Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:The Ways of The Hour
.pdf
THE WAYS OF THE HOUR
and appear to be among the gayest of the gay, when they do
not know where to lay their heads at night. Large towns are
moral blotches, they say, on the face of the community, and
they conceal many things that will not bear the light. From
one of these large towns, it is to be presumed from her dress,
manners, education, amusements, and all belonging to her,
came Mary Monson, to ask an asylum in the dwelling of the
Goodwins. Gentlemen, why did she come? Had she heard of
the hoard of Mrs. Goodwin, and did she crave the possession
of the gold? These questions it will be your duty to answer in
your verdict. Should the reply be in the affirmative, you obtain,
at once, a direct clue to the motives for the murder.
“Among the collateral proof that will be offered are the following circumstances, to which I now ask your particular attention, in order that you may give to the testimony its proper
value. It will be shown that Mary Monson had a large sum in
gold in her possession, after the arson and murders, and consequently after the robbery, but no one know of her having any
before. It will be shown that she has money in abundance, scattering it right and left, as we suppose to procure her acquittal,
and this money we believe she took from the bureau of Mrs.
Goodwin how much, is not known. It is thought that the sum
was very large; the gold alone amounted to near a thousand
dollars, and two witnesses will testify to a still larger amount
in bank notes. The Goodwins talked of purchasing a farm, valued at five thousand dollars; and as they were known never
to run in debt, the fair inference is, that they must have had
at least that sum by them. A legacy was left Dorothy Goodwin
within the last six months, which we hear was very consider-
421
JAMES FENIMORE COOPER
able, and we hope to be able to put a witness on the stand who
will tell you all about it.
“But, gentlemen, a circumstance worthy of all attention in
an investigation like this, is connected with an answer to this
question Who is Mary Monson? What are her parentage, birthplace, occupation, and place of residence? Why did she come
to Biberry at all? In a word, what is her past history? Let this be
satisfactorily explained, and a great step is taken towards her
vindication from these most grave charges. Shall we have witnesses to character? No one will be happier to listen to them
than myself. My duty is far from pleasant. I sincerely hope the
prisoner will find lawful means to convince you of her innocence. There is not one within the walls of this building who
will hear such a verdict, if sustained by law and evidence, with
greater pleasure than it will be heard by me.”
After pursuing this vein some time longer, the worthy
functionary of the state showed a little of that cloven foot
which seems to grow on all, even to the cleanest heels, who
look to the popular voice for preferment. No matter who the
man is, rich or poor, young or old, foolish or wise, he bows
down before the idol of Numbers, and there worships. Votes
being the one thing wanted, must be bought by sacrifices on
the altar of conscience. Now it is by wild, and, half the time,
impracticable schemes of philanthropy, that while they seem
to work good to the majority, are quite likely to disregard the
rights of the minority; now they are flourishes against negro
slavery, or a revolution in favour of the oppressed inhabitants
of Crim – Tartary, of the real state of which country we are all
as ignorant as its inhabitants are ignorant of us; now, it’s an
422
THE WAYS OF THE HOUR
exemption law, to enable a man to escape from the payment
of his just debts, directly in the teeth of the sound policy, not
to say morality, that if a man owe he should be made to pay
as long as he has anything to do it with; now, it is a hymn in
praise of a liberty that the poet neither comprehends nor cares
to look into farther than may suit his own selfish patriotism;
and now, it is some other of the thousand modes adopted by
the designing to delude the masses and advance themselves
On this occasion the District Attorney was very cautious,
but he showed the cloven foot. He paid a passing tribute to
the god of Numbers, worshipped before the hierarchy of votes.
“Gentlemen,” he continued, “like myself, you are plain, unpretending citizens. Neither you, nor your wives and daughters,
speak in foreign tongues, or play on foreign instruments of
music. We have been brought up in republican simplicity, God
bless it! say we, could we ever meet with it, and lay no claims to
superiority of any sort. Our place is in the body of the nation,
and there we are content to remain. We shall pay no respect to
dress, accomplishments, foreign languages, or foreign music;
but, the evidence sustaining us, will show the world that the
law frowns as well on the great as on the little; on the pretending, as well as on the unpretending.”
As these grandiose sentiments were uttered, several of the
jurors half rose from their seats, in the eagerness to hear, and
looks of approbation passed from eye to eye. This was accepted
as good republican doctrine; no one there seeing, or feeling,
as taste and truth would have shown, that the real pretension
was on the side of an exaggerated self – esteem, that prompted
to resistance ere resistance was necessary, under the influence
423
JAMES FENIMORE COOPER
of, perhaps, the lowest passion of human nature we allude to
envy. With a little more in the same vein, the District Attorney
concluded his opening.
The great coolness, not to say indifference, with which
Mary Monson listened to this speech, was the subject of general comment among the members of the bar. At times she
had been attentive, occasionally betraying surprise; then indignation would just gleam in her remarkable eye; but, on the
whole, an uncommon calmness reigned in her demeanour. She
had prepared tablets for notes; and twice she wrote in them as
the District Attorney proceeded. This was when he adverted
to her past life, and when he commented on the Dutch coin.
While he was speaking of castes, flattering one set under the
veil of pretending humility, and undermining their opposites,
a look of quiet contempt was apparent in every feature of her
very expressive face.
“If it please the court,” said Dunscomb, rising in his deliberate way, “before the prosecution proceeds with its witnesses,
I could wish to appeal to the courtesy of the gentlemen on the
other side for a list of their names.”
“I believe we are not bound to furnish any such list,” answered Williams, quickly.
“Perhaps not bound exactly in law; but, it strikes me, bound
in justice. This is a trial for a life; the proceedings are instituted
by the State. The object is justice, not vengeance the protection
of society, through the agency of an impartial, though stern
justice. The State cannot wish to effect anything by surprise.
We are accused of murder and arson, with no other notice of
what is to be shown, or how anything is to be shown, than
424
THE WAYS OF THE HOUR
what is contained in the bill or complaint. Any one can see
how important it may be to us, to be apprised of the names
of the witnesses a little in advance, that we may inquire into
character and note probabilities. I do not insist on any right;
but I ask a favour that humanity sanctions.”
“If it please the court,” said Williams, “we have an important trust. I will here say that I impute nothing improper to
either of the prisoner’s counsel; but it is my duty to suggest
the necessity of our being cautious. A great deal of money has
been expended already in this case; and there is always danger
of witnesses being bought off. On behalf of my client, I protest
against the demand’s being complied with.”
“The court has no objection to the course asked by the prisoner’s counsel,” observed the judge, “but cannot direct it. The
State can never wish its officers to be harsh or exacting; but it
is their duty to be prudent. Mr. District Attorney, are you ready
with your evidence? Time is precious, sir.”
The testimony for the prosecution was now offered. We
shall merely advert to most of it, reserving our details for those
witnesses on whom the cause might be said to turn. Two very
decent – looking and well – behaved men, farmers who resided in the vicinity of Biberry, were put on the stand to establish the leading heads of the case. They had known Peter
and Dorothy Goodwin; had often stopped at the house; and
were familiarly acquainted with the old couple, as neighbours.
Remembered the firewas present at it, towards its close. Saw
the prisoner there; saw her descend, by a ladder; and assisted
in saving her effects. Several trunks, carpet – bags, bandboxes,
writing – desks, musical instruments, &c. &c. All were saved.
425
JAMES FENIMORE COOPER
“It seemed to them that they had been placed near the windows,
in a way to be handy.” After the fire, had never seen or heard
anything of the old man and his wife, unless two skeletons
that had been found were their skeletons. Supposed them to
be the skeletons of Peter Goodwin and his wife” Here the
remains were for the first time on that trial exposed to view.
“Those are the same skeletons, should say had no doubt of it;
they are about the size of the old couple. The husband was
short; the wife tall. Little or no difference in their height. Had
never seen the stocking or the gold; but had heard a good deal
of talk of them, having lived near neighbours to the Goodwins
five – and – twenty years.”
Dunscomb conducted the cross – examination. He was
close, discriminating, and judicious. Separating the hearsay
and gossip from the facts known, he at once threw the former
to the winds, as matter not to be received by the jury. We shall
give a few of his questions and their answers that have a bearing on the more material points of the trial.
“I understand you to say, witness, that you knew both Peter Goodwin and his wife?” “I did I knew them well saw them
almost every day of my life.”
“For how long a time?”
“This many a day. For five – and – twenty years, or a little
more.”
“Will you say that you have been in the habit of seeing
Peter Goodwin and his wife daily, or almost daily, for five –
and – twenty years?”
“If not right down daily, quite often; as often as once or
twice a week, certainly.”
426
THE WAYS OF THE HOUR
“Is this material, Mr. Dunscomb?” inquired the judge. “The
time of the court is very precious.”
“It is material, your honour, as showing the looseness with
which witnesses testify; and as serving to caution the jury how
they receive their evidence. The opening of the prosecution
shows us that if the charge is to be made out at all against
the prisoner, it is to be made out on purely circumstantial evidence. It is not pretended that any one saw Mary Monson kill
the Goodwins; but the crime is to be inferred from a series of
collateral facts, that will be laid before the court and jury. I
think your honour will see how important it is, under the circumstances. to analyze the testimony, even on points that may
not seem to bear directly on the imputed crimes. If a witness
testify loosely, the jury ought to be made to see it. I have a life
to defend, your honour will remember.”
“Proceed, sir; the court will grant you the widest latitude.”
“You now say, as often as once or twice a week, witness; on
reflection, will you swear to even that?” “Well, if not twice, I
am sure I can say once.”
Dunscomb was satisfied with this answer, which went to
show that the witness could reply a little at random, and was
not always certain of his facts, when pressed.
“Are you certain that Dorothy Goodwin is dead?”
“I suppose I am as certain as any of the neighbours.”
“That is not an answer to my question. Will you, and do you
swear on your oath, that Peter Goodwin, the person named in
the indictment, is actually dead?”
“I’ll swear that I think so.”
427
JAMES FENIMORE COOPER
“That is not what I want. You see those skeletons will you
say, on your oath, that you know them to be the skeletons of
Peter and Dorothy Goodwin?”
“I’ll swear that I believe it.”
“That does not meet the question. Do you know it?”
“How can I know it? I’m not a doctor, or a surgeon. No, I do
not absolutely know it. Still, I believe that one is the skeleton
of Peter Goodwin, and the other the skeleton of his wife.”
“Which do you suppose to be the skeleton of Peter Goodwin?”
This question puzzled the witness not a little. To the ordinary eye, there was scarcely any difference in the appearance of
these sad remains; though one skeleton had been ascertained
by actual measurement to be about an inch and a half longer
than the other. This fact was known to all in Biberry; but it was
not easy to say which was which, at a glance. The witness took
the safe course, therefore, of putting his opinion altogether on
a different ground.
“I do not pretend to tell one from the other,” was the answer. “What I know of my own knowledge is this, and this
only. I knew Peter and Dorothy Goodwin; knew the house
they lived in; know that the house has been burnt down, and
that the old folks are not about their old ha’nts. The skeletons
I never saw until they were moved from the place where they
tell me they were found; for I was busy helping to get the articles saved under cover.”
“Then you do not pretend to know which skeleton is that
of a man, or which that of a woman?”
428
THE WAYS OF THE HOUR
This question was ingeniously put, and had the effect to
make all the succeeding witnesses shy on this point; for it created a belief that there was a difference that might be recognized by those who are skilled in such matters. The witness assented to the view of Dunscomb; and having been so far sifted
as to show he knew no more than all the rest of the neighbours, he was suffered to quit the stand. The result was that
very little was actually established by means of this testimony.
It was evident that the jury was now on the alert, and not disposed to receive all that was said as gospel.
The next point was to make out all the known facts of the
fire, and of the finding of the skeletons. The two witnesses just
examined had seen the close of the fire, had heard of the skeletons, but had said very little more to the purpose. Dunscomb
thought it might be well to throw in a hint to this effect in the
present state of the case, as he now did by remarking
“I trust that the District Attorney will see precisely where
he stands. All that has yet been shown by legal proof are the
facts that there were such persons as Peter and Dorothy Goodwin; facts we are not at all disposed to deny”
“And that they have not appeared in the flesh since the
night of the fire?” put in Williams. “Not to the witnesses; but,
to how many others, does not appear.”
“Does the learned counsel mean to set up the defence that
Goodwin and his wife are not dead?”
“It is for the prosecution to show the contrary affirmatively. If it be so, it is fair to presume they can do it. All I now
contend for, is the fact that we have no proof as yet that either
is dead. We have proof that the house was burnt; but we are
429
JAMES FENIMORE COOPER
now traversing an indictment for murder, and not that for arson. As yet, it strikes me, therefore, nothing material has been
shown.”
“It is certainly material, Mr. Dunscomb, that there should
have been such persons as the Goodwins, and that they have
disappeared since the night of the fire; and this much is proved,
unless you impeach the witnesses,” observed the judge.
“Well, sir, that much we are not disposed to deny. There
were such persons as the Goodwins, and they have disappeared
from the neighbourhood. We believe that much ourselves.”
“Crier, call Peter Bacon.”
Bacon came forward, dressed in an entire new suit of
clothes, and appearing much more respectable than was his
wont. This man’s testimony was almost word for word as it has
already been given in the coroner’s inquest. He established the
facts of the fire, about which there could be no prudent contention indeed, and of the finding of the skeletons; for he had
been one of those who aided in first searching the ruins for
the remains. This man told his story in an extremely vulgar
dialect, as we have had already occasion to show; but in a very
clear, distinct manner. He meant to tell the truth, and succeeded reasonably well; for it does not occur to all who have
the same upright intentions to effect their purposes as well
as he did himself. Dunscomb’s cross – examination was very
brief; for he perceived it was useless to attempt to deny what
had been thus proved.
“Jane Pope” called out the District Attorney “Is Mrs. Jane
Pope in court?”
430
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]