The New York Herald Newspaper, April 12, 1859, Page 16

10 THE WASHINGTON TRAGEDY. Trial of Daniel E. Sickles for Killing Philip Barton Key. Conclusion of Opening Argument of the Counsel. THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE, “Bestimony of William Badger, John B. Haskin and Daniel Dougherty, do, do. a, THE GENERAL NEWSPAPER REPORT. Wasmvaron, April 11, 1859. “The counsel finished his remarks at hall-past twelve @olock. Mr. Brady offered to prove the friendly relations exist ding between Messrs, Sickles and Key ia March, 858, aud submitted a note from Key to Sickles, aud copies of otbers. Counge! for the prosecution objected. Argument followed. THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT. Wasurveroy, April 11, 1859. Bueh is the anxicty manifested to be present at the trial So-day, that before the doors opened for the admission of the audience the Court room was crowded by persons who had obtained ingress through the windows. ‘The points which the counsel for Mr. Sickles presented Sor consideration on Saturday were:— Firs:—That the government is bound to make out a ‘ease. ‘Second —That malice was not to be presumed, but proved. Third—How far the adultery was to be considered pro- ‘Vooation. Fourth—Why such a crime, under the old common law, {was vot murder, but manslaughter. Fifth—Why the extinction of pricilegum clerical, the slight burning in the band, which was punishment in such swases, is tantamount to an acquittal, Sixth—Whether the frenzy natural to a hosband, under sircumstauces of such a charactor, does not operate to mental unsoundness, ‘Thete eix poin's were considered on Saturday. The following is the seventh point, which counsel did , @et discuss then, bat proceeded to consider to-day :— Beventh—Whether, viewing the case as one of ungo- ‘vernable passion—as one of resentment produced by pas- sion—there wae sufficient time for the defendant’s passion ‘to coo! and for reason to get the better of his transport of passion, and whether hie subsequent acts were delibe- ate when the mortal wound wus given to the deceased. Judge Crawford took his seat on the bench at twenty minates past tea o'clock. The general jury panel was called, the jurors having ‘Deen instructed to attend to-day, and the Judge dismissed them till Monday next. About twenty minutes afterwards Mr. Sickles was con- @ucted into Court, and took bis geat in the dock, some of his counsel and Mr, Emanuel B. Hart having seats near him. The jury having been called and answered to their Dames, The counsel for Mr. Sickles resumed his argument. He said :-— Re was fest approaching the close of his present duty. If there were no other reason to admonish him to do so, bis own exhaustion would be such a reason, The interest he felt m the prisoner must be the excuse for the tax which be hai imposed upon the Courtand jury. He would briefly recapitulate the arguments which he had submitted. He had shown that human law @id not reach all cases of wrong; that the omission to provide against this wrong was sim- Wily to turn us over to our instincts, as regulated by the Jaw of nature, He had suggested that as to the relations between husband and wife and parent and child, nature had created duties of protection which it was not only not eriminal to discharge, but which we were bound to dis charge. He had suggested that an invitation toa man’s friend or neighbor to partake of the hospitality of his hhoose implied an understanding that al! lust or upclean- ness in regard to his wife or daughter would be repressed ‘or banished from the bosom, and that to come in the guise of a friend, whileat heart a foe, constituted an abase of the licenseto enter. He had also suggested that wheth- er the wife consented away her chastity or not, as be- tween the husband and the adulterer, or ravish- er, the husband’s rights were the same; that, morally speaking, the wife was the property the husband, and, as against him, possessed no dominion over her person in fayor of another. ‘He bad then considered how the Bible and how the com- amon law regurded adultery. While the Bible made adultery go high acrime, it was fair to presume that our minds were framed with corresponding perceptions—in other words, that when the Almighty bad portrayed adultery as ro heinous an offence, he javested ue with that quality of mind which enables us to look upon it in the same heinous light in which he himseif had exhibited iy. as ! understand the jaw of all reasoning, it is this; that the power which creates the duty gives the ability fo understand and appreciate it, Counsel referred to what the old judges had said: that jealoasy is the bighest rage of man, and adultery the greatest provocation that fan be given to him. In regard to the criminality of Mr. Bickles’ uct, counsel understood the basis of all nccount- ability to be the possession of that amount of reasoning which enables s man to gee the right way, and that smount of will which enables him to parsue it. The in tention or will is the principle which gives !¥fe to crime. ‘Mt was impossible to separate this intention from tbe @orpus delicti or body of the offence, Although in this care a human being wos slain, nevertheless there was not that will or intention on the part of the slayer that rendered bim amenable to criminal jus- tice. It was no matter how the uosoundoess of mind wes produced, provided it was produced. Mr. Sickles ‘was nota party to the origin of the provocation which seted upon him. He etood entirely clear of the conduct of the adulterer. He had never connived at it, and the first imtimation he got of it was the ruling motive which indaced hnim to commit the act for which he was now arraigned. Counsel had sbown that wherever mental soundness wae pet, the question for the jury was whether the cause which Produced mentat unsoundness was guilicieut to produce it. ‘This question bad already been before the learned Judge on the bench. He roferred to Judge Crawford's directions {6 the jury in the case of the United States against John Day. There the defendant was charged with slaying his wife. The defence eet up was lusanity, the cause being the moriitication of the prisoner at a child being born to him within three months after his marriage. The Judge railed that if, from the evidence, the jury found the fact aa to the birth of the child, and as to the factof the prisouer’s sense of injury increasing in inteusity till his mind became diseased thereby; and if, in such pa- roxyems of causeless rage, his power of distinguishing was destroyedor superseded, and he committed the act with which ke should be charged, he was not guilty of muréer—in other words, if shame acted upon bim to that exten: as to reuder his mind diveased, he was not guilty of muréer. Shame was only one of the emotions crowd ing Mr. fickles’ mind; that was the law which the de fence intended to enforce on this jury, Counsel also re- ferred to-hie Honor’s ruling on the wecond trial of Day When the Judge had submitted the aame propov'tions to the jury, ‘the jary would perceive that the shane of having # child born toa man under buch cironmetances | could not compare with the mortification and shanoo having a man's wife deflowered.”’ The Jucge there ruled if, from soy predieposing cause, such a sipte of mind was produced, the prisoner was not reeponribio wor his act ‘The counsel alzo referred to the Jadge’s decisi’n in the case of Jarboe, who was charged with murdor in #iayiog Se seducer of his sister. IBfariated by the conduct of the aeducer, this brother slew him upon the spot. The Io, 1rn- ed Judge there said that the statement of facts made & sage of murder, but the atate of the prisouer’s mind at the me war a matter for the consiteration of the jury. Un- der that instrvction the jury held that the brother was ex- cased. Counsel asked fa brother, who voluntarily as sumer to redrens the wrong of hia sister, stands ox- cused by the verdict of a jury from the son- sequences of his act because the provocation was too mach for bim to bear, on what principle could a difsrence ee indulged of a distinction drawn in the came of a has hend:interceding to avenge tho outrage on his marriage relations? The question for the jury was, how far, in the lsnion of tie act, the mind of the defendant cota With th teate? You, said the counsel, can ene wer ‘ae ‘ng med; You Os Auswer it as lnsbante We wed no books here w tll you with t at Tmdibe the Buren wnin4 ie ¢ Sattec- vhidhean be 4% well Paieed sso te render oa yer own POOR foclings as it exo wanas yon he you, efter any enlightenment. which Pree be ebie to’ th.ow vpon it Th is for” you fo sap @hat must bave ba't the frenzy of Mr. Sickior at the time he encountered Mr: » Under the circur, of | stapce? te bie ‘dreause—rewember this— ‘was ne denberation on the part of Mr. rickles im meetiog Mr. Key. Mr. Sickles bad thrown out bait— At be bad invited Mr. Key to that vicinity, ta order that be might go forth from bis mansion armed, a8 be was repre- eented to be by the learned counsel for the prosecution, to the end that be might slay bim, then there might be & feature in the case which might apyal 08. lui thors It no sneb feature here. Mr Key wax m the neighborhood of Dir. Sickles’ mavsion, following We bept ef nis own im- pions and Wicked inc/toations. ry ferocity of this Attack, as represented on the part of the prosecutign—Lae Nery murdercus character which they have tried to impart te it, shows most completely what was the state of mind which prompted Bim to the comunasion of the act. This ie m Speaking fact. Mr. Sickles encounters Mr, Key with out apy expectations whatever. He meets bim as casu- sliy as though be had met ihe veriest straoger: and the very fereciy with which the wituesses say be went at Mr. Key, and slew him, is tadicative of the irresinti ble impulses b dro bim on, aud agaiost which it was impossible to oppose any resistance, There is, here(ore, wotbinE Hike deliberation in the case, The foro. city of the etsault, as portrayed in the testimony, is the very fact, adove all others, on which I would rely w sbow the frenzied mind of the man who was the author of the act. A8 L have already said, grief, deapair, and revenge, and al] there feelings are excited Dy eugh & provocation, wok appeniing to @ey particular one, but exciting ail these ‘ele- ments of the mind, in the strife and contest for suprema- cy. Under these creumstauces willthe jary eay thatrea son exerted any sway amid goch a baitle of passions, | When it was impoesible that the ear of hie mind could lis- ten to the audience of reason or courcience? He referred the Court to the case of Major Rovert Ownsley, 17, State ‘Trials, and the Queen sgainst Fieber, in i/lustration of the proeent case. ‘There was no cooling time; there would be no cooling within the compass of a life time: as often as reminiscence hall recall the wrong of his wife his excite- ment will blaze up with allitefury. He referred to the ease in English trials where a father slew another for committing sodomy on hie gon—a crime go horrible in its character a# not to be named among Christaine; the lad, fourteen or fifteen years of age, yielded himseif to the uvbailowed luet of a man, the father, hearing of the crime, bunted bim out and pursued him for'a whole nignt, aod baving found him, deiiberately slew him. Would any jury say there were any such feelings of purity in this case as those which attach to a wife? It was of the essence of hu- mand nature to love woman with a tenderness which does not identity itself with any other on. This forms the most enthusiastic, the most maddening passion which clusters around woman aud invests her with her claims to protection. The more the offence is conteruplated the more it maddens. Although the father deliberately slew the man who perpetrated the horrible crime, and altboagh the Judge cbarged the jary that they must convict him of murcer, yet the jury, ih the face of the law, convicted him only of the crime of manslaugoter. A parallel might be drawn between the twocases. In the first the father, after pending all vight in pursuing the offender, executed vengeance, In this the adulterous conduct of Mr, Key tbrost itself upon Mr. Sickles as he passed him; io a moment the tram exploded; and because the wrouged hus- ‘band summarily slew bim he is arraigned here as a crimi- val. Mr, Sickles, unlike the father referred to, had no time to munifert such indications of mental ungoundness as those which attach themaelves to offences of this kind; he could vot call in witnesses 0 see the Craziness under which he committed the act; but under such a state of mind as these circumstance would naturaliy produce, Mr. Sickles committed the act for which it is ‘sought to deprive him of existence. Now, gentlemen, @ very brief narrative of this case, and 1 shall submit it to you, so fir as the opening is concerned, Let us ask who were the parties to this transaction? As I have sald before, I sball speak no unkind word of Mr. Key; I shail pat the facts before you, and leave them to speak to you as humanity always will speak under cir- cumstances like the present. Mr. Key was aman of about forty years of age, as I am informed; he had been & married man, and at this very time be had the monu- ments of that sacred relation daily before him to warn him of the wickedness of his conduct; he bimself had as- sumed the marringe vow, and knew the eolemnity of it; he could tell himself what would be his own feelings if his own bed bud been violated, and he could very well couceive to himself how he would act if be had dis- covered the author of that violation. His profession, too, was such as should have imparted some gravity to his character. There are some occupations which do not in- 2 terfere with the frivolity of human outure ; but if there is any profession 1m this world short ct the pulpit which can and ought to sanctify, if 1 may 0 speak, the human mind, and communicate a vravity to it which is uot ite natural vestment, it is the profission to which beloug—it is the profession to which Mr. Key be: loneed. The very business of our projession is to study out the rights of other men, and to bave them onserved. The first of all the duties which are cast upon us, and the last of all that ‘we can be excused from, is the performance of the studying out of the social and the personal relations of man toman;and the dutics that atinch fo those relations is the first offlse and the principal business of our profession, and therefore a law. Yor,above all others, before every’ tribunal, whether i ¢ erected in the arch of heaven or upon the face of the earth, is entitied to the least charitable consideration. What, too, was his position? He was the prosecuting officer of this District. He was selected to conserve the cause of public morality and public decency. It was his business to see that your homes were protected against reducers, adulterers, and every other species of criminal; and yet he wrapped himself in the garb of hypocrisy, came into this court and hunted down, with an almost un | paralieied success, the mere worms that crawl upon tae face of the earth, while the fall grown man of crime, such as he himself was, was permit. ted stak through your community, not only not punished, but not even admonished for it. Now, this is the character of this adulterer. Is there a word here that is not strictly trae? Who was the woman with whom be committed this adultery? Young enough to be his daughter. What her disposition may be I know uct; bot reasoning from her years, and from our know- ledge of the mental stracture of woman, it is not too mach to Fuppose that all the frivolity thatsurrounds a woman at that age environed her; that she was susceptible to flat- wry; that ehe was susceptible to the atientions of men, and looked upon them ag 80 many offerings cast upon the shrive of her beauty. At her period of life the marriage ‘vow had not impressed itself with all its gravity upon her mind; she did not experience fully the meaning of the terms by which she had surrendered herself, body and soul, to the ownerehip and control of ber husband. If there over was acase in which a man was tempted by a wo- wan, he ghould have imitated the example of Joseph, wbo left bis garment in the hands of Potipbar’s wife. This was a cate above all others in which a man, ere he fell cnder the dom\nion of hig Inst, should have left bebind bim some proof which by the mendacity of the woman might be tortured into evidence of his guilt. Who was the husband in this case? He is a man not quite of the same age with Mr. Key; he was accredited to your city us & member of the councils of the nation; he caine (rom the great commercial metropolis of our continent, that city Upon which every part of this Union looks with pride, and which, however objectionable some of its features may be, nevertheless, every American heart will concede is the firet city of our Union; he was here ia the sphere of duty; and by way of showing Mr. Key and you the confidence he placed in the protection which was guaranteed to vita by the Jaws of your District in bringing within tte preciac his wife and his child, he throw them and himself upon you and the taws of this Dictrict for protection. Now, what were the relations of Mr. Keyto Mr. Sickles? We thall show you what those relations were, So far az Mr. Sickles” was concerned they were those of sincere frien¢ship. So far as Mr. Key was con- cerned they were those of professed or avowed friendship. It hes becn eaid by the Psalmist “for it was an eneay that reproached me; then could I have borne it; neither was it be that hated me tbat did magnify himself against me; (hen I would have hid myself from him; bat it was thou-—a man mine equal, my guide and my acquaintanc we took sweet coubecl ‘together, aad walked into ti houre of God in company.” The wrong of a stranger may be borne with patience, but the perfidy of a fricnd of itself becomes intolerable. We will show you, gentlemen, the part of thie defence, that Mr. Sickles had interceded to have Mr. Key appointed to the very position which his pri- vate life bat disgraced; that all (he influenze which be could wield to secure to him the elevated position of pro- secutor at the bar of thia court was thrown into the scale, for the purpose of onabling him to attain that object of bis ambition, We will show you that Mr. Sickies had sent him private clients; and will show you that on one occ sion when Mr. Sickles had occasion himself, in conse- quence of a difference relating tw the hiring of his house, to employ professional rervices, he secured those of this Mr, Key as bie counsel in opposition to the valua ble vervices of the learned senior counsel for this prosecution. So that there were not only friendi; bot professional relations between them, whic! sinks any man to the lowest depts of basenoss who would ihink of compromising his acquaintances under such circumstances. Mr. Key pretended that he aba! health—T eay pretended, because, althongh he had vot strength enough w encounter the sphere of dat, which awnited him here, nevertheless he had stron enough to carry out his deaigna in reference to the wife of his neighbor. “Had he expended in this Court the samo Physical exertion which be expended in the prosecution of his atultery, be would have physically, as he was mentally, adequate to the discharge of covery duty which devolved’ upon bim. But while he had not strength enough to moet the exigencies of his daty here, he had that strength which was necessary to sustain’ his powers of virility elsewhere. He became a visiter at tue houre of Mr. Sickles. ‘Tue acquaintance dates #0 far back, I believe, a& six years since. Mr. Sickles if a man in public life; he ie compelled to trust to the purity of bis tied often and for considerable inter vale to be away from hie family mansion, and to leave bis wife to the guardianship and protection of hor own chae tity. Mr. Ikey goes under the appearance of a friead, and he exbivite those attentions which gallautry is ordinarily soppowed to prompt, bot which in bis cage was the foun dation on which the adulterer sought to rear his destrnc- tre power. We will show you that, as early as the 6th of March, 1868, it was reported that this Mr. Key was ¢elovoring him; Mr. Sickles sends for his; he (Key) stands upon bis honor as a mag; he denies the truth of the impeachment; he dengands the su'bor, and from oue Ww another he sends and passes | notes: ant when be is unable to discoves the author What he represents to be a calumny, he then addreesos | | Mr. Sickien, apoaking of @ ridiculous and disgusting | calumny, and yot within a fow days after this very note which he sent to Mr. Sickles, ia Which he sought to re- store Mr. Sickles’ confidence, we will be able to show you that if the intimacy did not exist at the tume of the note, at ail events it occurred within afew days after. Now, gentlemen, see the cunning of this Mr. Key: he feels bow base be is, When he is charged with treacher- ous deeigns towards Mr. Sickles, he eays, “Te i the highest affront which can be offered to me, and who- ver asserts jt must meet me on the fisid’ of honor, at the very point of the pistol.’ THe cuts off all comm iq stion On the part of the world to Mr. Sickles; and that was the reason why, ‘or a period of nearly one year, although he was, no doubt, alnost daily in the practic’¢ of bis treachery on his friend, antil the develope. rents came upon bim,agJ shall presently etate, M Ble never harbored a thought of suspicion against him. We wWillsbow you that from that time until the 24th of Feb "uary, 1869, the relations of Mr. Sickles and Mr. Key stoo.' perfectly friendly, and that Mr. Sickles imanifested the usnal confidence fn bim. On the 10th of ary, two weeks before his death, Mr. ® one ov & dinner party at Mr. Sickles hove, and whe docs he take there but his own gieter: he taker Dis sister to the house wf hia pros for that '¢ tho onry tart that can be ayrlied to the oman who deceives ber husband—he actoally secompe- on Hie own water and her ineband to the house \¥ & wo man with whom he was cultivating and prosecuting’ these ‘whe would calmly there after ber; when fr Key sitting by her. As soon ag Mr. abruptiy leaves the wife. internal sense of baseness which could have him thus to eeparate himself from ‘ Mr. Sickles returning home, on opening his letters day, opens ap snonymous letter, which was tbe origin of the discovery, and which will be placed in evidence be- fore you. e substance and Mrs. Sickles were in in Frfteenth street, betwe 5 Key bad nes Bye: house = ae purpose, “sq tbat he bad just as much f Sickles’ wite as, Mr. Sickles himself ‘bad. Now, the pature of Mr. Sickles would never permit him y anonymous letier, if formed as ¢ ordinarily formed—he is a man of noble charac- ter, aud would treat it with contempt. But there is & degree of circumstantiality about this letter—it enters £0 much into detai—for it tells where the house is, and gives such an mkling of faith, that it satiefles him there ix Fometbing Mena | inve jon, and be becomes satisfied of aii but the identity of the persons visiting the houee. It turvs out that there ig a house where this is described as being; thas Mr. Key hired that house, and that he was in the habit of going there with, but oftencr to meet a female who went in before or after him, Tho oply question left for Mr. Sickles to solve was whe- ther this female was his wife. Now, gentlemen, behoid bgain the conning of Mr, Key in selecting a house; it was necessary for him to get one in a secluded piace, or at all events ope in a@ section of your city in which witnesses could not rise up egainet tim, and which was —T near to Mr. Sickies’ house to enable him to comply wil his lusts as often as he desired: hence he goes down to part of faced city which is chiefly populated by blacks. But for the disability beyond the pessibility ander which the law has rendered that kind of testimony, the infam, of Mr, Key wouid be run before you in a stream whicl would disgust and sicken you; there is evidence enough, however, to get over thie disability, and to counect him unmistakably with the author of all this ruin and disgrace; ‘on the firet day after Mr. Sickles commissions Mr. Wool- dridge to inquire into the identity of the woman who ac- companied ey to house in question, Mr. Wooldridge goes to the neighborhood in Filteepth street, and arranges with the persons in the house opposite to give him a room on ext day. While there on Friday he understood that the woman bad last been seen at the house on Thursday. He iformed Mr. Sickles of this, and on tbe foliowing Sa- turday went and watched the bouse for five or six hours, but not discovering anything went to his boarding house, apd while there learned that Mr. McCloskey had been to the houge with a note for him, While he is there at his boarding house Mr. McCloskey returns and delivers the note. In that nete, Mr, Sickles still unwilling to believe in the guilt of his wife, writes to him to be exceedingly wn- der{ip{the prosecution of his inquiries, for he bas reason to believe that his wife is innocent, As soon as Mr. Wool- dridge gets this note be goes to the Capitol and sees Mr. Sickles, and was under the necessity of disabusing the mind of Mr. Sickles and of destroying the hopes which Mr. Sickles indulged of his wife's fidelity, He teils Mr. Sickles that while opposite this house on Saturcay he had learned that it was on Wednesday that the woman had been there last with Mr. Key, and noton Thursday. Of course Mr. Sickles having, by in- quiry, satisfied himself that bis wife was not at this bouse on Thursday, when the time of her visit came to be fixed to the true day all his confidence in the maiter was entirely taken from him, and he became convinced that the woman thos seen was his wife. Mr. Wooldridge described to him the articles of dress which the woman who accompanied Mr. Key wore on the occasion of her lust in Mr. Sickles at once recognized the apparel of Conviction more and more fastens itself He returns home; he puts her guilt in such a way as she thovght the bad been exposed, and under the supposi- tion of the discovery of her guilt, she acknowledges her dishonor, and gives him a written confession. Mr. Wooibridge baving had @ note sent to bim that night, from Mr, Sickles, which, as he was not home till midnight, he couid not attend to until the next morning, calied the next day between ten and eleven o'clock; finds Mr. Sickles a perfectly frenzied man, and is shown’ by him his wifo’s confession, The counsel described Mr. Sickles’ agony of grief consequent on the discovery: the sending for Mr. Butterworth to take bis wife to her parents in New York; the overwhelming anguish experienced by Sfr. Sick- les in’ being obtiged to proclaim his shame to his friends; ‘Mr. Butterworth’s leaving the house; Mr. Sickles’ servant man deecrying the adulterer passing the house, and as was his habit when passing in that neighborbood, waving aud whirling his handkerchief; the servants exclaiming, “There goes Mr. Key,” and Mr. Wooldridge looking out and finding that it wasso, Now, the counsel continued, you will perceive that Mr. Key was perfecily desperate this Sunday. He had not scen Mrs. Sickles since Thurs- day. He had not been able to get apy communication or tignals to ber or from her. He bad hired his bouse for nothing. Days had gone by, and he bad not violated the casket of his friend’s affection and love. Like alll liber- tines, he was eager for the fray of his passions. He was carried headlong, he was shamelessly, “in the eoft gush of a Sabbath sunlight,” watching the castie of his neighbor. You can account for the conduct of Mr. Key in no other way. Mr. Butterworth, after a time, leaves the house; he returns to the house; a remark is made by Mr. Wooldridge, “Why, Key has been seen to pars the house.’ You did not tell Mr. Sickles that; no, Mr, Wooldridge and Mr. Botterworth were re- soived to conceai from Mr. Sickles, if they could, that this roan was prowling outside the house with dishonorable intentions towards bim; so after a while Mr. Sickles comes down stars; he’ is then in a perfect state of frenzy. Mr. Key had been seen to pass the house on the opposite side in company with a lady and gentleman, and to wave his handkerchief, under pretence of waving it at a Little dog, which waving was the signal for these assignations. Mr. Sickles now knew that his wife hud deen dishonored by Key; he saw this man in the neigh- borhood of his house waving this disreputable signal; he rushes down ina perfect frenzy. So close and compact was the occurrence that the inmates of house did not know till they heard that Key had been shot thut Mr. Sickles was outside of the house; Mr. Wooldridge raw Butterworth go out of the houge alone, and while he was arranging a stereoscope on the window sill of the library, he saw persons running, and some who came in the direc. tion of the house informed him of the occurrence. Now, take the miud of Mr, Sickles, Tho might before hia wife bad acknowledged her guilt; he had passed the night without sieep—be had sighed aad sobbed it away; Aw his friends came in the following day he was compel: led to unbosom to them the story of his wife’s dishonor, and, to crown ail, he saw the adulterer with his flag float- ing,'as it were, under his eyes, for the pu ‘of Be- ducing his wife from the mansion which ought to have rotected her. Itis for you, then, to say, gentlemen, ‘rom these facts, as we shall place them ‘before you what must have been the condition of Mr. Sickles’ min at the time be wept to the scone which resulted in the death of Mr. Key. One or two other facts, and I have done, Why was Mr. Key constantly in the vicinity of Mr. Sickles’ house? He lived far away from that ‘house; be was in the habit of riding by it oa horso- buck; be was in the habit of showing himself off to the greatest advaniage, practising ali those blandishmeuts which adulterere cultivate for the pa of reach- ing the target which they have set before them. Tiow did Mr. Key have his agsignations? He took advantage of your parlors; if he encountered Mrs. Sickles in the Presivent’s mansion, be made an assigna- tion with her there; if he eucountered her in the mansion of some Senator, he made an assignation with her there; he tainted with his own foul ap- pointment the ' atmosphere which your wives and daughters were compelled to breathe. Here behold ancther strong indication of bis character. Wherever he met her the whole object of his acquaint- ance was the gratification of his lust; he followed ber wherever she went; she could scarcely go more than a few bundred feet from her house before be was by her side; if she was walking he was a foot; if she was riding the carriage was stopped and he got in, aud he would ride with her two or three hours, the directions being that the carriage be drawn through back streets. He became the subject of kitchen comment; he wag ‘called by the ser- vanta “Diggrace,”” that was the name given hin by the kitchen department of Mr. Sickles’ house. The District Attorney of the county of Washington had becodfe a by word, « reproach, in the kitchen of one of the houses of the district; a8 foon ag he was seen coming near Mrs. Sickles the remark was, ‘Here comes Disgrace to see er: Even the eervants felt the pressure of his infamous atten- ors to Mr. Sickles’ wife, Counsel related the evidence that the defence wou'd be able to give in reference to the visith of Mr. Key and Mrs. Sickies to the bouse in Fifteenth street, and eaid that Mr. Key was seen with Mrs. Sickles and bis dgughter on Pennsylvania avenue the Thursday before his death, and that he was then reading a letter, which letter was similar to the one that had been sent 10 Mr. Sickles, apprising him of the danger in which he stood on account of the discovery of hia relations with Mrs. Sickles. The defence would ‘show by one or two servants of the house that Mr. Key and Mrs. Sickles were heard in their adulterous intercourse in the library, and that on one occasion Mr. Key was known to be in the house as late as four o'clock in the morning, while Mr. Sickles was absent in New York. The defence would alto show that Mr. Koy, like all mon who go on in this way, was in the habit of carrying weapons, And now, continued the coungel, an effort has Veen mace in this cage on the part of the prosecution totarn Mr. Sickles over to the Executive clemency; it has beon in effect said to you, “render your verdict and Mr. Sickles cap appeal to the interposition of Executive clemency.” I ask you not to divest yourself of your rights as jurors in this case. You never occupied a position which was #ur- rounded with the honor which envirgn your proment po- sition, You were never called ripon to declaro'eo, wolemna aod important a verdict ag is expected of you in the deci- sion of the jesue here presented to you. “The same feel irgs that could prompt the Executive to reverse or an your verdict are the feelings which should warn you against and turn you from ite rendition. If the Executive should interfere at all, iv could only be on the ground that Mr. Sickles, at the time of the commission of this ast, was au instrument in the bands of hig God for the of executing in a summary way the judgment of Tis Saker. h you are to pass here— That is the very question on whici was oF was not Mr. Sickles an involuntary ineteu- ment in the hands of some controlling and’ directing power for patting an effective termination to the adulterous career of Mr. Key? When this question or a similar question bas becn presented to other juries, they have not sought to evade the responsibility. Counsel referred in this connestion to the following cuses:—The woman tried in Earex for murdering Mr. Errington vol. xxix. State Trials, page 18 to 26; the cake of Wood, tried in Phila. delphia, for the murder of his daughter because she bad mai ® libertine; the ease of Simgleton Mercer; the ‘Myers case in Virginia; Aruclin Norman's case, tried ia New York: and Jarboo's cane, tried in this Gourt. Coun: se) proceeded—Thus you have your own immediate citi- zene and the citizens of other States, where justice ia not rold, and where justice cannot be bought, paving the cisebarge of their oathe on the principles on which, fa one aspect of it, we piller this deience. Will you re rounce Your allegiance 10 there principles? Will you re fuse to yield yourvelves to them? Or will you rather fol- low the wake of these precedents, to render which. will accord with perfect jurtice, and whish wll, time, be cet ve the What in the effect of a doctrine that a pecunt compen- Hon je the only mode of smoothing ne? bleeding It your city asa brothel. It tolls every mas sar wl Pay te price which ajury may set upon hie or 8 seduction, be cau euler aby bouse be ‘and contents. ? Are rifle the purest bed that stands in it of its Is that 10 be sue cootrine of your Jocsli amere tari! of rates or a tar ff of ‘order °F the brovbe! to Ox of the more respectable mavsions jurics say What an adulterer and @ sedi for the eratiiration of bis lusts. in them? very moment that you act ou that principle resolve every houo in your dist ict into a house titotion, and you tell those who are hardy enough to think of exteriog them that all they have got to au tn to court the pecuniary cot, aud that if they are ready to foot the bill to be presented in the verdict of an Ameri- can jury, they ehali stand cleared of ail human and di- vine accountability. Ta God's name repndiate that principle from yeur bosom! It is your inestimable privilege {to sit in a chy under we immediate protection of tbe fire ‘which burns on that great altar at which all other — torches of our government are lighted; you are here at the seat of ovr federal goverpment; you are overshadowed by the | halo of the pame of Washington; let the recollection of | that bame inspire you with fitting and becoming thoughts; be reluctant and loth to incorporate in your verdict a principie, which, if it be the priucipje on which you act, will Lave @ more demoralizing effect than any otter pria- ciple that could be sustained or acted upon by an intelli- gent jury. Counsel resumed bis seat amid suppressed indications: of applauee, and was complimented by many of those who were within of bim. ‘The Court took a recess for a few minutes, After the recess, Mr. faid—We want you to ad- mit the handwriting of Mr. Key to some papers. Mr. Ould and Mr, Carlisle having examined them, ad- mitted the Serer lado 6 Mr. Brady remarked that the first is directed by Mr. Key to Mr, Sickles, and dated March 26, 1858, and en- dorses six letter—one of them written by Mr. Key, and the others written by different persons to him, Mr. Yuld—We object to them, Mr. Brady—On what grounds? 7 a7 Mr. Ould—The first letter purports to be from Mr. Key to Mr. Sickles, enclosing certain other communicatious addregsed to various parties—one to Mr. Wooluridge and his reply, one to Marshall J. Bacon and his reply, one from Mr. Key to Mr. Beekman and his reply, all in the handwriting of Mr. Key, and all, exce first, pur- porting to be copies of other letjers, date of nearly all of them is 26th of March, 1858. The first letter from Mr. Key w Mr. Sickles eaye:—"Send py vouah D. Hoover the correspondence bad to-day, etc.’’—alluding to certain matters, portions of which have been detailed to- day in the expected evidence of the defence, The objec- lion is that this correapondeuce at present _seem# vo be in bo Manner connected With the igsue the Court and jury are now trying; besides the note from Mr, Key to Mr. Sickles is dated a year ago, and ag it must relate to trans- actions before the jury, it must be excluded, in point of time, from the res gestue. Another objcction is that it shows no relation, direct or indirect, to the matter before the jury. I should like to know on what peculiar grounds: Une coi reepondence 18 10 be offered 43 evidence y eet Mr. Bracy—I will state it. The learned District Atior ney, in opeping the case, told the jary that the govern ment speaking through him could ascribe the act of Mr. Sickles in killing Mr. Key to no other impulse than re- moreeless revenge. He painted Mr. Sickles agan assassin, There is no proof before the jury that Mr. Key and Mr. Sickles mot each other before the time of that fatal occur- renee. The jury have nothing on their minds as to their former personal relations. The cause of their meeting, and the relations and circumstancer, are left to euch inferences ag the jury must necessarily dfaw from them in the absence of this testimony. We do not propose offering the tesumony to prove the adulterous act oa the part of Mr. Key, but to show the friendly relations be- tween the deceased and the accused. His honor said, in the case of Jarboe, the declarations of the denfendant in his own favor are adroissable in murder, and only in mur- der; but must be declarations of kind feclings, te acts of a friendly character, or such like, towards tbe deceased, prior to the commission of the crime with which he is charged ; and understand this correspondence between the two gentlemen is of euch character as to show that their relauions were of a frieudly character, and that Mr. Key treated Mr. Sickles as bis equal and friend at that day. Mr. Ould—There is no communication on the face of the Papers from Mr, Sickles to Mr. Key; no expression of either a kindly or a hoati'e feeling. There was only a note of Mr. Sickles, in which their relations are not sub- stantially touched op atall, There was nothing to show that their friendship continued through the year previous to the killing. Mr. Bracy replied, claiming the admiasion of this testi- mony on the game ground as was decided in the Jarbol cage, The queetion was is such evidence competent? and this being admitted, its value was to be determined by the jary when the prosecution charged Mr. Sickles with delibo- rate aseaseipation on Mr. Key in broad daylight, the law gives us the rightto prove that Mr. Sickles is not an assassin, und that bis hands are not polluted by biood. Did not the District Attorney say that Mr. Key’s letter to Mr. Sicklee does not coptain an expression of good will? The jury will determine thet; but the letter commences “Dear sir,” and ends * ly and truly yours.’ If we show friendly relations im 1858, the law woald pre- sume continuous relations of friendsnip until something interrupted them. We claim the lettdrs are adiniseabio on another point, namely, ax showing by Mr. Key’s own. admission he bad most intimate relations with Mr. and Mrs. Sickles, and that they believed his intimacy of an innocent and honorable character; and we claim they are admiseable as tshowing tbe origin of the peculiar rela- tions between Mr. and Mrs. Bickles. Mr. Cablisle said this was a case in which the doors should be thrown open to what was not evidence, but they should confine themselves to the mode of proof which the law assigns in this case—they should go no farther than public justice requires. Your honor would perceive the actual use which it was proposed to make. of this testimony—you have heard in what man- ner this correspondence is to be connected with this unhay catastrophe in the way of Ddiackening the character of the deceased. On that ground it could not be received. The eloquent address of the learned gentlemen for the defence warrants us in believing it was offered for that purpose. It is offered first to bear on the question whether this act of homicide was an assassi- ration. My learned colleague, although he did not } ure the word, painted it as one asaassination, end fer the purpore of showing it was not an as- sassination my learned brothers offer to show there was continuous friendship between the accused and deceased by the production of letters written | Boveu monibs prior}to the coilision—not written by the deceased to the prisoner, but by certain other parties, and enclosed in @ note written by deceased, An assassination ig no leas an aseagsination because the deep motive or pas- sion which led to it—whether it be gold, or ambition, or vengeanc—for-a great or an inconsiderable wrong; it is still an assassination, and no power of human eloquence can paint it in any other colors. Mr. Brady—These letters go to prove the fact of Mr. Key's friendly relations, Mr. Carlisic—T was coming to that. Mr. Brady turther explained the object of offering these letters, insisting there was a state of facts which prevents Mr. Sickles from beiog convicted of any crime, Mr. Carlisle, reeuming, said that when he used the word agsassination he quoted from bis lesrned opponent. He (Mr. Carlisie) asserted that the evidence did not tend, it’ admissible, to show that the case was not one of assagsi- uation; and secondly, if this kind of evidence of previous friendly relations were admitted to show it was not an assassipation, certainly evidence reaching back nearly a year belore the traneaction was notevidence; that it tends to shed no ray of light which any reasonable mind can perceive on the question, He further repligd to Mr, Brady. 4 Mr. Phillips eaid the relations the parties” bear to each other ig pertinent to the iavue, because igsue is not toe killing of the deceased, but his murder, in which is im. lied that matice hy which the law designates the offence. e¢ presumption may be copttadicted, and one of the modes by which it may be done is to ascertain the relation which the parties bore to each other. This may be de movetrated by acts of friendebip or correspondence. In the present case we propose to demonstrate it by the lat- ter mode, The only question for the Court is the compe. \ tency of such testimony, which may be aa dustin the balance, but ite effect and weight for the Jury, as to point of time, we may trace back acts of friendship and intima. cy, and run back to the days of boyhood, proving such relations from infancy to the present time. 1¢ length of Lime, instead of weakening, strengthens the argument that | he was not killed by malice. We are celled on to give | the order of time. This is but one link of the chain of cir. cumstances to show the decay g 9 which existed between the parties prior to the date of the tragedy, and which cont pued down to within a few days of the commission of the act. The Court said the object of the defence was to show the relations of the parties to each other. The law un- coubtedly ie that when » man is on trial for murder, pre- vious expressions of good will and acts of kindness to- ward the deceased may be proved. On this ground the Court understood these letters to be offered. ie one he had read was simply courteous, and had no bearing on the issue. The lewers are not evidence. Mr. Brady took an exce; to this ruling, and then td a ruling which excluded » Key's letwer, apart from the | encloeuree. The rollowing are the letters:— MR. KEY TO MR. SIOKLES. Wasitnaton, March 26, 1853, 25858 4 Lietscers. yon eue Filonious and ‘laa hander on m oawas uneusceasfuls Respectioniy eos truly Sour wes uns ect corned) PAILIE BARTON Rey, ‘The following are the copies of the letters referred to:— ‘ME. KEY TO MR. WOOLNRIDGK. ‘Wastinatox, March 26, 1888, @x0, B, Woouneiwa., Bag :— prkWill you state in writing what commuatication you made to the Hon, Daniel K sickles concerniog », wn Af give mre your aulborlly for making uch sommuniaon My ae to sore ie wares a Fe pectiuily your obedient serv scene PHI. BARTON KEY. MR. BACON TO MR. KEY. Manon %, 1968. P. Banton Key, eq :— Ny’ Dean #in--Vonr note has jast heen handed me by Mr. Borer, with a copy of «note from Mr. Woodridge: In reply Thave to state that, in the maio, bie statement ia correct, thovah some points go beyond what I aaid, ag I told Mr, W: And WOW fepest to you. Mr. an was my author. T staed at tbe ume to Mr. Wooldridge and wow repent, that (did believe there was any truth In the statement ‘went on Jn the conversation to give my reagons for auch dlabellef, and it I deemed ta ‘ication. re, TES BACON, MR. WOOLDRIDGE TO MR. KEY. P Sian brit Marchal J, Racon informed me on Pupeday afte man i= Marchal J, a mi noon, March 2, that Mr. Beekman said that Mra. Rickles had with Barun during Mr Sickles last arsenes to the city of New York, bean out riding on horseback (aren S house on the road towards Bladens: Sickles had a room rematoe! if; alae thatehe took off bit, and that, 5 Joctg bt there was @a intimacy between Mr. Key and 8 ‘There waa much more of the game bind of conversation; and Mr. Bacon wld me also in ® manner that assured me it Was fo, thet Mr. Key bonsted that he only asked thirty #ix hours with any woman to make Met oo oo OL: Youre, WOOLDRIDGE. GB. 1m 26, 1288. MR. KEY TO MIR. BACON. Wasinxarom, March 26, 1888, Manemar J. Bacon, Raq. —) BitHerewith I send you @ copy of @ note from @, B. Wool- ridge, Eso., which you will ryty St ‘you did make it, stxte unoo what au you make it This will be handed t» n by my friend, J.D. Hoover, Keq.. and you A please avawer it immertiate- Be SS ae ‘rut, BARTON KRY. KEY TO MR. BREEKM As. my Wasuisarox, March 26, 1888, Brexwan:— He ETS A Scrowith a copy of a note addrusso’ to me form GB. Wooldridge, Keq., and also of one (rom Marsh-Il Bacoa ‘¥cu will be plassed to read them and xnswer in writing if the ate if you are reepounibie tor tbe vite ‘Ibis will be hinded you by my StF tered give nim au immediats it survant, PHIL, BARTON K&Y, 4 Hoover, and vou ‘Respectfully your togetber with nove from’ My 'W in reply to your inquiry whether calumpies contained io Mr. Wooldridge's statement, Tary that Tdisavow that I was ever thelr author, and prumounos avery thing therein a5. He, and aleo the siaeineat of Mr, Bacon tast ‘was their author, respectfully, yours 7a". BRRKMAN. ‘Tneee letters are all copied in Mr. Key's handwriting— a emal), scratchy and cramped hand—upou batt anes ny per, stamped at the top with his crest aud initials. Tie crest is the head of a dragon, or some other monster in heraldic lore, holding m its beak a key. TESTIMONY FOR DEFENCE. BVIDENCE OF WILLIAM BADGER. ‘William Badger was the first witness called for the de- fence, Examined by Mr. Brady. Resides in Philadelphia; is Navy Agent of the United States at the Navy Yard there; has been in that situation for two yearé; knew the deceased very well, and koew Mr. Sickles equally as well; have known Mr. Sickles since his return from the Court of St. James, as Secretary of Legation. Q,—Do you know what the relations between Key and Sickles were in regard to friendship or association? Witness —Their relations were, as far as my knowledge extended, of the most intimate character, Q—Did you know the wife of Mr. Sickles? Witncse,—I knew her very well indeed. Q.—Were you at adinner party given by Mr, Sickles oo the 10th of February last, shortly before the decease of Mr. Key? Witness—I was. Q—At Mr. Sickles’ private residence in Sixteenth street? ‘Witness— Yer Q.—Was Mr. Key at that dinner party? Witness—He was. Q.—The guest of Mr. Sickles? Witnees—Yes. Q—Was Mrs. Sickles at the table? Wituete—Mre. Sickles was at the table, and Mr. Sickles also, Q-—What other persons were there ag guests? Mr. Carhsle thought this not material. Mr. Brady wanted to show that Mr. and Mrs. Pendleton, members of Mr. Key’s amity, were at that dinner pariy avd op friendly relations with Mr. Sickies’ family. Mr. Carlisle beld that that was extending the matter beyond its proper limits, and argued against the aims sibility of the evicence. The names of those who had already suffered too much in this metter should not be unneccesarily brought into this inquiry, Mr. Brady argued as to its admissibility, on the grount that evidence of acts of friendship between the partics might be offered, and quoted Judge Crawford’s ruling ic the case of Jarboe, He disclaimed all intention of bar rowing unnecessarily the minds of the family of Mr. Key. None could sympathbige with them more than he; bui where @ mau is on trial for his life, bis counse) would not be true to their duties if they failed to offer such evidence eg is admissible Ale offered this evidence with a view, mig0, to the effet which this lately remembered act of friendship mus: have had on Mr. Sickles’ mind when he learned of Mr, Key's perfidy. He must have thought, as Jaius Caeser ‘thought as he felt at the foot of Pompey’s statue, exclaim ing, as the blood dropped from the point of his friena’s poignard, «Et tu Brute!” ‘Ihe Judgo—It is proposed to prove that members of Mr. Key's household were guests of Mr. Sickles av te dinner party, at which Mr. Key was present, on the Lt of Februry, with a view to prove the intimate social relations that existed between the pariies. — the rule, 68 I haye always understood it, aud as 1 understand {it now, is that expressious of goo will and acts of kindness must be confined to the parfies immediately concerned. Mr. Key’s being there is evidence to the jury of an act of kinduess on the partof Mr. Sickles towards him; butl do not see, cannot perceive, how the presence of his sister or hi ter’s husband there can go to prove the same thing. It appears to me that the evidence should uot be re ceived. Mr. Brady—Did you remain there until the company Jeft the table, and did Mr. Key also remain? Witness—Yes. Q.—about what time did the company separate? ‘Witness—Approximating to eleven o'clock, I shouid i ‘thin! pa the Court—This was on the 10th of February, I ink. Q. Did Mr. Key leave before you aid? ‘Witness—Do not think he left before I did; he loft about the same time; do not think Isaw him aguin that even. ing; the last time I saw Mr. Key was when he was a guest of mine at a hop at Brown’s Hotel, where I stopped. Q.—When was that? “i ‘Witness—The 11th of February, I think—the next day after the dinner; Mr. Key was there, and Mr. aud Mra. Sickles, as guests of my daughter. Q.—Did Mr, Key come there with Mr. and Mrs. Sickles? Witoerr—No; I think he came a short time before or after them. Not cross-examined. EVIDENCE OF JOHN B, HASKIN. Jobn B. Haskin called; examined by Mr. Brady—Where do you reside? Witnese—In Westchester county, New York. Q.—Yon are ® member of the House of Representatives? Witnere—Yees, sir, Q.—How long have you known Mr. Sickles? Witness—Between fifteen and twenty years, Q Did you know Mr. Key? ‘Witnesr—I did; 1 think I was introduced by Mr. Sickles to Mr. Key inthe month of March, immediately after the inauguration of President Buchanan. Q—Did you become well acquainted with Key? Witnese—Quite so. Q—So as to ride out with him? Witness— Yes. Q.—You know Mrs. Sickles? Witness—I do. Q —How long baye you known her? Witnese—About twelve years. Q—Did you visit irequentiy at the house of Mr. Sickles? Witnese—I did frequently during the session previous to the last; my lady visited there, also, when she was in Washingion. Q.—Did you meet Mr. Key there? Witnesr—I did. Q.—Was he frequently there? Witoese—He was. Q.—When did you last see Mr. Key? Witnese—I last saw him at the Opera, when Piccolomini performed; J think in the month of February last, Q —How long before his decease? Witnese—Two or three weeks. Q.— Was he alone? Witnese—I think he was, . Q—Do you remember having any conversation with him that ev@ping? Witness—T'do not. Q—Do you recollect a whist party at which Mr. Key was? Witnese—I do. Q—At whoze house was it? Witnese—At Marsbal Hoover’s: this wag shortiy atter the inauguration of President Buchanan; Mr. Key and Mr. Sickies were there; it was a party of gentlemen excla- sively; all the gentlemen were acquainted with each her. Q.—Was there any remark made by Mr. Sickles to Mr. Key at that time about Mr. Key's office? “Witnese—Sickles on that occasion mentioned and urged his reappointment to the office which he beld at the time of bis oeath, and said that he believed the President would reappoint bim. Q.—What did Mr. Key say to that? ‘Witness—Mr. Key thanked him for his intercession, and boped be would persist in urging his claims for a reap- pointment. Q.—How would you characterize the relations betweon Mr. Key and Mr. Sickles, as to degree of intimacy? ‘Witness—Very much like the degree of intimacy exist. ing between myseli and Mr. Sickles; that of the closest and nearest and dearcet character. Q.—Had you a conversation at any time with Mr. Koy about a correspondence between him and Mrs. Sickles? Witners—I had. Q.—When was that? Witness—1 think the Sunday night following the corres. Pondence; it was in te month of Febraary oF March, Q.—What was the conversation? nd allowed.) conversation was one of Mr. Key’s seek- ing, and was at my residence on Taird street, in this city, after « correépondence had taken place between Sick- Jes and Key; it was in relation to a story inquired into by Mr..Sicktee, Mesers, Key and McR/hone calied on mo at my residence; the topic of conversation waa this corres- pondence; it was introduced by Mr. Key,on which occa- wion he stated — The District Attorney objected to the witness stating this. Mr. Brady argued that the evidence waa proper. He wanted to show that this correspondence did not interrupt the friendly relations of the parties, The prosecution had kept the defeace in ignorance of their course, and he did uot know but that it ght be argued that this correspon- dence bad interrapted their friendly relations. He would it the quertion, however, in this What did Mr. ay of Mr. Sickles’ acta of friendship or kindness to- ward bim? [Ovjreted to, and objection sustained.) \.—After that conversation did you ever seo Mr. Key and Mr. Sickles together ? Witnets—I think I have, Q —Do you remember the Inst occasion ? wane ‘Was the night of the Opera, to which Ihave referred, Q.--Was Mr. Sickles with him at the Opora that night? Witneer—-No, sir; 1 saw them both there; Mr. Sickles carne in Tate, Q.—-Was Mrs. Sickles thore? Witnore—She was, Q.—Who was with her? Witners— Miss Radger, and Mr. Mart of Now York. Q—Did Mr. Sickies speak to Mr, Koy that night? ‘itnose—I think @ recognition passed between them; i” bid each other tho time of day. ir, Chiiton—Did you at avy time commanicate to Mr, Sickie# any expression of kindness made by Me. Key Iw rogurd to him? If eo, state whether Mr. Sickles utered ‘any expressions of friendabip, and whut they wero, ected to, and question put in this shape: — Q— Did you communicate to Mr. Sickles the conyer- pation ? Witoees 1 did, a part of it; not the whole, Q.—Did he make any remark indioative of his disposi- fon towards Mr. Key? Peter Cug, EVIDENCE OF DANIEL DOUGHERTY. Dan’! Dougherty waa then examined by Mr. Brady, making the following replies to questions put to him :—I am a member of the bar of Philadelphia; I hayy been so since the second of May, 1849; bave bad the pleasure of enjoying intimate acquaintance with Mr. Sickles since the time of President Pierce’ Q —Were you acquainted with bis wife? Witnese—I was; Tmet Mrs Sickles first on the 6th or Gth of March, 1857, tmasodiately after the amanguratoa of President Buchanan. Q.—Did you visit at the house of Mr. Sickles? ‘Witness.—I did, both in New York and Wasnington, Q.—Did you know Mr. Key? Witness—I did; I Orst met him 0 September tagt year, in New York; for tho abort time I knew him 1 juite intimate with him; wae ats large dioner party at. Ir. Sickles’ house on the Taursdey before Mr. Key’s de. cease, Q—After the dinner party was over did Mr. Sicklos and Mra Sickles, or ether of them. go ot? Witness—After we had retired tom the table to the drawing room, and after spending sme time there Mra, Sickles, 1 recollect, went to Willard’ Hotel; I presume it was about ten o’clock at night; T aisowent t» the bop, but. Idid not go in carriege with hor; about an hoor afterward: ‘les came in done. Q—Did you Key at the hopi ‘Wunese— ait, Q —In whose society? Wituees—I cannot distinctly recollect think he was firat. in conversation with Mra. Sickles; afterwards saw bim in conversstion with Mrs. Dougherty; my wife was piome- Bading tbe room, Q.—What part of the evening was be with Mrs. Sicklos? Witnest—I thivk it was before Mr. Sictles came in; did. not ee bim with her after that, ioe oHore did you make Mr. Key’s acquaintance in Yow Of ‘Witnest—It was on the occation of the Cable celebray tion, on the 1st of September; cannot say yho introdiged him to me, as Broadway was alive with pie: tan tem Sickles go’ down the strect in a carriage: wengpowtto where ebe was, abd vot huving @ good place there I aslad, her to accompany me to the Metropolitan Heel, where tho could have a better place, and where Mr. frokles, was; there met Mr. Key {a one of the priva‘e parbrs, and, ict mistake not, Mr. Haskin was there too, Q—Dio you see Mr. Sickles’ father and nothor in tas parlor at the same time ? Witnees—I cannot say whether I saw them n the where Mr. and Mra, Sickles were, but they were cer iu the building; I think that af the ame the pravession wi pusring they were up étairs tn another room, Q.—What was the last time you saw Mr. Key? tuess—I presume it mast have been abput twelve o'clock on the Saturday before the day of bis death; Twas starting from Mr. Hoover's house to pay my tespects to Mr. and Mrs. Sickles before leaving Washington; as 1 wag jJeaving Mr. Hoover's bouse [ met Mr, Key, aud he accom panied me vp the avenue; I thought he was coming to Mr, Sickles’ houre, but he turved into the Ciub House very abruptly, aud left me; 1 then went tw Mr. Sickles’ house; after remaining there come time I was goiog down the avenue agan, When I met and pursed Mr. Key; be bac left the Club House and was passing towards Mr. Sickle hovse; I parsed bim ip the avenue, nearly in frontof the Jackson statue, aod bid bim good bye, Q—What time of the day was that? Witness — About twelve o'clock, Q—Were you at a recept.on at Mra. Sickles’ house? Wituers—On the Tuesday before chat I was at a recep tion at Mrs. Sickles’ house; I saw Mr. Key there; that wag the 22d of Febru ‘To Mr, Carlisie—i think Iwas ten days in Washington at that (ime; left here that Saturéay and arrived in it that Wednesday week; I had not been in Washington fora year belore. ‘To Mr. Brady—My wife and Mre, Hoover were with me at that reception; there were algo @ namnber of ladies and. gentlemen ther . ‘Mr. Brudy acked Mr. Carlisle whether ho would admit tbat Mr. Key bad been coungel for Mr. Sickles ia a case where Mr. Carlile was on the other side. Mr. Carlisle asmitted that Mr, Key acted as conneel for Mr. Sickles in a matter in regard to Mr, Sickles’ honso; it n September or Ootober, 1868; he bad three inter views witv Mr. Key on that eubject, John J. MeEibone was called, pvt did rot answer. Peter Cagger was again celica, but did not answer, and ae i was Dow w few mnutes of three o'viock, the Court adjourned. The jury were permitted to take odt-foor exercise, In the charge of officers, but were edmooished nob to hold conversation with avy one on the subject of the trial, Naval Intelligence. CIRCULAR RELATIVE TO THE PAY OF MARINES. Heapquarters U. 8. M. Corrs, Payatastxn’s Orvice, April 1, 1859. The act approved August 6, 186d, grants to the non- commissioned officers, musicians and privates of the marine corps, the game pay and bounty for re enlistment as are now, or may hereafter be, allowed to similar grade in the icfantry of the army, The period of enlistment ia the srmy being five years, and in the marine corps four Years, in order to equalize the pay of tae two branches of the service, under the act to “snoresse the pay of the vavk and Gile of the army and to encourage enlistments, approved -Avguet 4, 16/¢.’ the following regulations wil be conformed to in all fuiare payments of marinee:— 1, Marines who are serving on a re-enbetunent at the date of the passage of the act approved August 5, 1864, end who bave since reeniteiened, or may hereufler re- enlist upon a second term eubecquentiy to the passage of tbat act, will not be paid the one dotar per month addi. Monat pay until they shall have served one year upon gach second term. 2, Marines whowere scrving on a firet enlistment at the Cate of the paresge of the act, who have since re enlisted, y hereafter re-enlist, wiil not be entitled to the ad- one dollar per month, uvti! they shall have served 100 of five years from the date of r¢-enligtment—thas ope year Upon & Kecond re-eviietment, 3, Marines who hive enlisted into the corps since the Sth Avgurt, 1854, will be required to serve a period of five yeare (ove year on a second enlistment) before pey will be entitled to the two dollars por month granted for a se- cond term, , 4 The bounty to be paid to marines for re-enliatment vncer the law, will be three months ordinary pay of tho grade, and the pay they were in receipt of at the time of discharge, a8 additional pay for length of effect from and after 1st January, 1867. W. W. RUSSELL, Paymaster United States Marine Corp, Approved—A. J. O"BANNoN, Fourth Auditor, and J, MAD= mison Crrrs, Second Com ptrolte Kiforts are being made s6 rhe right quarter to dispense with sutlers in the mariage corps, a anizance which hag Jong been a burthen to this particular branch of the Uaited. ‘States Fervice, and Lhe fooner it is abated the better. But more avon, THE NEW FLEET CAPTAINS. The following orders have just been issued by the Navy Department:— Copt. C.K. Stribling to command the Kart Indisn equad rou, to retieve Capt, Jo: Hie flag ship will be the steam sloop Hartfor’. ‘The aide wheel steamer 4 the sloop Jobn Adams hav: squadron. The fo/lowing office to the Jatter ves Murray Masoa; Liente- pants, C. Van Alstine, RM. Coyivr, John P, Hall and B, E Boatswain,’ Thomas 8 A. Capt. John B Moatgomery bas been ordered to the command of the Pacific squadron, to relieve Capt. John G, Long. The steam sloop Lancester will be the flag ship, to which the following eitic-rs have byen ordered:--Coar. manoer, Jobn Rudd; Lieutenants, A. 8. Baldwin, Henr: Rolando, Wm. G. Tet jer 'W. Queen and Bane Gheridt; one » O ‘ewell, Parser, A. G. Watson; Boatswain, James Waiker; Guoner, Geo. Sirian; Carpen> ter, Jobo 0. Butier; Saiimaker, Ww. Fogitt. To the sloopof-war Levant. wi also attached to ‘that Fquadron, the following offic ve been ordered:— Commander, Wm E. Bunt; Lieutenants, F. ©. Stont, Samue) Magraw’'and Richard 'T. Bowon; Acting Bostswain, Joho Collins; Carpenter, Joho Jarvis, Sailma- ker, Charles I. Frost, The Wyoming and Narragansett, new steam sloopr, bave also been ordered tothe same squadron, but officers bave not yet been detailed for e ‘m. Feral Big ann Inman has been Rbiy tothe com- mand the African squadron, to relieve Thomas A. Conover. His flag sbip will bo the steak Trig San Jacinto. The sloop Portsmouth has also been attached to that squadron, and the following offivers have been or- dered to service on board of her:—Commander, John Cal- hoon: Lieutenants, R. B. Rell, WH. K. Stevens, H. N. Crabb and Trevett Abbott; Purser, John A. Bates; Gunner, Wm. H. Hamilton; acting Carpenter, Wm. D. Toy; Sailmaker, Samuel Tatem, ‘The steam frigate San Jacinto, steam sloop Mohican, and African loop s'oop Consteliation have also been ordered to the squadron, but their officers are not yet detailed. Besices the above, Captain Mclowesh, late of the Home squadron, bas been ordered to the eagacola Navy Yard; Captain JA, DorDin, of the Norfoik Navy Yard, to the steamer Hartford; Captain Charles H. Bell, to the Norfollc ; Captain Wm. E. Hunt, to the sloop of war otenant R. Aulick, to the receiving ship at Bal- timore; Commander Frederick Obutard to the receiving ebip at Norfolk; Lieutenant Toomas Roney, to the roeciy= ing ehip at Baitimore; carpenter R. G, mas, to the sloop-of-war Saratoga, at Pensacola, waio P. J. Mile ler, to the receiving #hip wt Norfolk; purser Henry Etting, to the Naval Academy at Annepolia; sailmaker James R- Navy Yard; Alex, W. Childs, to the Portsmouth (N. f1.) appointed novng sallmaker, and Robert Casneli has been 8. King acting gunner in the navy, ‘The United States sbip Germantown gailed from Mantyi for Hong Kong on the Sth of February, Tho steam re ate Missiseippt war at Whamp’a, anxiously looking for her meward bourd orders, Commodore Tutnell on board nis flag ebip, the Powhatan, was also at Whampan, This latter is the only veerel of the present Kast India not expecting to be ordered home, The Sugar Crop of Loutiana. The sugar crop of Louisiana, for the last se on agceriained to have been 362,296 hhden-ahe largtes oto followin, i value of the crop for ten Hy Hhds, Pounds, Value, known except one, that of 1863. The show the amount and Years, 247,928 $12,306,150 ‘211 00 12,677/180° fi 1,827,559 5 aaa ft 0040,000 C} '¥ Of molasser made inst season is estl at 26,000,000 gallons. The value of en; and mo'asses prodnced in Louisiana for the year 1858, will amount twonty-cigbt miliions of dollars, The largest Guaatiy of sugar made by ove parish, was 44,000 ~ goes to the credit of St. May Inberville is the turning ont $8,876 bogeheade, Then follows AsainD- Wn The logs from overHiow is computed at 58,000 bow as,