AN ACT TO ABOLISH PUBLIC EXECUTIONS. Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That whenever hereafter any person shall be condemned to suffer death by hanging for any crime of which he or she shall have been convicted, the said purishment shall be inflicted on him or her within the walls or yard of the jail of the county in which he or she shall have been convicted; and it shall be the duty of the sheriff or coroner of the said county to attend and be present at such execution, to which he shall invite the presence of a physician, attorney general or deputy attorney general of the county; and twelve reputable citizens, who shall be selected by the sheriff; and the said sheriff shall, at the request of the criminal, permit such ministers of the gospel, not exceeding two, as he or she may name, and any of his or her immediate relatives to attend and be present at such execution, together with such officers of the prison and such of the sheriff's deputies as the said sheriff or coroner in his discretion may think it expedient to have present, and it shall be only permitted to the persons above designated, to witness the said execution:-Provided, That no person under age shall be permitted on any account to witness the same. Section 2. After the execution, the said sheriff or coroner shall make oath or affirmation in writing, that he proceeded to execute the said criminal within the walls or yard aforesaid, at the time designated by the death warrant of the Governor, and the same shall be filed in the office of the clerk of the court of Oyer and Terminer of the aforesaid county, and a copy thereof published in two or more newspapers, one at least of which shall be printed in the county where the execution took place. WM. PATTERSON, Speaker of the House of Representatives. JACOB KERN, Speaker of the Senate. Approved-The tenth day of April, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-four. GEO. WOLF. From the Commercial Herald. SOMETHING NEW AND IMPORTANT TO PHILADELPHIANS. From the Intelligencer. MAMMOTH LEMON. Mr. Strong:-On a visit, lately, to North Lebanon, Lebanon county, the residence of William Lehman, Esq. Engineer of the Union Canal Company, he exhibited to me a basket of lemons of his own raising, one of which, (having had the curiosity to measure it,) measured thirteen inches in circumference one way, and eleven and a quarter the other, the residue were not much inferior in size. Mr. Lehman has, also, in his garden the most numerous collection of the best kinds of fruit, particularly the Grape, some of which I had the pleasure of tasting last fall, I have ever seen in any private garden. Through the liberality of Mr. Lehman in bestowing grape spouts and young grafted trees to his neighbors and friends, Lebanon county will soon become as famous for its horticultural productions, as it now is for its agricultural. SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION. since of spontaneous combustion, which, instead of A circumstance came to our knowledge a few days throwing new light upon the subject, involves it in still deeper mystery. About two years since, the late Mr. S. C. Slaymaker presented to Mr. Adam Reigart of this city, a small piece of wood, evidently cedar, which he had detached from a larger piece, found in excavating the deep cut of the rail road, at the Gap, in this county, about thirty feet below the surface. This piece, weighing not more than two ounces, was broken in two, and laid upon a white pine shelf, in Mr. Reigart's counting room. About three or four days before the discovery was made, which I am about to describe, Mr. Whitaker, a gentleman who resides with Mr. Reigart, on wiping the dust from the shelf with a wet cloth, took up the pieces of wood, and after having dusted the shelf, laid them as before. Three days after this it was accidentally discovered that one of the pieces had ignited, and would have been in a few moments on fire; and, if it combustion was progressing so rapidly that the shelf had happened at night, the consequences might have been very serious. On examination a portion of one of the pieces was found reduced to ashes of a dark gray color, and from some of the outer fibres being sound, and ashes lodged in the interior under them, it would appear that combustion had commenced, not upon the outer part of the wood, nor upon the side which lay in contact with the shelf, but in the interior of the stickthe surrounding fibres being disintegrated by the action of the fire within, and ready to fall to pieces. Mr. Reigart has taken proper care to preserve the remains of the wood and the ashes, as nearly as possible in the state in which they were found. Colonel B. S. Hurt, of Nashville, Tennessee, informs us that he shipped at that place, 149 bales of cotton, 60,014 lbs. to Pittsburg, for which he paid $2 per bale freight; the same cotton he there shipped from Pittsburg to Philadelphia, at sixty-two and a half cents The shelf was at least six feet from the floor, and so per hundred lbs. and it arrived here safe yesterday, and situated that no spark from a candle or lamp could have is now for sale. The time required, ordinarily, to trans-communicated with it, and upon close examination it port freight from Nashville to this city, is about twenty is evident that the fire was not communicated exterdays, and it is attended with very little risk. This is a nally. very important matter to our city and her merchants; for, if goods can be transported in so short a time, and at such a reduced freight and risk, into the heart of Kentucky and Tennessee, and even into the northern part of Alabama, we do not see what is to prevent the trade of that rich and populous section of the country, from flowing through the channels that have been formed for it, to this place; and if we are to enjoy the advantages thus secured to us, what shall prevent the future growth and extension of our city? who shall say to it, "thus far shalt thou go and no further, and here shall thy bounds be stayed?" The members of the Board of Trade merit the thanks of the citizens for the unwearied pains they have taken to make known the facilities of transportation on our canals and rail roads. UNUSUAL.-A Mrs. Irving, of Clifford, Susquehanna county, was a few days ago delivered of four daughters at a birth; two of them died immediately, and the other two are not expected to survive long. Geologists-particularly those who contend that pitcoal, whether anthracite or bituminous, is of ligneous origin; and who entertained speculative opinions upon the causes of its carbonization, may find in this singular circumstance, an elucidation of some of their theories, or ground for the support of a new one.-Lanc. Gaz. FROST.-There was a severe frost in this vicinity on the mornings of the 13th, 14th, 15th, and' 16th May. Isicles were formed about 20 inches in length, and 3 inches in diameter, on the night of the 14th, and the mountains were whitened with snow on the following morning. We saw and heard considerable of the ef fects of the frost and cold weather below the mountain from the Lehigh Gap to Bethleham, and apprehensions are entertained among the farmers, of that vicinity that serious injury has been inflicted on the spring vegeta Tons. tion, and to the prospects of fruit in particular.-Mauch Chunk Cour. ASSORTED CARGO.-An ark arrived at this place a few days ago, loaded with 5,000 Rakes; 600 Bench Screws; 120 Bedsteads; 1000 Hoe handles; 100 Cradle Snaths; 2,000 Window Blinds; and 12 or 15,000 Slats for Venitian Blinds. These articles came from the manufactory of Mr. Edward L. Pains, of Orwell, Bradford county, in this state, and reflected much credit on the enterprise of that gentleman. In addition to the above, we were told that on the passage down the river, about 2,000 Rakes, 1,000 Blinds, 500 Screws and 25 Bedsteads were disposed of. When the ark left Bradford county, the cargo must have been valued at between two and three thousand dollars. It will proceed to Baltimore. -Columbia Spy, May 17. COAL TRADE AT PINE GROVE.-We have received a statement showing the quantity of coal shipped during the present season from this region, which, owing to the presure of the times, is less considerable than was anticipated. The whole quantity which will be exported this year, it is estimated, will not exceed eight or ten thousand tons. The shipments are mostly to Middletown, Marietta, Columbia, &c. on the Susquehanna. Shipped by Cauffman, Ulman & Strimpfler, Henry Umperhocker, 180 13 Wednes* 89 14 Thursd'y 28 15 Friday Philip Gerhes, William Graeff, Steeves & Oliver, Total, 22 16 Saturday 28 17 Sunday 1,280 18 Monday 19 Tuesday 1,627 20 Wednesd Dec. 141 38 236 40 3 38 39 4 37 38 5 39 40 6 38 40 7 35 35 8 42 42 936 39 10 33 37 11 29 32 12 25 27 13 25 27 14 24 25 15 27 27 16 27 32 1741 42 43 42 1836 37 1935 36 20 25 28 21 27 30 22 33 34 23133 35 24 38 40 25 38 39 26 38 138 27 30 32 28 25 28 29 27 32 44 44 NW and cloudy 30 Saturday 28 42 41 ENE damp and cloudy 40 41 East, light rain 44 46 NNW and cloudy 44 44 NNW and cloudy 36 38 NE and cloudy 45 48 NE, heavy rain 46 46 44 45 36 38 31 33 NW and clear SW and clear 1 2 3 5 8 10 12 13 14 NW and clear 6 7 9 11 15 17 18 21 27 27 32 33 NE with snow 24 2 days 1 day rain rain cloudy rain & sn Wind. NF,heavy gale with hea.rai. 29 21 23 24 25 30 14 1 day Strong from NW and clear 5 6 7 9 11 15 16 17 18 27 10 days S SW 1 2 3 4 8 10 12 13 19 20 26 11 days W 40 42 Strong from NW and clear 22 28 2 days NW 38 40 NE and cloudy with rain 43 44 NW and cloudy 39 39 NE with rain On the 2d in the evening, thermometer at 78° the highest. On the 5th in the morning, at 20° the lowest. Range 58°. The wind has been 6 days east of the meridian, 23 days west of it, and 1 day south. Mean temperature 5° colder than last November. * For numerous and particular descriptions of the Meteoric Phenomenon "of the 13th," by individuals in The Thermometer from which the above has various parts of the U. States, see Silliman's Journal, been taken, has an out-door northern exposure. Vol. 25. HAZARD'S REGISTER OF PENNSYLVANIA. YLVANIA. DEVOTED TO THE PRESERVATION OF EVERY KIND OF USEFUL INFORMATION RESPECTING THE STATE. VOL. XIII.-NO. 26. EDITED BY SAMUEL HAZARD. PHILADELPHIA, JUNE 28, 1934. From the Philadelphia Gazette. Commonwealth vs. TRIAL OF MURRAY. Court of Oyer and Terminer, NO. 338. committted) at Frankford, and also all the rest of the week; on the 11th November, he sold his horses and carts, was paid off, and left the place to go to New York; he was arrested, on the Friday week afterwards Before Judges King, Randall, Fergu-at Bustleton, travelling as a pedlar, together with two Felix Murray son and Knight. The facts of the case are briefly as follows:On the evening of the 4th of November last, Sutcliffe, the deceased, was sitting with his infant in his arms while his wife was preparing supper, the two children were lying in the bed in a room of an unfinished house, in Eighth below Christian street, which he rented of Mr. Timmins, at 50 cents per week-a knock was heard at the door, (at the back part of the room, which opened upon the commons,) and Felix Murray entering asked if the painter was in," having been affirmatively an swered, he sat down, with a wheelbarrow strap in his hand, Sutcliffe han ed his infant to his wife, another entered with a club, immediately struck Sutcliffe over the head with the club, and Murray beat him with the buckle end of the strap. Mrs. S. with the infant in her arms, fled and fell through the window into the cellar and brought assistance-when she came back, the assailants had disappeared-Sutcliffe was bloody, crawling on his hands and knees and was led to the hospital, where he died on Friday evening, the 8th inst.-almost immediately after he had got to the hospital, he fell into a comatose state, from which he never recovered, and did not afterwards speak. or three others, who, on hearing before the Mayor were discharged. His Honor, Judge King, charged the jury that he agreed with the counsel on both sides that the case had assumed such an aspect as justly entitled it to be considered of the first magnitude in the administration of criminal justice; that a case, exhibiting such a character and involving such consequences, demanded from all, the calmest, coolest, and most dispassionate reflection and consideration; that, if there could be found just grounds for a verdict of acquittal, for restoring this man to society, and to his friends it would be a source of sincere congratulation to all, as the consequences of a conviction of the highest grade of crime, impose a disagreeable responsibility upon the court. The first object of inquiry, (continued the Judge) in this and every other criminal investigation is, what are the laws alleged to have been infracted? and what are the facts, from the es ablishment of which the public avers that these laws have been infracted? He said, that it was the duty of the court to expound to the jury the law of murder, as modified by our act of assembly, though the final powers devolved on the jury to decide both law and fact, and that their determination of the law in favor of an accused, was final and absolute. His honor here instructed the jury fully as to what was murder as understood at common law and the mo. difications of it by the law of Pennsylvania and read to the jury from the case of the commonwealth vs. Ander. son Greene (Ashmead's Reports 296.) and commented fully upon the English law, which involved in the same punishment, all degrees of murder and explained the definition of the word malice, as legally understood and as requisite to constitute the crime of murder. He remarked that though the counsel of the prisoner On his way to the hospital, he said "he was a mur- seemed to take the ground that the prisoner must be dered and a dying man." and that "the man (or men) either not gu lty or else guilty of the highest species of who took away the stuff had murdered him;" at Mr. murder, it was the duty of the court to instruct the in Timmins' house, he essayed to speak but his mouth be- ry, in the modifications made by the act of 1794, which ing filled with blood, he could hardly be understood subdivided murder into degrees; that prior to the pas. and muttered something like "murder or Murray." sage of that act, constructive murders were punishable The identity of Murray was fixed by Mrs. Sutcliffe, who with death, and that if a man shooting at a tame fowl, said she had been acquainted with him previously and accidentally killed a human being, he was held guilty of that he was one of the men who assaulted her husband. murder and punished with death, and that the law so His body was bruised all over and his death was proved continued until 1794, on the ground that the man who to have resulted from the wounds thus inflicted; Murray does an unlawful act is liable to all its consequences, was not charged with the offence until the day of Sut- even if that liability terminates his life; that in our hus cliffe's death, Mrs. S. being, as she said, afraid lest Mur- mane and mild system, this notion was soon out of favor ray would go away, and was in hopes that her husband and led to the obliterating of those harsh features of the would recover. It was shown that Murray and his bro- common law; and that by the act of 1794, the doctrine ther had threatened any one who should live in the of constructive murder is repealed, and in Pennsylvania, house, and that about a week previously, the prisoner except in the cases especially enumerated in the Act of on passing the deceased, had gritted his teeth and mut- Assembly, the Jury must be satisfied that the party com tered something in a menacing manner; and that Mur-mitting the violence intended to take life, otherwise the ac ray and a man named Higgins had on the night before cused should not be convicted of MURDER OF THE FIRST the Sheriff sold the house, removed some stuff, or lum. DEGREE. ber from the cellar. The defense set up was an alibi; Murray was shown to have worked all day Monday, (the day this act was VOL. XIII. 51 He again instructed the Jury that they were the Judges of the law as well as of the facts, and admonish cd them to be careful and not to suffer any prejudice to exist against the prisoner, arising from the transaction itself, or any thing else, but carefully to guard their feelings, lest they should be led away by the terrific scene; that if they had any doubt either of the prisoner's identity or of his intention to take life, it was their duty to let their doubt on the first point operate to a total acquittal, and any uncertainty on the second point, to relieve the prisoner from a conviction of murder of the first degree; and that they should coolly and deliberately take up the case and return such a verdict as would give justice to the prisoner, as well as to the commonwealth, and such as their consciences and judg ments would ever sanction. The jury after an absence of only twenty minutes, found him guilty of murder in the first degree. A motion was made for a new trial, which was argued on the 10th June, and overruled by the Court in the following opinion: MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL. KING-President. The magnitude of the consequences of this cause, to the unhappy man before us for judgment, rather than any in rinsic difficulty involved in it, has induced us to give his application for a new trial the most careful, anxious and scrupulous attention. Every thing urged in favor of the motion, by his able, ingenious and eloquent advocates, who on the occasion, performed their duty with singular ability, has been deliberately regarded by judges who, feeling that they had the life of a human being in their hands, appreciated the responsibility of their position, and have come to their conclusions uninfluenced by prejudice, passion, or the pride of opinion. On the contrary, they can truly avouch, that during the progress of their deliberations, the yearnings of human sympathy for their fellow-man, more than once arrested the unalterable fiat of justice, and induced a reconsideration of the principles, on which he asks of us, to vacate the solemn verdict of a jury of his peers, selected by himself, rendered under a full view of the law and the facts of his case. The UNANIMOUS Opinion of the court, formed under these influences, it is now my duty to pronounce. Nine reasons for a new trial have been presented, which however on the argument were reduced to these, viz: First-Error of the court in admitting in evidence certain alleged dying declarations of Joseph Sutcliffe, the deceased, operating against the prisoner. Second-Inadequacy of the evidence of the defendant being one of the alleged perpetrators of the crime, charged to have been committed. victim of secret assassination to be received, in order to the detection and punishment of his murderer can scarcely be supposed. The fact that such testimony may be received and operate even to condemnation, has a saving and protecting influence on society; and hence the importance that the Commonwealth should not be deprived of it in any case, by artificial distinction and scholastic refinements generally more conducive to the defeat of justice than the conservation of innocence. Sir Edward Hyde East, in his admirable treatise on the Pleas of the Crown (vol. i. Page 153) says that "evidence of this sort is admissible on the fullest necessity: for it happens that there is no third person to be an eye witness of the fact and the usual witness on occasion of other felonies, namely the party injured himself, is gotten rid of." The difficulty in the case before the court, does not however so much arise from the abstract question of the admissibility of such testimony, as from a modification of it, introduced by one or two modern decisions and incorporated into all the recent text books. The modification alluded to, is that it is not for the jury to decide whether the deceased thought himself dying or not, when he made the declarations inculpating the de. fendant; but that this must be first decided by the judge before he receives the evidence (2 Russell 687, 2 Starkie 459-60.) If this doctrine means no more, than that a prima facie case of the moral consciousness required, as one preliminary to the admission of such testimony, should be exhibited to the Judge before introducing it to the jury, it may, perhaps, be conceded. Proof of handwriting affords an analogy to such a doctrine. But if the cases really go to the extent which has been urged in the argument, viz: that courts are the exclusive judge of the state of the decedent's mind when he made the declarations proffered in evidence, I must be permitted to add my doubts to the more weighty ones of Sir David Evans, who in the appendix to his translations of Pothier on obligations (295) calls in question the authority of the King vs. John 1 East P. C. 357 where the doctrine was first broached to the extent referred to; all legal analogies would seem to indicate, that when in a case of declaration, made by one most mortally wounded, as to the fact and perpetrator of the injury, prima facie evidence is submitted to the Judge that they were made under a consciousness of impending death, he should receive the evidence, and leave the jury to determine, whether the deceased, was really in such circumstances, or used such expressions, from which the apprehension in question was inferred; whether such inference is correct; whether the declarations against the accused were actually made by the deceas There are but two English adjudications on this subject before the Revolution and of binding authority here; the first, decided by Lord Chief Justice King, at the old Bailey, in 1720, and thus briefly reported in the 12th Viner, p 118. Title evidence (A. b. 38) PL. 13. "In the case of murder, what the deceased de clared after the wound given, may be given in evidence. The King v. Ely. The other is the case of the King vs. Reason & Tranter, reported in 6th State Trials p. 201 Third-Insufficiency of the evidence to establish murder of the first de ree, admitting all the facts alleged; and finally whether they are accurate and sincere. ed by the commonwealth to be unquestionable. Fourth-After-discovered evidence. That declarations of a person who has received a mortal injury, made under apprehension of death, are admissible in evidence, as well to establish the fact itself, as the party by whom it was committed, is unquestioned and unquestionable. The principle generally assigned for the admission of such testimony, which strictly speaking, is but hearsay, is, that declarations made under such circumstances, when every hope in this world is gone; and in 1st Strange p. 500 decided in 1721. In this when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the case there was indeed the clearest evidence that Mr. mind is induced by the most powerful considerations Lotterell, the deceased, when he declared the defendto speak the truth, create in the individual making ants to be his murderers was under the assured convicthem, in a situation so solemn and awful, an obligation of death, but the point as to the peculiar and extion equal to that imposed by a solemn oath, in a court of justice. If to reasons so cogent, others as suming more a character of public expediency were requested, they could be readily suggested and have been. "Necessity absolute or moral" says the late venerable and excellent Chief Justice Tilghman, "is a sufficient ground for dispensing with the ordinary rules of evidence" 4 Binney 326 A necessity more urgent than that which requires the declarations of the dying clusive duty of the court to decide whether he made these declarations under the consciousness of inevitable death, was not agitated or considered. It was, in the case of the King vs. Woodcock, 2 Leech 563, decided in 1789, and of course not authority here, that Lord Chief Baron Eyre, laid down the principle on which such testimony is received, in the beautiful language since universally adopted by the text-writers. But it is a curious fact that in this very case from which the principle is supposed to be derived, that the court must in the first instance decide upon the existence of head covered with blood; on inquiring of him what the consciousness of death on the mind of the defendant was the matter he replied he was a murdered and a before permitting his declarations to go to the Jury, DYING MAN." In proceeding towards the hospital, he Chief Baron Eyre actually left it for the jury to consider stopped at the house of Thomas Timmins his landlord, "whether the deceased, was not in fact under the ap-requesting him to go with him to the hospital. While prehension of death" when she made the declarations charging the accused; and if they were so satisfied that the declarations were admissible. The defendant was found guilty and executed. In the King vs. John (decided in 1790) it was ruled to be error to leave the question to the Jury to say whether the deceased thought he was dying or not," for," says the court, "that must be decided by the Judge before he receives the evidence." This rule seems since to prevail in England; but with this important qualification that the consciousness of death may be inferred by the judge from the nature of the wound or state of illness or other circumstances of the case, although the deceased should not have expressed any apprehension of danger. To this point the authorities are numerous and express, 2 Russell on Crimes 687-2 Starkie on Evidence 460-1 Phillips on Evidence 201-1 East Pleas Crown 357--1 Chitty on Criminal Law 464. Admitting for the purpose of this case, and for this object we distinctly do so, that the law is, as laid down in the treatises on criminal evidence, we come to the inquiry how far the facts authorized the court to decide in favor of the admissibility of the dying declaration of Joseph Sutcliffe. in Timmins's house, Miller, another of the witnesss, heard him (to use his words)" mumble something like Murray or murder" but in consequence of the flow of blood from his mouth, his utterance was indistinct, and the witness could not distinctly understand which he said. Timmins who accompanied the unfortunate man also to the hospital does not remember any of these expressions, being as he says "hard of hearing," but remembers his requesting Miller to tell his wife "not to be uneasy, that he would stop at the hospital that night," He also asked Timmins "if he could get out that night," on which the latter told him he had better remain there that the frost might hurt him. From the testimony of Dr. Wistar, we learn, that it was twenty minutes after 8 o'clock, when Sutcliffe arrived at the hospital: that the powers of life were very low; the surface of his body cold, and his whole appearance indicating him to be in imminent danger. So prostrate was his system, that Dr. Wistar says he should not have regarded any thing he said, considering him incapable of mental action. He spoke but a few words after his arrival at the hospi tal, almost immediately sunk into a comatose and lethurgic state from which he never was roused and never spoke again, He died at five o'clock in the morning of the On the fatal night of the 8th of November, between 8th of November, and on examining the body, the scalp 7 and 8 o'clock, Sutcliffe was seated at his fireside to was found by Dr. Wistar to be considerably bruised on which he had but a short time before returned from the the left side; the scull fractured branching off in two labours of the day; supporting an infant child in his directions, one toward the left ear, the other towards arms in relief of his wife, who was preparing his hum- the forehead; a large clot of blood four inches in diame ble meal; while so engaged, some one knocked at the ter pressing on the brain, and about two teaspoonful's door, and Felix Murray, the defendant, entered, seated of water at the base of that organ. The left arm near himself and asked if the painter was in-(the deceased the elbow, severely bruised. Hannah Bradford who was by trade a painter.) Sutcliffe's wife answered in washed the body, says, that the left hip was bruised up the affirmative. He sat two or three minutes when the to the ribs, and that his legs were mortified on the in latch of the door was again lifted-Mrs. Sutcliffe asked side near the ankles. Elizabeth Sutcliffe, in her dehim if he had left his company out of doors-he made scription of the violence committed on her husband, no reply—almost instantly another person, to this mo- says, that he was first struck on the left side of the head ment unfortunately unknown, rushed into the room with the club, that Murray struck him at the same time armed with a club which she describes as looking "like across the head with the buckle end of the strap; that he a hickory stick, something like an axe handle, only thin- had received two blows from the club before she fled ner;" who instantly seized Sutcliffe by the throat, ex- from the room and he had not then fallen. In this state claiming "you are the damned son of a bitch," and of the evidence the Attorney General proposed inquir commencing beating Sutcliffe over the head,-Murraying what declarations Sutcliffe made as to the perpetrainstantly joined in the savage assault, striking the deceased with a leather strap such as is used by wheelbarrow-men, having at each end of it a buckle. The distressed woman begged them for God sake not to kill her husband, to which they made no answer, but continued beating him. She fled for assistance with the child in her arms, which her husband had handed to her when the defendant entered, and in passing out fell through an open cellar-way, from which she and her child were assisted by a female residing next door. She ran again back to her house, found the assailants gone and her hushand "creeping" towards her on his hands and feet, covered with blood. She raised him up and his first inquiry was for a doctor, which he repeated when Tudor and Robinson two neighbors came to the relief of this much abused family. It was proposed to take him to the hospital, to which he assented, and he was accordingly conducted there, with but little or any assistance. Robinson says, that when alarme! by the cries of murder, he entered Sutcliffe's house, Sutcliffe said to him "I am a murdered man, where shall I go”— that he then proposed taking him to the hospital, with which he was satisfied: that when he got near Christian street some one asked him what was the matter, when he again said he was a murdered man," that he was then bleeding much, and getting very weak. Elizabeth Jones, a witness for the commonwealth, testified that she saw Sutcliffe at the corner of 8th and Christian street, coming along, led by Robinson and Tudor, his 66 tors of this outrage during his progress to the Hospital, which was resisted by the prisoner's counsel, but permitted by the court. For this purpose Miller was recalled, who merely re-stated his former testimony, viz: that at Timmins's he heard Sutcliffe make use of the words "Murray or murder," but which he could not distinguish. Thomas Robinson states that Sutcliffe said that the man who took the lumber away was the man who beat him." Previous witnesses had proved that MURRAY and one HIGGINS had sometime before removed from the house occupied on the 4th of November, by Sutcliffe, some lumber, under circumstances which in another part of this judgment, it will be necessary to refer to Such was the entire sum of the declarations of Sutcliffe received in evidence in the cause. So far as respects those derived from Miler they amount, from their vague character to nothing; and those proved by Robinson are not of much more precision and efficacy. So decidedly was this impression produced on the Attorney General, that in his address to the jury he distinctly disclaimed their adequacy to establish the identity of Murray; and urged the jury, if they had not other testimony maintaining this important particular, independent of these declarations, to acquit the prisoner. These views were adopted by the court in their charge to the jury; and the prisoner's counsel in his argument on the facts treated them as insignificant;—regarding the com monwealth as having in this respect failed. Since the |