Hide Article Text (OCR)
0001 ED FOB Lr*rConclusion of the Thomas Cullen“Murder.Trialforof[09 8nd Condema-Is Found Guiltyed to Imprisonmentfor Life,Singular Scene Between the Prisoner and His Father.The trial of Thomas Cullen, charged with the murder of James P. McWilliams, was resumed in the Criminal Court yesterday morning at 1C o'clock. The first witness examined was Chas. C. Blanchard, who testified to having seen Cullen display a revolver in a saloon on the night of the shooting.THE TESTIMONY CONTINUED.James McWilliams, father of the deeeased» testified that the latter died on the 23d of September. and was 17 years of age.Wm. Fry testified that he was with Cullen on the night of the shooting; saw him flourish a revolver; told him not to shoot ; saw the flash, and ran away to bed, at his hoarding-house, No. 42 Monroe s treet; Cullen came there to go to bed; told him it was no place for him; he left; next saw him at the police station ; tried to take the pistol away from him when in the saloon.William Kenwick testified to having been present at the shooting; Doras came running up and asked for the pistol ; don’t know whether or not Cullen gave it to him; saw the flash, and McWilliams fall, but don’t know who fired the shot. *J. W. Duffy testified that he was with Cullen on the street at the time of the shooting; did not see Doras or Lynch; saw Cullen have a pistol ; saw the flash, and the man fall; they ran away to witness* boarding-house, where Cullen put on some of witness’ clothes. On cross-examination he stated that he was pretty drunk; they were all pretty drunk; don’t know what became of Doras; has not seen him since.Ellen Pond, keeper of the boarding-house No. 185 Clinton street, testified that she saw him that night at tea time ; saw him again about 10 or 11 o’clock; he was in his own bed with Doras, and appeared to be asleep; half an hour after that ne was walking around the room; think he was sick; Doras was taken out of bed by the officers; don’t know when Cullen left the house; never saw him have a revolver. On cross-examination, witness stated that she saw Doras leaning over the man who was shot, and crving ; he carried the man to the drug store ; then he came home and went to bed. Witness •was asked if it was the general understanding that Doras had gone to Philadelphia. The prosecution objected, and the objection wassustained. , ,,Policeman Edmund Miller testified that he was with the Coroner when Cullen was arrested; asked him what he had done with his revolver, and he said he “ threw it; ” found four cartridges in his bed. On cross-examination, Mr. MiSer stated that Cullen came up into the room at No. 42 Monroe street when he was Beaching the house, and when some one said “ Who is that ? ” he went back, and the Coroner arrested him in front of the house ; he made no effort to get away.This closed the evidence on the part of the prosecution.TESTmONT FOB THE DEFENCE.J. M. Burnett, living at No. 141 Clinton street, was the first witness for the defence. He testified that he was in boa on the night in question between 11 and 12 o’clock, when he was awakened by a noise on the street; got up and looked out of the window; saw four men on the sidewalk ; one of them had a pistol in his hand; heard the shot; saw a man fall; one of the party ran to No. 135 Clinton street; three men Tan toward Monroe street; was about 160 feet from the spot; thinks the man who fired the shot wore light clothes. On cross-examination, Mr. Burnett stated that he did not see the man. go into the house, and is not positive as to the kind of clothes he wore.John Lynch testified that he was with Cullen, Fry, and Kerwick early in the evening of the affair, in a saloon on the corner of Madison and Canal streets, where they flayed cards and drank for about an hour ; be .eft before the rest did, and did not see them again; knows Edward Doras; has seen him have a pistol; knew Cullen and Fry in Philadelphia.John J. Cullen, father of the prisoner,testified that he resides in Philadelphia, and is a stonecutter by trade ; his son left home six or seven weeks ago, and went to Chicago; he was always a good boy, peaceable and quiet; never heard of his quarreling with anybody; he is about 19 years of age; witness saw in the Chicago papers that his son was married.The counsel for the prisoner here announced that he had no more testimony to offer.ARGUMENT FOR THE PEOPLE.The Court took a recess until 2 o’clock, and, upon reassembling, the case for the people was argued by George McWilliams, Esq., assisting the State’s Attorney in the prosecution. He disclaimed prejudice against the prisoner, for whose situation he expressed pity, but maintained that his connection with the killing was clearly proven, though it was doubtful if any eye saw the shot. By flourishing the pistol he showed a disposition to use it, while his subsequent flight was the strongest evidence of guilt. The safety of the community demanded that the jury should discharge their duty fearlessly in this case.ARGUMENT FOR THE PRISONER.John Mason, Esq., counsel for the prisoner, followed in a lengthy argument, in which he labored to show that not a scintilla of evidence had been submitted showing that Cullen fired the shot. He also suggested to the jury that, in any event, it was sworn by nearly all the witnesses for both sides that Cullen and his companions were all drunk, and that the act, if committed by Cullen, was committed in a condition of maudlin intoxication, and was devoid of a murderous intent. The darkness of the night, and the peculiar circumstances of the affair, rendered it impossible to accurately determine who fired the shot, and, so long as a doubt remained on that point, the jury must give the prisoner the benefit of that doubt. The fact that they all ran away after the shot was fired was of no weight as indicating guilt, for all were terrified beyond sontrol. The only significant feature of this point was the fact that Doras did not run away, but, seemingly in order to divert suspicion from himself, remained behind as one of the chief mourners, and gave himself up to the officers, but after the Coroner’s inquest he made his escape and fled from the city, though in doing so he threw up a situation paying him $5 per day. Why did Doras fly from the city ? The jury must seriously consider this phase of the case. Mr. Mason then adverted to the public meetings recently held for the purpose of urging the speedy punishment of criminals, denouncing these meetings as attempts to overawe the judicial authorities, and to prejudice juriesin advance.At this point he was called to order by the other side, and was requested by the Court to proceed no further on that line, but to confine himself to the evidence. He resumed by arguing that no intent to commit murder had been shown, the law declaring intent to he necessary in order to constitute crime. Suppose a clear case of murder were proved, the jury were not compelled to fix the penalty of death. Only under the most aggravated and atrocious circumstances, should the death penalty be inflicted. To inflict it in this case, would be to perpetrate a wrong for which the jury could never forgive themselves. Capital punishment wa3 a species of revenge,—a relic of barbarism. The object of the law should be to reform the criminal, and thereby confer a benefit upon society. He surrendered the prisoner into the hands of the jury, confident that he would receive a just and. merciful consideration. The address was one of John Mason’s finest efforts, both in rhetoric and argument, and was listened to with intense interest by the jury and spectators.ADDRESS OF THE STATE’S ATTORNEY.State’s Attorney Reed, in closing the case, expressed surprise at the defence, which was re-rJllC6(J fn ffiin • T?irof, bo ilidn’fc Izill Tiim of oil »~wwv. to this: First, he didn’t kill him at all; econd, Doras killed him; third, if Cullen killed im he was drunk, or it was an accident, ‘he bullet went straight through McWilliams’ -head; the evidence goes as iraight to convict this man of murder, here was a peculiar difficulty in this case to scire justice. Every one of the witnesses who iv the shot fired was a friend of the defendant,and it was with the utmost reluctance that they•were induced to testify anything against him.Mr. Mason objected to the statement that the witnesses were all friends of Cullen.The Court said the jury would draw their own conclusions with reference to this point.Mr. Reed laid great stress upon the fact that the ball went through the head on a direct level, Bbowing that a deadly, determined aim was taken. He scouted the idea that the shot was fired by Doras, as all but one witness in effect testified to the contrary, two swearing positively that he was not there. Cullen’s actions subsequent to the shooting, were such as to point conclusively to him as to the one fired the shot—his flight to No. 135 Clinton street; from thence quickly to No. 423? Monroe-1 street, wbere he did not board, and .where the men who had been with him, told him when he went to bed there, “This is no place for you; ” his return to his own boarding house, where he changed his clothing, and where he jumped through the window. The thing could not be explained consistently with Cullen's innocence. The witness Kerwick committed deliberate perjury.Mr. Mason objected to the impeachment of his own witness by the State’s attorney.The Court sustained the objection.Mr. Beed then took the position that Ker-wick’s testimony was contradicted by that of Fry, Burnett, and Duffy, who stated that Doras was not there. It was proved that Cnllen flourished the revolver in the saloon, and that he had on the sidewalk beyond all controversy. McWilliams laughed at him; he felt insulted, and, in a spirit of hellish bravado, he drew the pistol and shot him dead. The cause of public justice demanded that this murder should be punished. The only way to administer justice in this city was to declare that he who takes life wantonly shall forfeit his own. It would he a shame and a mockery not to punish this man.* INSTRUCTIONS.The Court then instructed the jury, as usual, In regard to the definition of the crime of murder aB laid down in the statute; as to malice express or implied; as to wiiat constitutes a reasonable doubt; as to the power of the jury to fix the penalty, etc. On the subject of drunkenness, the instructions for the people were as follows ;Voluntary drunkenness is no excuse for crime. If a man voluntarily gets drunk, and then commits a crime, he is just as amenable to the law as if he was sober. The jury have no right to allow drunkenness to excuse the defendant if they believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that ho shot and killed James P. McWilliams in maimer and form as charged in the indictment.For the Defence: The jury are instructed by the Court that, before they could find the prisoner guilty of murder as charged, they must be satisfied not only that the circumstances given in evidence in this case were consistent with Ms having committed the act, but they must also be satisfied from the evidence that the facts were such as to be inconsistent with any other rational conclusion than that the prisoner was the guilty party.Crime consists In the violation of law, in the commission of which there mnst be an union or joint operation of act and intention. In all cases of crime act and intent must concur, and in this case, although the jury should believe from the evidence that the prisoner shot the deceased, yet before they can convict him of murder, they must also believe from the evidence that at the time of the homicide he intended to Mil him, but if the jury also believe from the evidence that the defendant shot the deceased, and that the act was done deliberately and intentionally, then the law presumes the defendant intended the natural and probable consequences of the act.The jury are instructed by the Court that if from the evidence it is uncertain in the minds of the jury which of the two men, Doras or Cullen, shot and killed the deceased, McWilliams, then the law is for the defendant, and the jury is bound to acquit him of the crime of murder as charged in the indictment.It is a rule of criminal law that a crime must be fully established by cogent and convincing proof. Neither a mere preponderance, nor any amount of preponderant evidence is sufficient to convict a prisoner, unless such evidence generate a full belief of the fact, to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt.The Court instructs the jury that this case is to bo determined by the law and evidence, and not upon tho assertions and declarations of counsel.SPECULATIONS ON THE RESULT.The jury retired at half past 3 o’clock, and at ten minutes before 5 they announced that a verdict had been agreed upon. The Judge being absent, a messenger was sent for him. During the interval bets were offered as to the verdict, a reporter wagering the cigars with a bailiff that theprisonerwould not get over fourteen years. The general impression seemed to be that the death penalty would not be inflicted, State’s Attorney Reed expressing the belief that the jury would not decree hanging. The prisoner and his father, who sat side by side, manifested no especial anxiety, aa they had been evidently m%ch reassured by the telling argument of their counsel.THE VERDICT.Upon the arrival of Judge Tree, the jury returned to the court-room, and the verdict was read, aa follows;We, the jury, find the defendant guilty in manner and form as charged in the indictment, and fix Ms punishment at imprisonment in the Penitentiary of State for and during the term of his natural life.As the words “ for and during the term of his natural life ” were read by tho Clerk, the elder Cullen gave a loud cry of agony, and threw his arms around the neck of liis son. The latter shook him off fiercely, and, in an angry tone, exclaimed, “Quit that!” The father continued his wails of anguish while the jury was beinggoiled, but the son eat unmoved, and, when tho heriff came to conduct him to nis cell, he merely allowed himself to be repoatedly kissed and embraced by the old man, and then hurried away as quickly as possible.The counsel for the prisoner entered the customary motions for a new trial and arrest of judgment, the jury were discharged, and the Court adjourned.OBITUARY,Death of Dr, William D, Winer, anJE m I ne ist Physician anti Surgeon oiThis City,Died, on the evening of the 21st of October, at Burke’s Hotel, William D. Winer, of severe inflammation of the lungs, in the 41st year of his age.Bom and nurtured under the most genial influences, he obtained his degree of Bachelor of Arts of the University of Toronto, and several years after graduated in the medical department of that institution. After a year or more of travel and study, to still further fit him for tho vocation which he had chosen, he established himself in thia city in the autumn of 1856, and from that date to his fatal illness, if we except his absence as Surgeon of General Mulligan’s Brigade during our late civil war, continued in the active practise of his profession.There has probably exiBted few men whose traits of character were so well marked and pronounced, as to draw around them sueh hosts of friends, and by his death to make all feel that a great and irreparable deprivation has been visited upon them. Thoroughly unselfish, a firm and just friend, with charity toward all and malice to none, untiring in his attendance upon the sick and suffering, ever ready to assist the weak andj distressed, his name had become a household word in so many families, and his popularity so justly secured in every grade of society, that this announcement will bring sorrow to many a hearthstone, and the poor will sadly grieve, for indeed they nave lost a friend.With a comprehensive mind, and excellent power of analysis, backed by an unerring judgment, he haa worked himself to the highest eminence as a medical practitioner, and the members of his profession will acknowledge that they have lost from their midst a safe adviser, a firm supporter of its dignities and honors, and one who, under all circumstances, had reflected credit upon them all.The illness which brought him to his death began in the early part of this year, and was the result of long-continued labor, and constant exposure in his practice; but •unwilling to realize that his splendid physique should 6accumb to such apparent trivialities, be persisted until the very fountain of life had almost become dried, and, upon the urgent entreaty of his wife and medical adviser, he finally consented to remit his exertions, and by relaxation, and travel in milder climates, to rebuild his shattered forces. Thiacourse was, in a measure, successful, and for a time it seemed as if that greatest boon to the human race—good health—would be regained, bnt the hope was delusive, and eleven days ago a return of his former complaint, under a more aggressive phase, ensued, which terminated bis useful career.Even in this sad extremity, he struggled manfully, resolved that if determination and resolution could be of avail, to resist to the utmost the approcheB of Death; yet the inexorable Harvester slowly but surely cut the tendrils of life, and, with hope in the mercy of his Maker, through the intercession of his Savior Jesus Christ, that his many good deeds would balance that Bin which is inherent in all and born in our blood, the soul of this strong man passed to thebosom of God.Peace to his ashes! and may the memory ofhis goodness ever live with all. —■ —■—-Furnaces.This weather should remind all to look well to their furnaces, as the health, as well as tho comfort, of the family are largely dependent upon them. If you would always have an even temperature in your rooms, and be free from gas, smoke, and dust, and relieved of the care of opening and shutting your drafts, ana heat your house with three-fourths of the coal you usuaUy use, you can 3o so by calling at No* 214# East Madison etreet and ordering a heat governor attached* No payrequired till it has proved that it will do this,ofE
Newspaper Details
Chicago Daily Tribune
Chicago, Illinois, US
Wed, Oct 23, 1872
Page 2
Full Page
Clipped by
Library O.
MI, USA 24 Jul 2022
Other Publications Near Chicago, Illinois
News Journal
Suburbanite Economist
Southend Reporter
Community Publications
Southtown Economist
