• His Hon. MR. JUSTICE BENSON,
• His Hon. RICHARD VARICK, ESQ. Mayor,
• His Hon. RICHARD HARRISON, ESQ. Recorder,
• SELAH STRONG, ESQ. Alderman,

The People, vs. Richard D. Croucher.

• CADWALLADER D. COLDEN, ESQ. Attorney Gen.
• Councel for Prisoner.
  • BROCKHOLST LIVINGSTON, Esq.
  • WASHINGTON MORTON, Esq.

• John Downing,
• William Maxwell,
• Stephen Ludlum,
• Isaac Hicks,
• John Saunders,
• Peter Elting, Jun.
• Thomas Buckley,
• Aaron Judah,
• John Goodeve,
• James Davidson,
• William Cunningham,
• Jacob Rickets.

Gentlemen of the Jury,

THE prisoner at the bar is charged as you may have heard read in the indictment, with the crime of Rape. He who has carnal knowledge of a woman against her consent, is guilty of a Rape. Gentlemen, it may be ma­terial to remark to you, and that you should remember it, that if the act is committed even with her consent, and such consent is extorted from her through fear, or by duress, it is the same thing in the eye of law as if done against her will.

The circumstances of this case are too shocking to the ear of modesty, to be repeated to you oftener or more minutely than is absolutely necessary. It will be the painful task of the child upon whom the injury has been committed, a young girl about thirteen years of age, to detail them to you. It will be sufficient for me at present to mention to you generally, that &c.—

Margaret Miller, sworn. The witness appearing to be below years of puberty, the court enquired her age, [Page 5] which was said to be 13. After recovering a little from her embarrassment, and wiping away the tears, which ran fast down her cheeks for some time, she went on, and in answer to questions which were put to her, she said;

Mr. Croucher came to my ^*mothers, Mrs. Stackha­vers, I dont know how long ago, to sell some stockings —he used to come every day. One night he asked my mamma, if she would let me go and scrub his room for him at Mr. Rings, where he lived, for he said there was a lady and gentleman coming to look at some linens he had. She said at first, she did not know whether I might or not, but at last she consented. He said he wanted me to go that night, so that I might be there very early in the morning, and that I might sleep with a servant girl in the house if I would go. So I went with him to Mr. Rings house in Greenwich street, al­most by Rhinelanders brew house. He told me to go up stairs to a room in the third story, and he would fol­low; it was about 9 o'clock—I heard the clock strike 8 some time before.

I went up and he followed and took me thro' a dark entry into a room in the third story. He told me the servant girl would come and sleep with me, and then he locked the door, and took out the key and went down. After a little time he came back and locked the door inside; then he took me and undressed me and put me on the bed; and then he undressed himself, and came to bed to me. (Here the witness burst into tears, and was unable to proceed; but being told it was abso­lutely necessary she should tell what followed) she said,

He used force—he did what he would, and hurt me very much, so much that I could hardly get home the [Page 6] next morning. After he had done, he fell asleep, and I got up and sat upon some wood till I could see so as to find the door.

Quest. by the Attorney General. Did you not cry out and make a noise when he hurt you?

Ans. At first I screamed, but he said if I did not hold my tongue, he would put me out of the way. I cried all the time, but not loud, I was afraid to.

Quest. Did you ever tell Mrs. Stackhaver of this, or any body else?

Ans. I did not then, I was afraid.—He used to visit our house every day.

Quest. How long did you feel the effects of the injury he did you?

Ans. About a fortnight.

Quest. When was it that Croucher and Mrs. Stackha­ver were married? They were married, were they not?

Ans. They were married the Sunday night before Weeks's trial.

Quest. How long is it since you mentioned this affair, and how came you to mention it?

Ans. He told Mrs. Stackhaver himself of it.

Quest. How came he to do that?

Ans. He got angry with me one day, and he told Mrs. Stackhaver, that if she would turn me away, he would tell her something about me—this was when I was at school.

Quest. Then you did not hear it?

Ans. When I came home he told her so again before me, and he told her he had lain with me with my con­sent.

Quest. Did you consent in any manner, or at any time?

Ans. No sir, it was without my consent.

[Page 7] Quest. How came you at the Police Office, on what account did you go there?

Ans. I was sent for to give evidence about it; which Mrs. Stackhaver had told of, and they sent for me, and I went down.

Quest. Did Croucher ever treat you ill after this affair?

Ans. After they were married he whipped me, and turned me out of doors. [ Crying very much.]

Quest. Was there not a great deal of quarrelling be­tween Croucher and his wife?

Ans. Yes sir, soon after they were married.

Quest. How long have you lived with Mrs. Stack­haver?

Ans. Two years.

Quest. Has she always treated you kindly?

Ans. Yes sir, very kindly till he came.

Quest. Have you been accustomed to go out o'nights?

Ans. No sir, never, never.

Quest. You say she always treated you well till he came; did she not afterwards?

Ans. He wanted her to turn me out of doors, and she wanted to keep me.

Quest. Did he turn you out?

Ans. Yes sir, he turned me out three times.

Quest. How did you get out of the room that night after he had to do with you?

Ans. I sat on the wood till day light, and then I found the key on the mantle piece, and unlocked the door and got out. I could hardly get home I was so hurt.

Quest. Did your mother perceive any thing ailed you?

Ans. Yes sir, she asked me what was the matter, but I was afraid to tell for fear of Mr. Croucher, but he told of it himself and he said he had got a disorder of me.

Here the Attorney General said he should rest, pre­suming [Page 8] the fact was sufficiently proved if the jury be­lieved the witness. The court however said they con­ceived the evidence had not yet gone far enough, and that it was absolutely necessary that the witness should be, as to the fact, explicit. He then put the question to the witness in precise terms, whether she was certain that the prisoner, when he had her on the bed, had committed the crime for which he was now on trial? To which she answered in the affirmative.

Cross-Examined.

Quest. How long do you think you lay on the bed with the prisoner?

Ans. I don't know.

Quest. Did he go to sleep?

Ans. Yes sir.

Quest. Did you get up when you thought him asleep?

Ans. I got up and sat upon the wood, I could not get out.

Quest. Did you go to school next day?

Ans. No sir, I was so lame I could not go, I lay o'bed.

Quest. Did you make any excuse for not going?

Ans. I don't remember.

Quest. How old are you?

Ans. Fourteen the 7th day of next August.

Quest. Were you ever turned out of doors by Mrs. Stackhaver before this happened?

Ans. No sir.

Quest. Do you remember carrying home a bag of clothes from Ring's the next morning?

Ans. I do not know sir, I don't remember it.

Quest. Did he lock you in the first time he went down?

Ans. Yes sir.

Quest. Did you cry?

[Page 9] Ans. Yes sir; I thought he was a going to lock me up and leave me there.

Quest. How long did he remain below before he re­turned?

Ans. Not long.

Quest. Has not Mrs. Stackhaver threatened to turn you out of doors if you did not complain of him?

Ans. No sir.

Quest. Did Croucher afterwards often quarrel with you and treat you ill?

Ans. Yes sir.

Quest. by Attorney General. Was the injury repeated upon you more than once that night?

Ans. Yes sir, three times.

Quest. by Prisoner's Counsel. Did he ever repeat it at any other time?

Ans. Once when Mrs. Stackhaver was sick, he want­ed to, but I went out of doors and, would not let him.

Quest. Do you remember ever carrying him any clothes from Ring's?

Ans. No sir, never; he sent me once there for wine after I got well.

Quest. Did not Mrs. Stackhaver turn you away in consequence of this affair?

Ans. Yes, she told me I must get some other place, and I went to Mr. Houston's, after that Mrs. Thomp­son took care of me.

Abiel Brown, sworn. I hire a tenement of Croucher, the prisoner, joining where he now lives since he was married. A little after I moved in, on the first of May la [...], I perceived there was a disagreement between him and his wife, which I was very sorry for, and I used frequently to mention it to them. I used to see this [Page 10] little girl there, and I confess I supposed her in fault, and the occasion, for I used to hear the wife speak to her in Dutch sometimes, and then to him in English. I saw him turn her out of doors frequently. One day the old lady desired me to step in and look at some marks of blows on her shoulder. One morning he came into my shop and said there never was such a difficulty as he had, and the girl was the cause, she was a bad girl and should not stay in the house. He said she was a whore. I told him it seemed impossible for a child of her age and size to be so. He said she was, and he could prove it. She had once before he was married had the impu­dence to ask him one night to go home and sleep with her. I asked him if he came to this house. He said no, she went with him. He said she slept with him, but he did not effect his purpose because she was so young.

Repeat that, sir.

He said he did not accomplish the business, she was so young, but that she slept with him all night.

Pray, sir, did he intimate in plain terms that he tried? See if you cannot remember the words he made use of.

As near as I can remember he said, finding her so young he did not accomplish the business, but she was a whore, and he could prove it by other people. I have heard him tell the old woman that she was a whore, and she should not stay in the house.

Have you observed the behaviour of this girl, sir, and what was her character?

I have seen her about house, and seen her going to school and to meeting, and I never saw any thing but what was very well in her—I took her to be a modest, inoffensive girl.

[Page 11] Quest. Have you not observed something like a con­stant terror in her at the sight of Croucher?

Ans. She would endeavour to get out of his way into another part of the house, and I have often seen her a crying. One night he called me in, and he drove her up stairs. I have seen her in the gangway crying to herself for a considerable time. I have always thought she appeared very much afraid of him. If she met him when she was going into the house, she would turn and go in another way, through my entry.

The Council for the prisoner declined any cross-exa­mination.

[Being asked if she had not frequently overheard conversation between Croucher and his wife, concerning the girl, she said] I have—quite lately I heard Croucher say he did not like her, and she should not stay in the house; she was a very bad girl, and he was not going to keep a bad girl in the house; he was sure he said that she was a bad girl, he could prove it, he knew it himself. Then he said she was a whore, and he could prove it, he had lain with her one night him­self. He said he had heard that she was a bad girl, and he was determined to know if it was so, and therefore he had lain with her one night, and was satisfied it was so.

Quest. Did you understand Ma'am from what he said that he had had a connection with her?

Ans. Yes, I did.

Quest. That he had carnally known her?

Ans. Yes sir.

Here the Attorney General rested the prosecution.

Gentlemen of the Jury,

DELICATE and difficult of decision as issues of this kind ever must be, it is a subject of congratulation to you gentlemen, that this, from the circumstances alrea­dy detailed in evidence, is susceptible of an easy and safe determination, and of a determination favorable to the prisoner. I state this to be true, from a comparison of the testimony actually given on the part of the peo­ple, with what ought to have been produced to satisfy the caution with which the law watches over the life of man (or what is the same thing, his liberty forever) when put in jeopardy by accusations of this kind.

This caution indeed pervades the whole system of our jurisprudence in degrees necessary to the exigencies of the case; and it seems, as if in cases of this kind, the law has deemed no exertion of care and watchful­ness too great, no precision too accurate, no accuracy too nice, and unless all these ramparts with which it hedges in the welfare of the citizen be broken down, it does not permit one to fall a victim.

The prisoner, then gentlemen, will in his defence in­sist, first, That from the case as it now stands before you from the evidence on the part of the prosecutor, he ought to be acquitted. Secondly, he will strengthen this obligation upon you to acquit, by evidence offered on his part. He will shew you the terms upon which the girl and himself were, shortly prior to the time when this offence is said to have been committed. He will describe to you the place (so material here) where this enormity is said to have been perpetrated, and from cir­cumstances attending it, will lead you to suspect the part of the story told by the prosecutrix in relation to the outcries. He will lastly, gentlemen, offer to you [Page 13] such law as shall be deemed applicable to his case, which under the direction of the court will guide you in your decision. And here my duty ends. To explain and enforce these different points requires the experi­ence and talents of the council, who will follow me, and with whom after reading the law referred to, I shall leave the cause.

He then read several passages from Hales, P. C. and 4 Black. Com. and concluded in the words of Hale, "I only mention these instances that we may be the more cautious upon trials of offences of this nature, wherein Court and Jury may with so much ease be im­posed upon, without great care and vigilance. The se­riousness of the offence many times transporting the judge and jury, with so much indignation, that they are hastily carried to the conviction of the person accused thereof, by the confident testimony sometimes of malici­ous and false witnesses,"

The deposition of George Ricker, taken by consent, he being sick, was then read to the court and jury, and is as follows:

Richard Van Alstine, sworn.

Quest. Did you not board in the house with Croucher when this affair hap­pened?

Ans. I boarded in Mr. Rings house, from some time in January last, till the 30th of April. I lodged in the fourth story at first, and Croucher, the prisoner in the third. I remember moving down into the third story sometime before Week's trial, but I cant say exactly how long, where I always slept during the whole time I staid afterwards, without sleeping away one night.

Quest. by prisoner's council. Did you ever hear any noise in Croucher's room, which you say was next to your's, during the time you slept there, such as screams or cries of a woman?

Ans. I never did.

Quest. Could you not easily hear any little noise in his room?

Ans. I could hear him move chairs or any thing of the kind about the room.

Cross-Examined.

Quest. What is your usual hour of going to bed?

Ans. 10 o'clock or 11, from 10 to 11.

Quest. Did you make a practice of going to your room before your bed hour?

Ans. No, I did not.

Quest. Do you ever go to bed before 9 o'clock?

Ans. Not often I don't, I may have done so, I dare say I have sometimes.

[Page 15]The Attorney General read from Hawkins a passage that "Offences of this nature are no way mitigated by showing that the woman at last consented to the vio­lence, if such her consent was forced by fear of death or of duress. Nor is it any excuse that she consented after the fact."

The testimony being closed, Mr. Livingston addres­sed the Jury in behalf of his client.

Gentlemen of the Jury,

NO crime excites greater abhorrence or indignation, than the one with which the prisoner stands charged. When a female who is entitled to our protection, is se­duced or violated, there is an universal disposition in our sex to avenge the injury. And when an infant of tender age falls a sacrifice to the arts of a man of the prisoner's appearance, that disposition becomes almost incontroulable. But however unpromising appearances may be, the prisoner feels a perfect assurance, that he will meet with no obstacle to a fair and impartial trial, from improper prejudice or misplaced resentment.

Whatever, gentlemen, may have been the conduct of the prisoner to this young girl, or however unjustifia­ble, yet it is difficult to believe that it could have amounted to the crime for which he is now on trial. If any thing of an improper nature has passed between them, I am inclined to believe it has been with her con­sent. The passions may be as warm in a girl of her age as in one of more advanced years, and with very little enticement she may have consented to become his mistress. If so, the law acquits him, for when consent is given after ten years of age, a rape cannot exist. The moment a charge of this kind is made, every tongue is busy, and if the accused has an unlucky appearance or an unfortunate countenance, especially too if the girl [Page 16] is young, every one is ready to propagate the calumny, till at last what in contemplation of law may be inno­cent, is magnified into a crime of the first enormity, and it is almost impossible for the party to encounter with success the torrent of prejudice which threatens to overwhelm him. Such however is the wisdom of our laws, and such the care with which juries are selected, that a man is almost sure, if innocent, of being acquit­ted by his peers.

I stand not here, gentlemen, to vindicate Croucher from the imputation of improper conduct towards this girl; it is, I will readily admit, unjustifiable and highly criminal; but the question and the only one now be­fore you is, whether he is guilty of the crime alledged against him. You perceive the disadvantages under which the prisoner labors. The party injured, is her­self the principal witness against him, and such is the nature of the transaction, that it cannot be expected he can prove the particulars of his intimacy with her, or that it was with her consent. But her testimony is surely to be received with great allowance. When once it is known that a girl has had a criminal connection with a man, there is instantly a strong bias in her own mind and in those of her relations, that it should be proved to have been done by violence. So strong indeed is the temptation to give it this colour, that it is hardly possi­ble for a girl so situated to tell the truth. If it had been agreed on between Croucher and the girl that an inti­macy of this kind should take place, and as her own house was not convenient, that their meeting should be at his chamber; and if it had been so arranged, that he should ask her mother's permission for her going there under some pretence or other; and if in pursuance of this plan every thing had taken place agreeable to their wish­es, [Page 17] do you believe she would have disclosed all those cir­cumstances? If this was not so, if this story be not con­trived, would she not when smarting under the wounds she received, have at least communicated it to her mo­ther, and taken her advice notwithstanding all the threats which it is now said were made use of? It will be con­tended that she tells a consistent story; but after what had happened, some story of the kind was necessary, and certainly not very difficult to be fabricated at her leisure. To discredit her, there is the very strong cir­cumstance of her having concealed it for such a length of time. This is attempted to be accounted for, but let it be remembered, it is accounted for only by herself, and not by any other witness or any other circumstance. Indeed the disclosure is never made by her at all; but extraordinary to relate, it comes out first from Croucher himself. Now, gentlemen, a man who appears rather shrewd and cunning than otherwise, and who cannot be so ignorant of law as not to know what constitutes a Rape and its certain consequences, tells her mother him­self, in the presence of Mrs. Brown, that he had had this connection with her! Again, you do not find that she made any outcry or called for assistance, but she pretends she was deterred by fear and threats. I admit that if there has been force, or if he told her when he lay her on the bed, that if she made a noise he would blow her brains out, this would constitute such a de­gree of violence as to justify her not making a noise. It is very easy to contrive a story of this kind, but the truth is, every girl on these occasions will find an ex­cuse for not crying out. It is in evidence that after the fact he treated her with great severity, and was ever quarrelling with her mother for not turning her out of [Page 18] doors. What inference are we to draw from this? Be­ing no longer in his possession or power, she would be at liberty to make what complaint she pleased, and af­ter being once made to a magistrate it would be no lon­ger in his power to injure her. Is this conduct at all re­concilable with his guilt and his wish to conceal it? Besides the cases read to you I will mention one, which must be within the recollection of you all. I allude to the case of Mr. Bedlow. He was brought to a trial in this very Hall on a similar charge; the testimony there was far more satisfactory than it is here. The character of the principal witness, the girl, was supported as ir­reproachable, and circumstantial testimony was added in corroboration. The jury were upon the point of con­viction; he escaped with great difficulty; and because he did escape, the City was in a tumult; the house where the crime was supposed to have been perpetra­ted, was levelled to the ground; even the houses of the counsel who defended him were surrounded and threat­ened with destruction, so that the magistrates of the city were obliged to interfere.—The evidence to convict in that case was far stronger than here, and yet the girl herself has since that time, by a voluntary affidavit, pub­lished to the world that Mr. Bedlow was innocent, and that she was suborned. How shocking is it to remem­ber that he was on the point of being sacrificed, for it was then death, to a plausible perjury? In the present case the character of the girl has not been supported at all, nor I presume can it be. But it is said, her youth renders it impossible she should have been a lewd girl. Who that is acquainted with the dissolute morals of our city does not know that females are many of them to be found living in a state of open prostitution at the early ages of 12 and 13 years? Such in truth is the little care [Page 19] which we take of our youth, and such our ill-judged mode of educating the sexes together in our public schools, that it would not cause much wonder to see young girls turned upon the town as young as this wit­ness. It is in evidence, that the girl was seen, about ten days before the crime is alledged to have been com­mitted, in a very improper and indecent situation with Croucher. I am not defending the conduct of that man. I will suppose he is guilty of having most shamefully seduced and ruined the girl, but the moment seduction is put upon the same footing and confounded with Rape, consequences the most dreadful are to be apprehended. What is more common than for young men at a certain age to single out some female, to whom they pay their temporary addresses, merely with a view of present gratification. Suppose a case of this sort, and that after continuing upon an amicable footing for some time, a quarrel ensues, a prosecution is set on foot, the girl swears that all was done without her consent, her cha­racter is supported as formerly virtuous, and although evidence may be offered of the terms of extreme inti­macy on which they have long been, yet confounding seduction with Rape, he is to be found guilty of the lat­ter crime and cut off from society for life.

In the present case there is reason to believe the pro­secution originates in motives of a very unjustifiable na­ture. The girl does not come forward at first on her own account, but to oblige her mother. Her mother thought this a short way of getting rid of a disagreeable husband. There are strong grounds to believe this has been the case. A prosecution originating in such mo­tives and at so late a day, ought to be viewed with a very suspicious eye. The transaction took place in March, and we hear nothing of it during that month, [Page 20] during all April, during all May, nor till the middle of June. This delay is not accounted for, and it cannot be to any one's satisfaction. If you once admit of the excuse now given, that this concealment was owing to dread of the prisoner, you put an excuse into the mouth of every witness who may chuse to appear and com­mence a similar prosecution from personal motives of revenge. No, you are bound to make a resolute stand, and to say, the evidence is unsatisfactory, we cannot hear it, it is your own fault if an injury has been done you, that you did not make your complaint in season, we will not, we cannot listen to it at this time.

I need hardly tell you, that attempts will be made to prejudice you against the prisoner, as being a man of bad character. Gentlemen, it is not an unfortunate phy­siognomy that ought to supply the place of evidence: I have a right to demand the same evidence here as in every other case. The girl is young and her appear­ance before you rather interesting. Your feelings no doubt have been shocked at the tale she has told, but that shock once passed, you ought to demand other evidence to justify you in convicting of a Rape. I hope no one will be found guilty of so detestable a crime up­on so feeble testimony: I never knew of one, and it is to be hoped there never will be one.

Gentlemen of the Jury,

I CANNOT deny, gentlemen, that this cause has excited much of the public curiosity, and probably there may be reason to fear, that such prejudices are abroad as the Counsel for the prisoner has suggested.

I hope, however, that you will be able to divest yourselves of every thing which may influence your de­cision, [Page 21] that is foreign from the testimony that has been offered to you. It is no wonder that the gentleman should be under the dread of such prejudices, when he finds himself under the necessity of admitting that his client has at least been guilty of the most criminal se­duction.

Two authorities have been read to shew you that in the course of some centuries, two cases have occurred in which the defendants were convicted, when it after­wards appeared that probably they were innocent.— The authorities apply no more to this case than they would to any other of the same nature; and if the rea­soning which you have heard is just, it amounts to this: That because these cases have occurred, because two persons have been innocently convicted, all who thence­forward are accused of this crime must be deemed in­nocent.

It is admitted, that if the child who is the principal witness is to be believed, that then you must convict the prisoner. But the gentleman says that she is un­worthy of credit, because no witnesses are brought to support her character. What does this require of us? That we should bring witnesses to prove that this infant was not lustful in her cradle!—We have relied upon the natural presumption, that a child of her age could not have any wanton desires. If there are extraordi­nary instances of so early a birth of the passions, and this child is one of them, why has not the prisoner brought forward witnesses to prove that she was so?— He has long lived in the same house with her; he is ac­quainted with her intimates and connections; why has be not produced some of these to shew you that nature had in this child so extraordinarily departed from her common rules?

[Page 22]It appears that the prisoner and the woman he now calls his wife, almost from the instant of their marriage, have lived in perpetual discord; and it is suggested that this may be a scheme of the woman to rid herself of a man whom she finds the destroyer of her happiness.

But if the wife has really intended to suborn the child for such a purpose, her conduct has been very incon­sistent with her design; for you find that the moment she discovered that the prisoner had had connection with the girl, the unfortunate child is abandoned, is turned out of doors, and ever since then has lived, and is at this moment living with persons who are entire strangers to all the parties.

But a more serious attack is made on the credit of the witness, from the circumstances of which I apprized you at the opening of this cause. No cries of resistance have been heard, and more than two months elapsed before she complained to any one. Upon these points the gentlemen have read law to you, and seem to insi­nuate that these circumstances are conclusive against her testimony—but this is not so. The books only caution you against convicting when the testimony is liable to those objections. You are not to convict un­less they are satisfactorily accounted for.

The girl finding this man paying his addresses to her mother, already looks upon him as her father. With­out hesitation she agrees to go to his lodgings to sleep with a girl in the house—she is seduced into his room —the moment he leaves her and locks her in, she be­gins to cry, she knows not wherefore—she is afraid, she knows not of what. When he returns he undresses and begins to treat her with violence—she calls for help— then he threatens to murder her if she does not desist, or if she ever makes a discovery of his guilt. " Loose, [Page 23] unbuttoned and ready for violation," with a diabolical countenance rendered ghastly by infernal lust, he lays his merciless hands upon her. Is it wonderful that such threats at such a time from such a person should have suppressed her cries? Nay, must we not believe that they suspended her faculties? For it is hardly pos­sible to suppose that nature, whilst it retained its ordi­nary powers, could silently endure her mere corporal sufferings. She was almost torn asunder. For days she could not walk;—for weeks she did not recover the wounds she received.

But two months and more elapsed before she com­plained.—In answer to this objection let it first be re­collected, that during all this time she was living with the prisoner. Let his conduct to her be remembered; that he was forever beating her—turning her out of the house—driving her from her bed—always loading her with the most reproachful language. By such conduct he excited her fears to that degree, that as the witness herself says, she could not cast her eyes upon him with­out feeling terrified.—Let it also be remembered, that she could never forget his threats to murder her if she was not silent. It is worth remarking, that a trial for murder which lately took place in this City, made a strong impression on the mind of this child. She does not even remember when any of the circumstances she has mentioned occurred, otherwise than as it was pre­vious or subsequent to that trial. She knew that the accusation there was, that a woman had been cruelly murdered. She had learned the particulars of that trial from the prisoner. It is natural to believe, that while this dreadful story was fresh on her young mind, the threats of the prisoner to put her out of the way, which as she says she understood to be a threat to murder her [Page 24] if she was not silent, must have had a greater influence than they would have had at any other time. Thus may we account for her concealment, which can no longer be considered as a circumstance against her cre­dit. She probably never would have been prevailed upon to make the disclosure, had not he himself forced it from her.

But the circumstances under which the guilt of the prisoner was first developed, are inconsistent with his guilt, and strongly opposed to the credit of the witness. Let us first call to our recollection what these circum­stances were. The quarrels between the prisoner and his wife were generally contests about the girl—the wo­man taking the child's part when she was abused—the prisoner always insisting that she should be turned away—the woman objecting, that she was an orphan whom she had adopted, who had long lived with her, and that she should not be cast off—to make her odious in the eyes of her protectress, he says that she had prosti­tuted herself to him—the girl hears this, and in order to vindicate herself exposes all the villany of the prisoner. In one of these quarrels the prisoner proceeds to beat his wife—she goes to the police-office to make her com­plaint on that subject, and there, as a mere incident, re­lates what has happened to the girl—in consequence of this the magistrates send for the girl—and thus, gentle­men, this cause has been brought before you.

It appears to the counsel for the prisoner that his making this declaration himself renders his guilt incre­dible. Let us remark, though, to whom this confession is made. Is it to any one that could bring him to pu­nishment? No, it is to his wife. He has been repre­sented to you as a man of some legal knowledge. We may then well suppose that he knew his wife could no [...] [Page 25] and perhaps he also thought that she dare not appear as a witness against him.

His conduct to the girl also seems to his advocates to be inconsistent with the possibility of his guilt. Whilst she was living with them it is said he had her in his power, and that he might even have murdered her without fear of detection.—But not so, gentlemen. Is it not at least as reasonable to say that he could not have committed such a crime whilst she was under the eyes of her protectress. It is in evidence, that he ac­tually threatened to murder her, and it may therefore be, that all his violence towards her was to drive her from home, that he thus might have a better opportu­nity of executing with security his threat of silencing her forever.

It has been said, that a jury cannot be justifiable in pronouncing a verdict against the prisoner in such a case, unless the testimony of the party ravished is cor­roborated by other witnesses.—Let us take this to be the law, and enquire how it applies to this case.

When you know that the prisoner has boasted that he made this child a whore.—When we have heard his confession that he has had her in his bed.—When you know that he has told of the difficulty with which he obtained his [...]fernal gratification, can you say that you have no corroborative testimony?—Is not every allega­tion of the child against the prisoner proved to you by two witnesses altogether credible, except indeed as to the consent? And as to this point you are to be sure, as I believe in every case of the same sort a jury must be, under the [...] of relying on the testimony of the girl—but even that is not uncorroborated. Her age— her size—her sufferings—her appearance before you—her tears here▪ the very appearance of the prisoner, [...] [Page 26] forbid you to believe that she could ever have consent­ed to his embraces.

It is impossible, gentlemen, to manage a cause like this without having one's feelings excited. Supposing myself the advocate of an unfortunate innocent infant, I may have been betrayed into some warmth of expres­sion; but I hope I have said nothing that the testimony will not warrant, or that will have an undue influence on your minds.—I have no zeal for the conviction of the prisoner.—If you say he is not guilty, I am bound to believe him so; and if he is innocent, I pray to GOD that you may not CONVICT HIM.

The Recorder then charged the Jury.

Gentlemen of the Jury,

THE prisoner at the bar stands indicted for the commission of a Rape upon Margaret Miller. This crime, from the very nature of it, is apt to excite indignation in every breast, and when per­petrated on an infant of this age, that indignation be­comes greater. It is, however, your duty to divest yourselves of all warmth and all prejudice, and to exercise your judgment upon this case in the most temperate manner. If it shall appear to you that the girl, young and inexperienced as she may be, yielded her consent, it is no Rape, and you must pronounce the prisoner not guilty, however criminal in the eye of mo­rality his conduct may be. The whole question will, I think, depend upon the credit which is to be given to her; if she is to be believed there cannot be a doubt as to the prisoner's guilt.

It is evident that there has been a conne [...] between them, and the single question that [...] whether it was against her consent. It is a [...] [Page 27] that deserves your consideration, that a very long time elapsed after the commission of the fact before she made any disclosure, and this, unless it can be satisfac­torily accounted for, must undoubtedly detract much from her credibility. She attributes it to the terror which originally possessed her mind, and which she says continued as long as he frequented the house of the person by whom she was adopted. There is another circumstance too which, if believed, is greatly against her credibility. It is the fact disclosed in George Ric­ker's affidavit, as to the situation in which he says he saw her with the prisoner. Against this, however, may be set her extreme youth, and the character given her by another witness, "that she is a modest, virtuous, and inoffensive girl▪"

The court cannot with propriety charge you, gentle­men, whether you ought or ought not to give credit to the principal witness, that is certainly your province.

If upon the whole you shall think her worthy of cre­dibility, you must say the prisoner at the bar is Guilty; if otherwise, you are bound to acquit him.

The Jury then withdrew, and returned in about four minutes with a verdict—GUILTY.