 1878, before Hon. Calvin E. Pratt, one of the Justices of the Supreme Court. Messrs. Van Cott and Winslow appeared for the plaintiff, Moses and Britton for the defendant. The case was most singular and important. The plaintiff was Mr. George Hope, then and for many years President of the Continental In- surance Company, one of the leading companies in the United States. Mr. Hope had devoted his life to the business of fire insurance, with eminent success. The defendant, Stephen

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.

The civil, political, professional and ecclesiastical history, and commercial and industrial record of the county of Kings and the city of Brooklyn, N. Y., from 1683 to 1884, Volume II, Part 155

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909, ed Publication date: 1884 Publisher: New York, W. W. Munsell & Co Number of Pages: 1345

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909, ed
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: New York, W. W. Munsell & Co
Number of Pages: 1345