»» > •   >



:>> >
-» y >. >■.
> > > >I
> > > > e

»~>	>	~> > ^-^^HS	Wf3\
5>>	>	i» -*m	
>»> >	■>	'» > _* !^H	
BSO		► "> '»3	P^"t.
	}	!>^ * ->% -	t*
I* »T>		^ :> >:> _	»-:
3^ >»		> > -»3».	
L^O		>^> »-	J
► >>.-.*			K
>  > > J.
 O   > -y j>
> > > >ra* > > -> * >^	v«> > O >J»
» > ^ '£a» >• s» ~> "»3^	"** > • >:> ">> 3£.
» ^ > QBk > -> "> ' >J	
'■* >».:>> > E> > J3	
> >1tO» >> s» -> >~3ft>	».» -> •> » -»• • JM
T> •> >/^ > » ~> >Zfc	^>*~* > >> *L>~a
^-■3> >v~> > "> J^	■kjo ->-■>> x>:
►- J* ))£> J» L»->>S	mxs> > >j> >:
> >> ))» JJP ,_» .> > >2	►-3» ) P J»>-^
>:si5> ->^^  ~>s>

  -—  > j^  j».» ■
rx>  :>
->  > > ?=
^-^


>"?:-;L> 52»:
j  >  • >> ^^:


  ^>  >   >">  >
 S  r>    > > > —
 i  v - >^■>
>   >-  -  > > >_-
 ^ »)«>
)»i>^> j
► JO >J> 1»



>»



 •g

»> X>
>» T> > > >
 >)'5>  > »
         i> >>

 > >  »   > > >
 > ">  »  »   >
> > »  !»   > y
■ »  > > »   >a


 >»  > >  ,  >
1  »  >^  >  :
*»   >  -»  »■»   y-

»»i  > »   /
 >»   > ■*./   _ 
Surgeon  General's  Office
       <Jcc/tcn,........................................







i ^&gQQGgQgQXJ'qCQCrQ)gQ(jNOgQQOj&-c^
V 
 DUE TWO WEEKS FROM  LAST DATE
t^U" 2 a 1934
J 4UL Z 3 1954
OPO  202088 
 
TRIAL AND CONVICTION
                              V
DR.  STEPHEN  T.  BEALE
WITH THE
LETTERS OF
CHIEF JUSTICE LEWIS, AND JUDGES BLACK AND WOODWARD,
ON HIS  CASE.
INTERESTING ETHER CASES,
              LETTERS OF

PROF. GIBSON, PROF. WILTBANK, WM. BADGER, Esq.,
    W. L. HIRST, Esq, REY. ALBERT BARNES,
        DR. HENRY A. BOARD MAN, &c.
it,9r*i
              PHILADELPHIA:
T. K. COLLINS, Jr., No. 8 NORTH SIXTH STREET.
                   1855. 
100
B3Ut
 16 55
          Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1855, by
                      T.  K. COLLINS, Je,
in the Clerk's Office of the Clerk of the District Court of the United States in and for
                   the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 
         TRIAL AND CONVICTION

                        OF

DR.   STEPHEN   T.   BEALE.
  The history of this case, if it shall ever be faithfully and fully presented
to the public, will be regarded, in many respects, as one of the most remark-
able on  record.  All that is proposed in this publication is to sketch its out-
line, and lay before  the community some of the influences and appliances
which were so potential in consigning this man to prison and in still keeping
him there.
  The crime alleged against him is one of the gravest and of the most atro-
cious character.  The only witness to prove  the charge was  Miss Narcissa
Mudge, and all  her  suspicions, impressions,  and convictions, were received
while she was in a state of etherization.  What influence  the testimony of
such a witness, uncorroborated in a single point, should have produced upon
the minds of the jury who had this case in charge, will best appear  by the
perusal  of three letters  from Chief Justice  Lewis,  and Judges Woodward
and Black, of the Supreme  Court, which will be  found  in the  subsequent
pages.                                      .           .         ...
  It is due to the young woman, who has occupied  so prominent a position in
this unhappy affair, to say, that if she  had first consulted  her mother after
the supposed outrage had been perpetrated upon  her, the disgusting disclo-
sures  which have crimsoned every cheek with shame, would  probably never
have been made.   But, unfortunately, she fell into the hands of those  whose
zeal outstripped  their discretion, and who were more anxious to punish an
aggravated offence than to possess themselves of undoubted evidence that the
offence had been committed.  Their counsels, unhappily, were followed.  That
they were honest, it is right to believe, but that they were wofully mistaken,
none but themselves have any doubt.
  The testimony given by the young woman  in Court, is designedly omitted.
Every body knows what it is, and we shall not pander to depraved appetites
by  reproducing what would  have been infinitely better for all parties if it
had been from the first suppressed.

                           THE  ACCUSED.

  The principal  sufferer in the strange  drama which has been enacted,  is a
man some forty years of age, who commenced life under  all those adverse
circumstances induced by poverty and the want of patronage and influential
friends   He had nothing on which to rely but the blessing  of heaven, and 
4
 his own unsullied character, modest deportment, untiring industry, and manly
 energy.   With  the  aid  of these,  he pressed  steadily forward, meeting-  and
 surmounting formidable  obstacles, till he graduated at one  of  our first Medi-
 cal Schools, and obtained a prominent standing as one of our  first and most
 successful dentists.  For the last ten years he  was what the world would call a
 prosperous and a happy man.   Skill, and strict attention to his business, en-
 larged his sphere of operations, and secured  to him a wide circle of friends
 and profitable customers.  An  interesting young family shared his anxious
 solicitude and affectionate regard.   His aged parents were  kindly cared  for,
 and the  wants of their declining years liberally and cheerfully supplied.  To
 things moral, spiritual, and divine, he gave due heed.   He was a consistent
 member of a Christian  church, a Sabbath-school teacher, and  a warm  and
 zealous friend of the great Temperance reform.


                        COURT  PROCEEDINGS.

   When the grave charge was preferred against  him,  the community were
 surprised and shocked.  He was among the last men who  would have been
 suspected of such a dreadful atrocity.  His entire character, his  habits,  and
 all his antecedents seemed to forbid the  thought that he was capable of such
 an outrage.   His trial took place in October last, before the Court of Quarter
 Sessions, Hon. Oswald Thompson  presiding.   The public interest in the case
 was universal and intense.   Every step of  its progress was watched with
 unusual solicitude.  The accused  occupied  a seat by  his  counsel, Messrs.
 Brown and  Mitchell, and throughout the entire  investigation demeaned him-
 self with great propriety and  self-possession.
   One feature  in  this case  exceedingly  damaging to Dr.  B.  must not pass
 unnoticed.  Mr. Reed proposed to adduce proof of acts  of  attempted atrocity
 by him similar to  that charged in  the  indictment.  Judge  Thompson ruled
 out the evidence as inadmissible.   But the mischief was accomplished by the
 offer made.   It was whispered about that  awful disclosures were prevented
 merely by a technicality of the law, and that if the accused  was not convicted
 it would result from the  suppression, by the ruling of the Court, of the proof.
 of his guilt.   It is easy  to see what influence  this exerted  in  hastening  the
 doom of this unhappy  man.   It would have been vastly better for him if his
 counsel and the Court  had waived  the illegality of the offer  made and thrown
 the door wide open  to every rumor and every story that  could have been
 trumped up against him.  Dr. Beale, at the time, earnestly desired  his coun-
 sel to adopt this course, so confident was he of his ability to clear himself of
 the imputations thus indirectly made against him.
   The insufficiency of  the testimony on  the  part  of  the Commonwealth is
 well stated by James C. Van Dyke, Esq., District Attorney for the United
 States, in a letter to Gov. Bigler, urging the pardon of Dr. B. He says : " No
 legal principle is better established than that, before any inquiry can bo made
 of the guilt or innocence  of any person charged  with crime, the government
 should establish, beyond  reasonable doubt, that a crime has  been  committed
 by some  one.  This fact should be established  by the best testimony of which
 the nature of the case will admit.   Thus, in an indictment  for homicide, the
 evidence  of a drunken or insane man  should never be conclusive;  nay, should
be regarded as of little or no  weight at all,  upon  the question whether any
one has been really killed, when it  was in  the power of the Commonwealth to
produce better testimony  of the fact,  such as the evidence of the dead body,
the funeral, those who  attended thereat, &c. 
5
  The same principle applies in cases of rape.   The evidence of the prose-
cutrix, unsupported by strong collateral circumstances, is at all times looked
upon with suspicion.  How much  more  so  ought it to be, when  that very
prosecutrix confesses herself, in some degree at least, not to  have been a free
agent, either mentally or physically!  Under such circumstances, I take it to
have been the duty of the Commonwealth to have produced  that better testi-
mony of which the case was most palpably susceptible, which testimony could
easily have been obtained by the opinion of one or more  physicians.  Such
testimony would have set at rest the doubt upon one point  at least, to wit:
the ' corpus delicti.'   Not having done this,  the case  was left to the mind of
every reflecting and reasonable man in  extreme doubt whether any crime had
in reality been committed by any one."
   At length the testimony closed, and George  M. Wharton, Esq., who was
associated  with the  District Attorney, addressed  the jury in behalf of  the
Commonwealth.  It is due to Mr. Wharton to say, that his speech was fair,
able, argumentative, and touched skilfully upon the main  points relied upon
for conviction.  We have but a single  criticism on Mr. Wharton's address to
the jury.   It  was not, according to our way of thinking, in perfect  keeping
with established propriety and  professional  etiquette in  a prosecuting officer,
for him to  close his speech with a  solemn asseveration  that he. believed  the
accused guilty of the crime charged against him.   There was no argument in
this declaration, but something infinitely worse,  to wit: an  influence derived
from his character and standing, to bias and forestall the  minds of the jury
in the verdict  they were to render.
   Mr. Brown, in behalf of Dr. Beale, was  about to  address the jury, when
a painful event, the sudden death of a brother of one of the jurors,  gave an
unexpected direction to the case, and doubtless went  very far  to  decide it
adversely to the accused.   Mr. Brown offered  to submit the case without ar-
gument, under the charge of the Court, and  thus the more speedily to relieve
the juror, who was placed in most  trying circumstances.   The District  At-
torney, Mr. Reed, acceded to the. offer,  as well he might,  after the main points
on which  he relied had been so fully and  ably discussed by Mr.  Wharton.
The charge of  Judge Thompson, by this unexpected turn, was not as full and
elaborate as it would have  been, if  the case  had progressed  to the usual  ter-
mination.   But the  Judge  acquitted  himself  with ability,  and supplied, so
far as he was  able, those obvious deficiencies induced by the unexpected,  ab-
rupt close of the  proceedings.  His allusion to  Dr. Webster in his charge,
for the purpose of showing that the high character which  Dr. Beale had es-
tablished before the Court, was not to have too much weight, was, to say  the
least, exceedingly unfortunate in its bearing upon  the accused.   That it was
unintentional, we have no doubt, but its influence upon  the  verdict was soon
manifest.

                     YERDICT  OF THE  JURY.

   The jury were out some two  hours and a half or three hours, during which
time a portion of  them had a season of rare  jollification, singing merry songs,
and regaling themselves  on choice wine, and came into  Court with, a verdict
of guilty,  and a recommendation to mercy.   The verdict was received with
general surprise;  but, coupled as it was with a recommendation to mercy, in-
creased the wonderment of" the people.   What!  what! was heard in all quar-
ters; a man guilty  of one of the most heinous  offences on the  calendar of
crime,  recommended to mercy?  What did  the jury mean ?  Did  they look 
6
upon the crime charged as a venial offence, which should be lightly regarded
and lightly punished ?  The matter was soon explained by the statements of
one or more of the jurors.   It teas a compromise verdict.   Those who would
not convict the accused, were induced to unite in a verdict of guilty, provided
the rest would agree  to a recommendation for mere}'.
  Recommendations  to mercy frequently accompany verdicts when persons
are convicted of heinous crimes, but  only  when there were  some circum-
stances connected with the commission of the crime, that mitigated the crimi-
nality of the offender, but for which the stern justice of the  law furnished
no remedy but the mercy of the Court.  Thus:  a murderer aroused by the
blindness of jealousy, or  maddened  by the fierce fire of rum, may be  found
guilty, and recommended to mercy.   Not so in  this case.  There is nothing
to excuse, nothing to palliate guilt.   If Dr.  Beale was guilty at all, he icas
all guilty ;  guilty of  a predetermined crime of calculating perfidy, that scarce-
ly has an equal in the annals of sin.
  Dr.  Beale was severely censured in certain quarters for his animadversion,
in his address to  the Court, upon the conduct of  a portion of the jury.  But
he expressed only what the community, to a wide extent, felt.   It was proved
before the Court that a portion of this jury indulged in the use of brandy,
wine,  and ale, to a degree far from being decent and decorous.   They evinced
the "moving of  the spirit in them" by no doubtful signs.  No duty is more
weighty and solemn,  than that imposed upon jurymen, having in charge the
liberty and the lives of their fellow citizens.  If ever  men need to have clear
heads, an unbiassed judgment, and entire freedom from the pernicious effects
of intoxicating drinks, it  is when they are  called upon to sift and weigh tes-
timony involving the dearest  interests of those who  are obliged to appeal to
"God  and their country"  for protection and  deliverance.  No censure  is too
severe to be meted out to men who will indulge their guzzling propensities in
such circumstances.   They  deserve the indignant frown of every decent man
in the community.   The Hon. Judge, Allison, did  himself great  credit in
making a public  announcement to the officers of his Court, soon after the
event  to which we have referred, that he should hold them strictly account-
able if ardent spirits  were thereafter furnished to jurymen while on duty.

                    NEW TRIAL ASKED FOR.

  As  soon as the verdict  was rendered,  Mr. Brown gave notice that he should
apply for a new trial, and file reasons according to the usual custom.   Judge
Thompson  fixed  upon an early day  for hearing the argument, giving  notice
that he should invite Judges Kelly and Allison to sit with him, and assist in
the proper adjudication of the case.   The day the case was argued, the dense
mass in the  Court-room indicated how deep an  interest was felt in the com-
munity.  The argument occupied some  ten or eleven hours  on  different days,
by Messrs. Brown and Reed.   At its close the Court  intimated that their de-
cision would be given as soon as they should find time to consider the various
points urged upon their attention.   Nearly four weeks passed before their de-
cision was given, and  when it was,  to the deep disappointment and regret cf
thousands of our best citizens, it was adverse to a new trial.   Here, as we
think, the Court made a  mistake.   The case was  a novel and  an  extraordi-
nary one.   The  Hon. Judge Woodward, in  his  letter to Gov. Bidder, dated
Jan. 7th, 1855, urging the pardon of Dr. Beale, says:
  " The questions presented, both of law and  science, were novel, and worthy,
it seems to me, of more thorough investigation than they received.  For these 
7
reasons, I have been forced to think the conviction  of Dr. Beale, and the re-
fusal of a new trial, were ill-advised—a harsh measure of justice."
  No claims of justice or of duty, so far as we can see, forbid this man the
favor he so earnestly craved.   A new trial should have been granted, as near-
ly all intelligent men will admit.   It was most unfortunate that it was  de-
nied.   The  effect was not, as might have been anticipated, to calm and tran-
quillize the  public mind,  but to rouse it to a higher and deeper intensity.
The feeling  was very strong and wide-spread, that an injured and an innocent
man  was to be sent to prison.   With such scores  of rascals parading our
streets, who go " unwhipped of justice," the condition of Dr. Beale excited
an unusual  sympathy.   It was thought not necessary to incarcerate  a man
whose good  antecedents and good character  helped on his conviction, instead
of securing for him a more favorable consideration by a portion of the jury.


                PRISONER BROUGHT  INTO COURT.

   On Tuesday, the 28th of November, he was brought into Court, to receive
his sentence.   Every available space was  occupied by those attracted by cu-
riosity or deep sympathy, to witness the scene.  Dr. Beale appeared to great
advantage in the awful circumstances in which he was placed.   His faithful
wife, with an agonized, bursting heart, was  by him,  sharing his sorrows,_and
comforting  him in his distress.   He asked, through his counsel, the privilege
 of reading  the following  address,  before sentence was  passed.   Every eye
 was fixed upon  him, and every ear  strained to catch every word  he uttered.
 It was a scene of deep, thrilling, and  painful  interest.   It would have been
 painful if he had been proved to be guilty.  As it  was, it was agonizing in
 the extreme.   There were but few present  who did not evince, by eyes  suf-
 fused with tears, their sympathy for  the man who  was to be torn froin his
 pleasant home, and from the protection  of  his  cherished  wife, and eight
 young,  helpless children.

                     ADDRESS TO THE  COURT.

   " I am aware that the  declarations and the solemn asseverations of a man
 placed in the circumstances in which I stand before this Court, have but little
 weight upon the public mind.  At the same time I am constrained to_ give ut-
 terance to the truth, however cautiously or sceptically it may be received.  It
 will, in some measure, assuage the anguish of  my hours of confinement to re-
 member that I  protested my innocence of the dreadful crime of which a jury
 have convicted me.  This I now do, in the most decisive and  solemn  manner,
 appealing to the searcher of all hearts, my Maker, and  my final Judge, to wit-
 ness what I say.  I  never contemplated its commission.   I never attempted it.
 My whole soul revolts at the suggestion.  I had feelings towards  my accuser,
 somewhat like those of a parent towards a child.  She had grown up under my
 notice, and on many occasions had  received my professional  services and at-
 tentions  It was a strange hallucination that  led her to  suspect me of  crime.
 and it was  nearly as strange that she should have made the charge against me;
 a charge which, once  made, would be likely to  be persisted in, whatever her
 subsequent convictions might be.   There were those, I am  sorry to say, who
 stood  by her, counselling her  to  make  confirmation  doubly strong, by the
 solemnity of an oath,  instead of cautiously and anxiously inquiring whether
 she might not have taken impressions  for facts, the  vagaries  of the imagina-
 tion for the ravishment of her person. Once committed on that side, the mo-
 tives were  powerful to make out their case.   They rejoice in their success.
 They have  torn an innocent man from a cherished and heart-broken wife, and
 ei<*ht helpless children—from aged  parents, who so  much need  his care and 
8
solace, who have  almost reached the graves  to which they now are rapidly
hastening with sorrow—deep sorrow.  I say they have torn an innocent man
from all these loved ones, who depend entirely on him for their comfort and
support, and made him a prisoner—a prisoner, I say, not a felon.  Paul was
often a prisoner, but never a felon.  It will mitigate the sorrow and anguish of
mv imprisonment that I am not a felon, and  no verdict of any jury can make
me so.  The power and the right to assert my innocence, my Maker gave me,
and in asserting it I need not ask the privilege of any earthly tribunal.
  " A word in regard  to the dark, mysterious  hour unaccounted for (from ten
to eleven o'clock), on which so  much stress has  been laid.  "Why is it unac-
counted for?   Because my lips were closed, as if  the seal of death  was upon
them, and now they are unsealed.  I  need only refer to Miss kludge's own
statement, and candid, intelligent men can decide whether the representations,
so positively made on this point, are true or false.  It should be borne in mind,
that the time, though called an hour, was but three-quarters  of an  hour; for,
according to the evidence given in Court, the workmen were at the  operating-
room door every few minutes, from quarter before eleven to the time Miss Mudge
left the house.
  "Miss Mudge's evidence on this point is this: 'I went to Dr. Beale's about
ten o'clock ;  I went into the front parlor, and in a few minutes Dr. Beale came
in and said he was not quite ready ; he had some ladies in his office.   In about
ten or fifteen minutes after this he came down with some ladies, and saw them
out of  the door; I then went up into the operating room, took my bonnet off,
and took a seat in  the operating chair; Dr. Beale  washed  his hands, and in-
quired after  my health, and the health of our family; he then handed me a
book and said he would have to go and  see one of his workmen;  he left the
room ;  I do not know how long he was gone ;  when he came back, he began to
operate on my tooth to prepare  it for plugging; it was very painful, and he pro-
posed to put something in it to remove the  soreness; I declined having it, and
preferred taking ether, and he gave me ether.'
  " From this statement of Miss Mudge, in Avhich she appears perfectly honest,
every thinking mind must see  that the time  in  question was wholly, gone be-
fore she  began to take ether;  and yet  her counsel, Mr. Wharton, wishing to
make out his case, passed by all this, and said 'the outrage, if committed at
all, must have been committed in this time.'  I believe if the question had been
asked  Miss  Mudge, what time she began  to  take ether, she would have said
about 11 o'clock."
   " Miss Mudge said I handed  her a book, and left the operating room.  I did
so, and was absent from  the room about ten or twelve minutes, and  after  I re-
turned, I worked  on her teeth  about twenty minutes, before she began to take
ether, and while she was under the influence of it, I finished the preparation
of one tooth for plugging, and cut into the  pulp  or nerve  of another tooth,
which made it bleed ;  this cut  appeared  to  give her pain.   I immediately told
her I musttakethis tooth out; she asked, why? I said, I cannot save italive, and
it had better be out.  She said, give me more ether, then.  I did so, and took it
out.  It appears Miss  Mudge did not know that I  finished the preparation of
one tooth for plugging, while she was under the influence of ether,  and that I
cut the nerve of the other, and yet she thinks she knew everything that trans-
pired in the room.  Her mind was engaged with thoughts and things of which
she has told  us. and, I suppose, honestly, but which never transpired.  Here
was a delusion, and for me,  a fatal one.
   " As to a new  trial, which  I earnestly sought,  and which  the Court have
seen fit to deny me, I  must be  permitted to say a word.  It would have  given
me unspeakable joy if the application  had  been  granted.  Were  there any
strong or insuperable objections?  If I am  guilty, as charged, justice would as
certainly have been meted out  to me.   If guilty, the verdict of another  iury
would probably have been at least an untainted verdict.  Is it so now ?  I re-
spectfully submit  to the Court,  is it so now?"
   " Some of the facts  connected with the deliberations of that jury  have  been
made public. I leave the public to judge what sort of a jury it was, who, with-
in half an hour of coming into Court, to  convict a  man of an infamous crime, 
9
could have a menagerie exhibition, some of them braying like an ass, and roar-
ing like a lion, singing the song of the 'Landlady of France,' with the ' Good
Brandy, oh!' and other bacchanalian songs equally indecorous and unbecoming.
But it is said there was no undue excitement from liquor in all this.
  '_' Those who urge this in behalf of this jury, do them great  unkindness.  It
is infinitely better for their reputation  to admit that they were disguised with
liquor, than to allow that they had such unfeeling, savage natures,  as to frolic,
and play the jackass and the lion, in the very hour that they were  to render a
verdict, which was to consign a father to a prison, and to blight and blast the
happiness of  an innocent wife and eight children, and hurry his aged parents
in sorrow to the grave.  Deeply as I have been wronged by the verdict of the
jury,  I must say to their credit, if credit it is, that  I do not believe that they
could so grossly outrage propriety and  common decency, if it had not been for
accursed rum.
  " But there are facts  in my possession which the technicality of the law
would not allow to be made public.  They are such as these:  besides the four
bottles of wine used at dinner on Friday, an hour or two before the verdict was
rendered, this jury had  a brandy bottle in their room  filled up three or four
times.  Besides this they rung their bell on several occasions, and called the
landlord to their door, opened it to him, and ordered glasses of brandy, and
also of ale.   If I am shut up in a cell, there are  those in this  community who
can and will substantiate these facts if they are denied.
  " Even the  offer of my able and learned counsel—who had the most perfect con-
fidence in his case, as well as in my innocence—after a speech  of more than two
hours had been made against me—to submit the case without argument, in view
of an afflictive providence by whjch a brother of one of the jurors was suddenly
and in a moment struck down by death—I say even the offer to submit the case
without argument, was used to my disadvantage, and hastened my conviction.
  "Ajuror, immediately after the rendering of the verdict, said, in the hear-
ing of numbers, 'Davy' (alluding to Mr. Brown) 'was like the boy that wet
the bed, he had nothing to say/
  " Another juror, before he had heard a word of my defence, said of me—' D—n
him,  he is a guilty fellow, we'll sweeten him/  If  the forms of  law made it
improper for  the Court to hear these  facts, an  enlightened community shall
hear  them, and judge what sort of a jury rendered a verdict against me.
  "One thing more I have to say, and I know they will heartily join me in
this, to wit, if any one of them shall ever be accused of crime,  I hope they will
have  a fairer, more sober, and more moral  set of men to judge of their case
than  I had.
  " I speak not of them all; there were two or three  honorable exceptions, and
my only regret is, that they had not the firmness to stand by  their convictions
in spite of ribald songs and all the other appliances to hasten my doom.
  " And how were my clerical witnesses, who kindly rallied round me  in my
extremity, spoken of by one or more of the jurors?  In this  profane and aw-
ful manner:  'G—d d—n the divines! they are as bad as he is.'  This fact is
derived from one of the jury.
  "The District Attorney will pardon me  in a passing allusion to the course
he has seen fit to pursue.  Was it altogether necessary to press upon me, with
all the weight of his character and influence, to exert himself  to the utmost to
prevent the Court from granting me a new trial?  Was there  any danger that
I should escape.
  " I have one request to make of the District Attorney.  It is  this : that when
he lies down  at night, surrounded by his  family and all thecomforts of home,
he will remember there  is one husband and father lying in a cell on a pal-
let of straw, torn from the wife of  his bosom and  the  children  of his love,
heaving bitter sighs, starting from  his unquiet slumbers by the fancied  call of
his loved  ones, and  that husband and father  is as innocent  of the crime for
which he is incarcerated as Mr. Reed himself.
  " And when he comes around his well spread board, and greets  the smiling,
happy faces of his wife and children, I want him to remember  that there is one
husband and father taking his coarse and scanty fare on the wooden trencher of 
10
 a prison, with no wife to cheer his dreary solitude, and no children to comfort
 their heart-stricken and sorrowful father.  And when he  goes to the sanctuary
 on the Sabbath, I  want him to think of a husband and father  in prison, who
 never boasted of going to ' fifty churches,' but who did feel it a privilege to go
 with his family  to the church of his choice, and there, in a quiet and humble
 manner, to  learn those lessons of heavenly wisdom, which are almost his only
 support and solace now.
   " I will add no more, except to reiterate before God and man my innocence of
 the charge alleged against me."

                    SENTENCE BY  THE  COURT.

   At the close  of Dr. Beale's  address, Judge Thompson  proceeded to  the
 discharge of his painful duty,  and sentenced him to a confinement of four
 years and six months in the Moyamensing prison, saying  to him, "If you
 are innocent, it  may be one of those trials your  Heavenly Father, for some
 wise purpose, has sent upon you,  and I trust that you will be  able to bear it
 with that fortitude which the Christianity you profess is calculated to bestow."
 This was cold comfort after the  refusal of a new trial, which would, to a.moral
 certainty, have resulted in a prompt and honorable acquittal.
   Poor man ! he had a conscious, confiding trust in Providence, but he could
 not but regret that the Court, the appointed  instrument of Providence to in-
 terpose between  the stern demands of  the law  and the verdict of a song-sing-
 ing, fun-loving,  menagerie-playing jury, had not seen  fit to accord to him  his
 importunate request in granting him a new trial under  more favorable auspices
 to establish  his  innocence.  It  is well to  commend a man to the care  and
 compassion of Providence; but to do this while a human instrumentality ade-
 quate for his relief is not employed, is not adapted to soothe  the sorrows of
 one about to be  shut up within the walls of a prison.
   He stood  firmly, but submissively erect, while the sentence was passed,  ex-
 hibiting little emotion except what was indicated by an occasional tear which
 he wiped from his  manly cheek.
   He was accompanied to prison by his faithful  wife,  who, when the prison
 doors were closed upon him, returned  with an agonized heart to her desolate
 home, to bear as she was best able, her accumulated and crushing sorrows.


                     MEASURES  FOR RELIEF.

  Immediate measures  were adopted by  many  of our  most  respected,  in-
 fluential citizens to present the case of  Dr.  Beale  to the consideration of Gov.
 Bigler, and  implore of him the  interposition of  executive  clemency.  Peti-
 tions, signed  by judges and lawyers, clergymen  and physicians, dentists,
 merchants, mechanics, and men  of all  professions and occupations, amounting
 to six or seven thousand names, in the aggregate,  were  forwarded, prayin^ for
 the instant liberation of Dr. Beale.   Besides  those sent from Philadelphia,
 large numbers were forwarded from other quarters, from the interior of the
 State, from Baltimore and from  New York.  Never, perhaps, was  there such
 a simultaneous and general movement, without consultation and without con-
cert, for the  relief of an adjudged convict.   Many persons volunteered their
services to circulate petitions.  The influential  and  controlling  motive was a
deep conviction on  the public mind that an innocent man had been " cloven
 down by a combination of untoward circumstances," which he  could neither
foresee nor prevent.   Mrs. Beale, about this time, published  the following
card, which did very much to increase  the  interest, and to direct  public at-
tention to this remarkable  case. 
11
                               A CARD.

 _  It is with the utmost diffidence that I appear in this manner before the pub-
lic. _ For my own sake I would not do it;  I would bear my sorrow and anguish
in silence, rather than obtrude myself upon the gaze of a selfish, censorious
world.  But I owe duties to others, which I must not shrink from discharging,
whatever  may be the cost to my own feelings.
   I have eight young, helpless children, practically made orphans by the recent
painful events with which the public are  familiar.  I have a  husband, dear to
me as my own life, shut up in the cell of  a prison, for an alleged crime, which
I am just as well satisfied he never committed, as I can be of any event which has
not transpired under my personal observation.  If I believed him guilty I would
suffer in silence, and sorrow and shame, and let justice take its course.  I have
the feelings of a woman,  and would resent, like a woman, an indignity upon my
honor, and an outrage upon my rights.  But nothing of this kind has occurred.
My husband has been cloven down by a combination of untoward circumstances,
which human wisdom could not foresee, nor  human care prevent.  I know
what he is in domestic life, in the bosom of his family, and in the circle of his
friends ; I think I know the purity of his life, and the integrity of his heart.
   His sorrows and  his wrongs have made him dearer to me than ever.  I will
share his  sorrows with a loving, sympathizing heart, however fiercely the  storm
may beat  upon him.  He is my husband, the father of my children, and has
ever  been to me all that a wife and a mother could wish or desire.   Under these
circumstances, it is easy to see that I cannot rest till my loved one is restored to
the circle  to which he has always imparted joy  and gladness.
   Will not a benevolent,  sympathizing community aid me in this effort?   This
is the object of this earnest appeal.   I ask not for money, but for what is to me,
in my circumstances, of more value than the gold of Ophir, a  kind co-operation
in securing the interposition of Executive clemency. This, now, is my only resort.
Petitions  for a pardon, already numerously  signed, are  in circulation.   Will
not every  husband and father confer upon me the great favor  of giving his sig-
nature ?  A kind and prompt response to this earnest appeal  will lighten the
sorrow and  the bitter anguish of a once  united and  happy  family,  but now
stricken down, desolated, and made to drink the cup of wormwood and gall.

                                               LOUISE  B. BEALE.
   Philadelphia, Nov. 29, 1854.


           YIEWS OF  DRS. HARTSHORN AND  STILLE.

   The Medical Examiner contained two  articles, unusually  able, lucid, and
convincing, from Drs. Hartshorn  and Stille, on the  scientific aspect of the
case, which had  a surprising influence in correcting erroneous impressions,
and in settling the case on its true  merits in the public mind.*  The following
brief extracts  are specimens of the manner in which these gentlemen disposed
of the testimony  against Dr. Beale :—

  " To return to Miss  Mudge.  The operation on her teeth, whatever it might
be, was painful—this leads to a consultation, a determination to resort to  ether
—another long or short delay, and the administration of the vapor from a nap-
kin.   Sooner or later she  feels dizzy, cold and numb ;  her eyes are closed ; she
continues  breathing the ether and the symptoms  ' grow upon  her.' The mys-
terious  spell is deeply working, yet  she  does  not lose her 'consciousness of
what is doing.' She is aware that he is taking liberties which would rouse any
woman in her  senses,  yet she makes no effort to unclose her eyes, and is inca-
pable of outcry or resistance!  Here we must pause, already past the threshold
of the  second and crowning scene of this wretched drama.  At first dizzy,  cold
and numb, she has become powerless, voiceless, sightless, and yet she feels the
slightest touch, perceives a breath, hears every  footfall and even suffers pain, 
12
one throe of which receives the worst interpretation.   This  is one  case of a
thousand—a miracle of sense and nonsense,  even for  that juice of Oberon's
flower, the wondrous ether."        .      .       .      ■             •
  Again: "we find nothing in the evidence, or on record, or in our own experi-
ence, that will justify us in the admission, that she, or any one, had  ever been
so helpless under the influence of ether, and yet entirely  aware of what was  go-
ing on."
  One paragraph more from the pen of Dr. Hartshorn:—
  " Much has been said about 'thathour.'  Can she really remember nothing
of the second period of time, be it long or short,  but what is  contained in her
rudimentary sketch ?   The outlines are deep and broad, perhaps, but  they seem
dimly and dismally far apart.   We mean no indelicate  allusions.  We feel  the
most earnest desire to spare the feelings of all parties,  and of none  more than
the unfortunate subject of these comments.  We  wish  to believe her  free from
soil, and if we  strike rudely at the ill-stained slough  that  has  been thrown
around  her purity of fame, it is but to destroy its  every  trace."

   Dr.  Stille" says—
  "If an accusation of rape is one 'easily made  and hard to be refuted/ this
is particularly the case under the circumstances referred to, and it may at any
time be successfully  made against the purest and best men in the community."

   Dr. Stille mentions  several  facts, showing the  strange illusions  to which
persons are subject in  a state of etherization.  We have space  only for  the
following:—

   "After an operation performed upon the forehead of Mr. T----, a  dentist, of
this city, he said that although his  eyes were shut, he saw every cut of the knife.
He saw the shape of the wound upon the forehead ; and what was better than
all, this cutting appeared to  him to  be done upon somebody else.  A lady
dreamed that she was at Cape May, and was going into the surf, and  that whilo
in the water, she was attacked by a shark, whieh held her  fast, but without
pain, until the  company  present extracted his teeth and liberated her.  A lit-
tle girl, the extraction of whose tooth made a report like the drawing of a cork,
sprang out of the chair,  crouched  upon the floor, and looked up, anxiously in-
quiring if anybody was  killed?   She supposed she was travelling upon a loco-
motive engine,  which had been blown  up and thrown her into the air.  A boy
fancied himself in a cotton-mill;—an Irish woman dreamed that she had been
home, and seen her friends engaged in spinning, and others dreamed that they
were in railway cars, or shipwrecked.  A young  man having been sufficiently
etherized, the dentist prepared to extract a tooth.   In a moment he dashed the
instrument from his mouth, left the chair, and striding about the room  demanded
what they  meant  to do  with him. In  a few moments the effect of the  ether
passed off.  Being again put under its influence,  the same scene was enacted
with even greater violence, and he endeavored  to jump out of the window.
When he regained his memory, he related that he imagined himself surrounded
by a great number of  enemies, one of whom endeavored to drive a nail into
his mouth,  and, being unable to struggle with him, he had sought  safety in
flight."
   The January No. of the American Journal of Dental Science,  edited by
 Chapin A. Harris, M. D., contains an article  on  the case of  Dr. Beale worthy
 of universal perusal.  We introduce the following brief extracts:—

   "The first thing we have to say, is to call attention  to  the  well known rule
 of evidence ; the  greater the  antecedent improbability of any declared fact,
 the more direct, positive and indubitable  must be  the testimony by which such
 a fact is proposed to be established.  Thus, if a man entrusted with money
 were to say that he  was  knocked down and robbed in  broad daylight, in  the
 crowded thoroughfare of a great city, he could only save his credit for veracity
 and honesty by bringing the most irrefragable proof of  the truth of  his asser- 
13
tion.  A jury of madmen or idiots might believe  his individual  oath, but we
doubt if twelve men, possessed of the average allowance of common sense,
could be found to make up their minds upon such testimony.
   " Now let us look at the antecedent improbability in  the case before us.  A
man of family,  living  on good terms with his wife, of standing in society, and
dependent upon that standing for his  livelihood, is charged with having  com-
mitted a rape upon a young girl.   There is nothing peculiar about the circum-
stances to rouse the passions of this man ; on the contrary, he has known her
from  her childhood.  She is a familiar acquaintance.  She has not dazzled him
with  any sudden beauty,  but seems  to have  been a commonplace girl, sur-
rounded by very prosaic circumstances.....Now how is this man,  to
whom his character represents so many dollars and cents in hard cash, accused
of having acted?  Why, of having made a public appointment to  meet her  in
a public place in broad daylight, in his  own house, in a room overlooked  from
all quarters, open to his own domestics,  habitually resorted to by his workmen,
at an hour when he was likely to be disturbed by other visitors, under  circum-
stances in every way unfavorable  to  the purpose  he designed to accomplish.
.....And now for the physical improbability.  Look at the dentist's
chair; we write for dentists ; and tell  us what sort of facilities does it afford for
a rape ?  Dr. Parmly saw the identical chair and stool, and has published it  as
his deliberate opinion that such  an act  there was not improbable, but impos-
sible."
   [The conviction on the mind of Dr. Parmly corresponds entirely with that of
Dr. Van Dyke, Dr. Patrick, and two or  three other gentlemen who went to Dr.
Beale's house,  and with Miss Mudge's testimony before them, examined the
premises, the operating chair, &c.  They said,  What can't  be, hasn't been,
and tliat's the end of the matter.]

   According to her own confession she made no outcry, and did not try to make
one—does not know whether she had the power to  make one, but she did scream
after the second dose of ether, when  her tooth was pulled.   This  is a very remark-
able statement, and ought to  have been carefully weighed by the jury.....
We find it impossible to believe Miss Mudge's statement; first,  because her own
conduct after the affair is totally inconsistent with the story she tells. Secondly,
we disbelieve her statement, because it is inconsistent with itself.  Thirdly, we
disbelieve her,  because she was not in a condition to know positively the facts
to which she swears.  There are no collateral circumstances to  corroborate Miss
Mudge's statement, and hence, in  the nature of the case, we  cannot  see  that
there is any evidence at all."

   Numerous facts relating to the influence of ether were transmitted to Gov.
Bigler from different and distant parts of the country.  We  present  in  this
connection a few of the statements.  In a letter from Dr. McGuire, Winches-
ter, Ya., dated Nov. 5th, he says :—

   " But yesterday I amputated a man's finger whilst the ether was given him.
He became very unmanageable, requiring the assistance of several students to
control him.  After the operation,  he  expressed great surprise and displeasure
that I ' struck him/   Upon repeated protestation  on my part that I  did  not,
confirmed by many witnesses, he seemed to yield, but again  to-day reaffirmed
it.  It seemed to remain on his mind with all the clearness of a real event."

   Dr.- J. W. Hazlet, in a, letter dated New York, December 2d,  says:—

   "The lady at last slept, and I removed her decayed tooth. When she awoke,
she evidently had a semi-consciousness of the dream under which  she acted, as
she seemed very much reassured on finding that a lady was present.   I have
no doubt that, had  there not fortuuately  been a witness  present, I should have
been in the position of Dr.  Beale, a victim to a dream."

   This lady had the impression  that she had been violated. 
14
  Dr. D. D. Dickinson, in a letter dated Boston, Dec. 4, says :—

  " After recovering a little from the effects of the chloroform, the patient arose
from the chair,  and, calling her sister, walked to a distant part of the room,
where they held a long conversation.  They then came back  towards my ope-
rating room, the sister laughing and saying, she would ' tell the doctor all about
it/   She then related to me that her sister, while under the influence  of the
ether, fancied that I was taking some  gross liberties with her person,  and it
was only after repeated assurances from her sister that she stood by us every
instant of time,  and that nothing of the kind took place, that she could be con-
vinced that she  had not been grossly insulted."

  Dr. F. Z. Crane, in a letter dated Easton, Pa., Dec. 5th; says:—

  " I have been a practising dentist  in this place for nearly twenty years past,
and have occasionally administered both ether and chloroform to patients ever
since the discovery of their anaesthetic effects upon the system, and am so well
convinced from  my own experience that no dependence ought to be placed upon
testimony  given as to circumstances which occurred while under their effects,
that I think Dr. S. T. Beale a fair subject for executive clemency, and hope it
may be exercised in his behalf.
  " I will  merely add, that I do not write  this at the instance of any one, being
entirely unacquainted with any of the  parties concerned, but do it from a sense
of duty."

  Letter from Alexander  Hare, 222 Sixth Avenue,  New York, Dec. 5th:—

  " I have taken ether to have teeth extracted.  The second time I experienced
no illusion whatever, but the first time I was certain the doctor and his student
were plotting my murder,  or at least that they  had actually robbed me  of my
watch.  I was sure of this, as I sate  &ndi felt the doctor take  the watch out  of
my pocket, and then go behind me with a knife to cut my throat.  My niece
was in the room with me.  When the  operation commenced,  I was  sure they
had persuaded her to leave the room to accomplish their designs, as I looked to
her seat where I had just seen her, and she was not there, at least to my vision.
During this  time I had a tooth extracted without knowing it.  On recovering
myself a little from the effects of ether, I felt  for my watch—found it  undis-
turbed,  and saw  my niece sitting where  I saw her when the operation com-
menced.  I asked her what she left the room for  ? She answered me that she had
not stirred from her seat, and that nothing that  I had supposed had taken place.
Although my judgment and common sense assure me that I was laboring un-
der a hallucination, yet to this day (seven years since) I cannot get rid of the
impression which I am sure must have been just as distinct as the impression
on the mind of  Miss Mudge.  I have read the whole trial, and I  am fully satis-
fied that she was entirely deceived, and that Dr. Beale is an innocent man."

   A San Francisco paper  of Dec. 13 th, contains the  following:—

  " The Chronicle mentions a case in this  city, in which a lady took chloroform
previous to undergoing an  operation for a felon.  On  awaking from its  effects
she charged the doctor with taking vile liberties with  her person. Fortunately
another lady was present  during the  operation, who convinced her that the
chloroform was the agent which had taken liberties with her imagination."
   The Editor adds :—

  " The case in which Dr.  Beale, the Philadelphia dentist was convicted, may
have been similar, but he unfortunately had no  witness."

   A lady patient sent the following to Dr. Asay, dated Philadelphia, Decem-
ber 5 th:—

  " The impression made  upon my mind  which I related  to  you before I left
your office, is as fresh in my memory as it was  then,  and seems  as if it was a
reality. 
15
  " It appeared to me as though Dr. Webster had met me, or came across  me
somewhere, and tied my hands tight together, and also my feet;  then took me
by the shoulders and dragged me somewhere ; I could not tell the name of the
place.  The ground  I was dragged over seemed to me to be a raw clay, and ap-
peared to be mixed with small stones.  I tried  to get away from  Dr. Webster,
who tied me and dragged me off, but I could not. I thought I called for some-
body to help take me away from him, but nobody came.  If my friend had not
been with me I should have really thought that you had tied my hands and
feet and dragged me about the room, but knowing she was with me and was
there, and that Dr. Webster was  dead, and  I  was there to  get my tooth ex-
tracted, and as I knew she would not allow such a thing, I must be convinced
it was a dream, though it really seems tome as if it must be otherwise."

  Dr. Ward, of Newark, N. J., in a letter dated Dec. 7th,  says :

  " A case in point recently occurred in my  own experience.  I poured a tea-
spoonful of chloroform upon a white cambric handkerchief, and for about three
minutes applied it to his mouth and nose.  Insensibility was the immediate
consequence, but after the lapse  of  five minutes he recovered, and declared
himself completely  exhausted, from a chase of half-a-mile, that he supposed I
had given him.  I could not convince him that I had not driven him down the
basement  stairs, out of the  area door, down  the street, around several blocks,
keeping close at his side the whole way.
  " I called his attention to the fact that he was not dressed, and, therefore, it
was absurd;  but he could not be persuaded, and during the rest of the illness,
and since his entire recovery, he has persisted in believing that this race was ab-
solutely taken.  I think it not unlikely that he would swear to it beforea Court
of justice  to-day, notwithstanding my assurances, if closely questioned."

   Dr. Wm. H.  Chandler, in a letter dated Thompson, Windham Co., Conn.,
Dec.  5th, says :
  " Some  time since, Dr. Flagg,  dentist,  of Providence, R. I., administered
chloroform to a female, and  performed an operation  upon  her teeth, in the
presence of another female.  After the operation was finished, and the effects of
the chloroform passed off, the female who had been operated upon, at once, and
in the presence of her friend, charged the Dr. with having outraged her person;
but the accidental presence of a  third person prevented a  Mudge case from
coming on to the carpet."
   Dr. A. T.  Smith, in a letter dated Syracuse, Dec. 18th, says :

  "I have administered ether and chloroform, perhaps, twenty-five  hundred
times, and among so many cases I would naturally have almost every grade of
conduct;  some very lascivious, and others corresponding, in a degree, to  the
case of Miss Mudge.  Nearly the first that I administered ether to was one of
this character, and that one led me to have either friends or assistants^ imme-
diately with me, in order to prevent such an occurrence, either honestly in their
minds, or from a maliciousness of purpose."

   Dr. E.  R.  Crouch, in a letter dated New York, Dec. 9th, says :

  " I am partly the  cause of Dr. Beale's misfortune, having been, in connection
with Mr. Williamson, of Leicester, England, one of the first to introduce chlo-
roform into dental practice.
  " The following cases I took note of, and from them I hope you will draw the
same inference which I have done, to wit: that the subjects are unconscious of
what is taking place during the time they may beunder the influence of chloroform.
These are the cases: William Turner, of the Bank of England, Leicester, had
a stump extracted,  and was under the idea that he was passing an entry at the
Custom House, and was brought to a stand by  the Collector of Customs refus-
ing his gold  as being light.  He  then thought he was shooting goats on the
mountains in Westmoreland, and  said he seemed to have lived a month while
under the operation.  He was not conscious of  pain. 
16
   " Henry Gregory, of the Bank of England, Leicester, had a molar extracted;
was weaving all the time—his hands had the motion of a weaver throwing the
shuttle;  not conscious of pain.
   " Thomas Spooner, Solicitor, had three stumps taken out; was shooting rab-
1 .its. and remembered  things which he had  forgotten; not conscious of pain.
Miss  Spooner, his sister, of Port Madoc,  Wales, had fourteen  stumps taken
out; was in delightful meadows gathering flowers, and was so happy that she
regretted being brought to ; not conscious of pain.
   " These facts I wish to bring to the notice of your Excellency, thinking-that
the unsupported evidence of Miss Mudge, of what took place while she was
under the influence of ether, ought not to be taken as truth.  If Miss Mudge
will allow me to administer ether to her in your Excellency's presence, and will
inform me of anything which took place during  her unconsciousness, I should
be willing to take Dr. Beale's place."

                   DR. F. A. VAN DYKE'S VIEWS.

   From an able paper, prepared by Dr. F. A. Van Dyke, of this city, and laid before
Gov. Bigler, we present the following extract.  The Doctor says: " My opinion
is, that Miss Mudge  was  laboring under  'illusory  sensation/  She herself
sunk  in the chair, throwing back her head, as is very usual with patients in the
dental chair, and probably at the same time changing the position of her feet,
and the adjustment of her  clothes, and in  the confused,dreamy state of ether-
ization in which she then was, the pain occurring from the prelimiuary action
of the monthly discharge,  increased by etheric  stimulation, her  morbidly ex-
cited  perception converted into that occasioned by the supposed atrocity com-
mitted by Dr. B., who, standing by her side, operating upon her tooth, threw
his breath upon her face.   This version is sustained by the  subsequent actions
of Miss  M.  She declares herself conscious of the  occurrences  around her;
she hears Dr. B. at the wash stand; she opens her eyes, and looks down on her
person ;  sees her clothes raised, and without replacing her garments, or rising
from the chair to  rebuke Dr. B. for his foul outrage, she closes her  eyes lest
he should be aware that she had seen her position; and when he informs her
that one tooth of the two must be extracted, asks for more ether; and when the
tooth  is extracted, screams with the pain.  She could  not resist; she  could not
make outcry when  the violation of her person  is being perpetrated ; an act
creative of a moral shock equal, surely, to the physical shock of the extraction
of a tooth ; and  yet in the one instance she screams, and  in the other she  is
quiet and silent.
  "Again.  With the consciousness of the occurrences alluded to, continued,
she exhibits, after the etherization has in a great measure passed away, no ap-
pearance of distress to Mrs. P.; prefers no complaint against Dr. B.; but, on
the contrary,makes a new appointment with him for farther dental operations;
spends a full hour in promenade of the streets ; visits an ice-cream saloon, and
her dress maker ; walks with a gentleman some pavements, evincing  to no one
any remarkable expression of distress or mental suffering; makes no  examina-
tion of her person or clothes for confirmation of her impression, that her per-
son had been outraged; she feels no soreness, or difficulty in walking, and suf-
fers several hours to pass before she gives utterance to her tale of wrongs.
Neither Miss Mudge, nor any other person,  examined her clothes till the Sun-
day afternoon following the Friday's visit to the dentist.   Her person at no
time was examined.*  The testimony of Miss M., as to the outrage, is  left with-

  * [It should be stated that Dr. Beale and his counsel, immediately on the charge
being preferred against him, urged that Dr. Huston, the family physician, and Dr. J.
K. Mitchell, should institute an examination, that, by this means, the falseness of the
charge might be made manifest.  This was declined.  Another  overture was made
that Dr.  Huston and  any physician he might  choose to select, should do this thinL'!
This, too, -was declined.  Finally, it was proposed that Dr. Huston alone should do it,
but it never was done; and Dr. Beale was sent to prison on the uncorroborated testimony
of a witness, no more fit to testify, as Judge Woodward says, "than if she had been
dead drunk," or, as Judge Black says, " than if  she had been at  the antipodes."] 
17
out any of the  corroborations to  be derived from  inspection of  person and
clothes, speedily after the alleged  atrocity, laid down in all approved authors
in medical jurisprudence, as essential to the completion of testimony in cases
of rape.
  " This conduct, continued through a period of several hours, is totally at va-
riance with the course that would have been natural under the circumstance of
an actual defloration of a virgin girl, conscious of her condition, and cannot be
accounted for upon any known principles of human actions.  The whole  im-
pression of an outrage of her person, was an illusion, the result of an  imagi-
nation and perception, bewildered and clouded  by etherization,  and of her ap-
proaching monthly period.  This  opinion is supported by hundreds of record-
ed cases of  etherization, wherein illusions equally decided have been induced
by the administration of ether."  (Sae the vol. on Ether, &c, by J. F. Flagg.)


                         PUBLIC  JOURNALS.

   The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal,  and  the Medical and Surgical
Journal  of this city,  edited by  Dr. James Bryan, contained able  articles
which exerted great influence in removing the. false impressions upon  a por-
tion of the public mind in  regard to Dr. Beale.  Almost every medical jour-
nal throughout the country took his side.  The newspaper  press also rendered
valuable service in vindicating this injured, and innocent man.  Among those
most conspicuous in this work, justice requires the  mention of the New York
Times, Boston Times, New  York Evening Mirror, Daily Savannah Georgian,
Saturday  Courier,  Saturday  Evening Mail,  Pittsburg Dispatch, Miner's
Journal, one or more of the Baltimore papers, The Wisconsin Daily Reporter,
Evening Bulletin, and the  Lancaster  Saturday  Express.  The dentists
of New York and Baltimore  held public meetings to express their sympathy
for Dr. Beale,  and  to show the utter  insufficiency and unreliability  of  the
evidence on which he was  convicted.   The dentists of Philadelphia evinced
their interest in the case by an  earnest application for executive clemency.


            INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT LETTERS.

   Numerous pressing letters were addressed  to Governor Bigler, imploring
his  instant interposition.  A few of the most  important are introduced in
this place.   The first is from the  Hon. Ellis Lewis, Chief Justice of the  Su-
preme Court.
                          West  Penn  Square,  Phil'a, December 21, 1854.
His Excellency Gov. Bigler:—
  Dear Sir : I have examined  the testimony of the lady who gave  evidence
against Dr. Beale.   It appears from her own statement that, when the act com-
plained of is supposed by her to have been perpetrated by the Doctor, she was
so much under the influence of ether that she could neither see, nor cry out,  nor
perceive by  the  sense of feeling,  that his person was in close contact with hers.
Her only reason for believing  him guilty is, that she felt pain, and felt his
breath.  The breath might have been felt in the course of necessary contiguity
to her mouth, the place of his  dental operations.  The pain may have been
produced by an infinite number of causes, in no way connected with any crim-
inal act.  A witness unable to  see,  or to cry out, or to perceive the  personal
contact absolutely necessary for such an act as she imagines took place on that
occasion, and this incapacity produced by ether is, in my opinion, incompetent
to narrate anything that occurs while she is in  that  state.  She does not pre-
tend to any actual knowledge that the crime was committed.  She merely infers
it from feeling his breath at one extremity, and pain at the other, without the
slightest perception of any personal contact between  these two points.  Were it not 
18
that the subject is a solemn and grave one, I would say that this is perfectly
ridiculous. It is not such evidence as, in my opinion, justifies a conviction.  But
when, in addition to this, you take into view the fact that persons under the influ-
ence of ether are subject to delusions which are not removed when the cause
ceases to operate, the case is, I think, a clear one against a conviction.   The
subsequent conduct of the lady in taking more ether after she knew that the
outrage had been committed, in making no complaint to the lady in the  ope-
rating room, in asking for another appointment, in desiring it to be  booked, in
taking the Doctor's  advice to walk and not to ride—in spending the afternoon
with her friends cheerfully and joyously, without mentioning  the  injury she
had received until evening, lead me to believe that her impressions on the  sub-
ject were vague and  uncertain, such as  she herself could  not fully believe to
be anything but delusions, until  she  finally came to the conclusion that they
were  realities.  That she was in error, I really believe, and  so believing, if I
had the power which is reposed in the Executive, I would grant a pardon.
                                 Very respectfully your  friend,
                                                       ELLIS LEWIS.

                      JUDGE BLACK'S LETTER.

                                             Phil'a, December 28, 1854.
  Mr Dear Sir : The case of Dr. Beale you will admit to be a most awfully
hard one if he be not guilty.   How are we to judge whether he is guilty or not
except by the evidence given on the trial?   The presum-ption undoubtedly is,
that the conviction is right.  That presumption is much strengthened by the
high character of the able and upright Judge who presided at the trial.  It is
true,  also, that the  opposition  made to the pardon by  a  prosecuting  officer
with the clear mind and honorable feelings of Mr. Reed, is entitled to great
weight.
  But is it not clear that the conviction was an error?  An honest error, of
course, but still an error.  Think, for a moment.  This man is convicted of an
infamous and most atrocious crime, alleged to have been committed under cir-
cumstances which make it in the highest degree improbable.  It becomes  still
more difficult to believe the accusation when we reflect on the conduct of both
parties before and immediately afterwards.  How is this overcome ?  All the
improbabilities of the case might be met  by the clear, direct  testimony  of a
witness who knows the fact.  But no such evidence was produced.   The prose-
cution called a woman, who, at the time of the occurrence to which she testi-
fies, could know no more of what was going on than if she had been at the Anti-
podes.  There is no evidence, at all, unless we take that of a woman who swears
to very little, and whose faculties of mind and body were totally suspended,
when she supposes she saw or perceived the little she does  swear to.  When a
conviction takes  place without evidence, it is the duty of a Governor to rescue
the victim immediately, from a punishment which is wrongfully inflicted.
                                            I am, most  truly, yours,
                                                        J.  S. BLACK.

                    JUDGE  WOODWARD'S  LETTER.

                                                 Phil'a, Jan. 1th, 1855.
To His Ex. Gov. Bigler :—
   Dear Sir : I am  called  upon by the  friends of Dr. Beale  for a written ex-
pression of the opinion in reference to his case, which you drew out of me in
conversation, a few  weeks since. I had  thought the question closed  by your
final determination  not to pardon Dr. B., but I  am assured  you are now  recon-
sidering the  whole subject, and that you desire to hear from me  by letter.
   Without going over all the ground, and certainly without intending any re-
flection on the highly esteemed Judge who presided at the trial, I feel free to
say that I never read or heard of a  ravished virgin behaving after the fact as
Miss Mudge described herself to have acted. The offence is a grave one, easily
charged, and difficult of defence, and for these reasons, the  law, in its wisdom 
19
enjoins strict regard to be given to the conduct of the woman.  It is her duty
to cry out, or, if prevented, to make discovery of the offence presently after its
perpetration. _ Now this lady, supposing her disabled by ether from giving the
alarm at the instant of assault, had ample opportunity, even before  she left
the house, and still more after she left it, to make her wrongs known to persons
of her own sex.   Yet her conduct down to the evening of the day was that of
a lady to whom nothing extraordinary had happened.  I think no man, before
Dr. Beale, was ever convicted of a rape on the testimony of a woman whose
conduct not only afforded no corroboration of the principal fact, but which was so
inconsistent with it.
  Then, as to  her capacity to detail what occurred while she was under the in-
fluence of the drug; I conceive it was no more trustworthy than that of a per-
son dead drunk.  Doubtless all sorts of visions pass through the brain of such
a person, but was any citizen ever before convicted of rape on the unsupported
testimony of such a witness?  I think not.
  The questions presented, both of law and science, were novel, and worthy, it
seems  to me,  of more thorough investigation than they received.  For these
reasons, I have been forced to think the conviction of Dr. B., and the refusal of a
new trial were ill-advised; a harsh measure of justice.  But is there ground for
Executive interposition ?   I think there is.  The Governor  is to see that the
laws of the land are executed, not only in form, but in substance and reality.
And if a citizen has been convicted of a high crime on  a state of facts which
the law has never recognized as sufficient to establish the charge, the only re-
source is in the pardoning power.  Again, facts  often occur, or are developed
after conviction and judgment, which demonstrate with moral certainty the in-
nocence of the accused.  The Executive, proceeding  on such facts, is always
justifiable in pardoning.  Now, in this case, I apprehend there have been such
subsequent developments in reference to the influence of ether on the mental fa-
culties, its tendency to excite impure passions, and to establish just such delu-
sions as those which most likely deceived Miss Mudge, that you would be quite
justifiable in granting a pardon.
  On the following distinct grounds I would recommend that Dr. B. be  par-
doned:  1. That the amount of evidence  required  by law to convict of  rape,
was not submitted to the jury.  2. That the only witness to the principal fact
was as completely disqualified to relate occurrences as if she had been drunk,
and being uncorroborated by the usual legal tests, her testimony was inadequate
for conviction. 3. The scientific discussions to which the case has given rise,
demonstrate the  insufficiency of the evidence, and  the insecurity of human
liberty if this case be permitted to stand as a precedent.
  Thus, my dear sir, I have very briefly put on paper the substance of our con-
versation.  I do not know the parties, and have no feeling in the matter except a
desire that the law should be vindicated.  The Court proceeded conscientiously
in the lights before them ; and all due respect is to be  entertained for  their
judgment, but from all that is now before the public,  I believe they erred, and
you alone can correct the error.
  Having no official responsibility  in the case,  I should have preferred not to
express an opinion on it, but you are entitled to have, in this form, what I said
in conversation, and therefore I communicate it.
                                     Yours truly,
                                               GEO. W. WOODWARD.
               LETTER FROM REV. ALBERT BARNES.
                                                  Phil'a, Dec. 1st, 1854.
To His Excellency Gov. Bigler :—
  Sir: Understanding that petitions  are about to be presented  to your Excel-
lency, in behalf of Dr. Beale, of this city, now in prison, under sentence for a
rape, I beg leave to add my name to those- who pray that the sentence may be
remitted.
  The sole ground on which I do this is the probable innocence of Dr. Beale. 
20
If there were sufficient and clear evidence of his guilt, the sentence of the Court
would be, in my judgment, too mild, and nothing in his past character or in his
present circumstances, would induce me to sjgn  a petition for his discharge.
  I have, indeed, no evidence in the case which  is not  before your Excellency
in the report of the trial, but I may be permitted to ask your attention to two
circumstances in the case, showing my own belief, and 1 think the belief of a
large portion of  the community, that the evidence was not such as to establish
the proof of his guilt.
  One is, that the  condition  of the only witness in the  case, the female on
whom the outrage is alleged to have been committed, was such, being under the
influence of ether,  as to  make her testimony insufficient to convict a man of so
high a crime, and that her own deportment, subsequently, showed that she had
no real consciousness that such a crime had been committed on her person.
  The other is the strong improbability that such  an offence  could  have been
committed, or would have.been  attempted, in the circumstances, in a place so
public, and with no precaution on the  part of Dr. Beale for concealment.
  Under these circumstances, I beg leave to express my earnest conviction of
the innocence  of Dr. Beale, and my  belief in  common with that of a large por-
tion of this community, that the interests of justice would not suffer if the sen-
tence were remitted, and to pray that he may be discharged from this sentence,
and restored to his family and the community.
                                     With great respect,
                                                  ALBERT BARNES.
  Hon. Wm. Bigler.

  Professor Willbank, of the Pennsylvania Medical  College, in a letter to
Gov. Bigler, dated Nov. 28,  1854, says :—

  " Until this charge was brought against him, Dr. Beale always stood high in
the estimation of our community.  His character, both  moral and professional,
was beyond  a reproach.   He was extensively known, and, I believe, universally
respected.  Is it right, allow me to ask, to convict such a man of so heinous an
offence and doom him and his family to infamy and ruin, upon the evidence of
a single witness, and that witness  in a state of unconsciousness?"

  Extract of a letter from Wm. Gibson, M. D., Professor of Surgery in the
University of Pennsylvania :—
                                                Phil'a, December, 1854.
His Ex. Gov. Bigler:—
  Dear Sir: At the request of a number of intelligent and influential gentle-
men of the medical profession, the pulpit and the bar,  I take the liberty of ad-
dressing you on  the subject  of Dr. Beale, convicted most unjustly, as I firmly
and conscientiously believe, of a rape on Miss Mudge.
  After a patient and untiring investigation of the case, without any prejudice
against or in favor of either party,  I have arrived  at the conclusion that Dr.
Beale is an  innocent man, and that Miss Mudge,  from beginning to end, has
been laboring under mental illusion, the effect of the inebriating influence of
anaesthetic agencies.   I would add, that I was the first to employ ether in  Phila-
delphia, and that for several years I have used it in private practice, and before
hundreds of students in  the operating  theatre of the University, upon a  vast
number of patients young and old, male and female, with the most singular,
varied, and delusive effects, but not in  a single instance have I found the mus-
cular power diminished or destroyed in one part, and remaining perfect in ano-
ther.   In  other  words,  I  have  never  known a  patient to retain the muscular
power of the eyelids and lose that of the limbs, as stated by Miss Mudge  upon
the trial of Dr. Beale, to have been her case.       .      .            ' 
21
                     MR. WESTCOTT'S  LETTER.

                                                 Phil'a, Jan. 1st, 1855.
His Excellency Gov. Bigler :—
  My Dear Sir: It is generally believed in the community, that Dr. Beale is
now, or is to be pardoned, and the notice published in the papers yesterday is
generally credited.  Your friends, therefore, have an opportunity of judging
of the effect upon the public mind that his pardon would have, and I can assure
you, so far as I have seen and heard, people  think it right.
  You know that, originally, I was of the opinion that he should not be pardon-
ed for reasons  that I explained to you, and  that I have changed that  opinion
upon the most sincere conviction, I hope you will believe.  I do believe him in-
nocent, and am sure that he was convicted against all sound law and reason.  I
hope you will be able to arrive at the same  conclusion, and gratify his friends
and bring solace to his distressed and amiable family.
                                       Very truly yours,
                                                    G. G. WESTCOTT.
  His Ex. Gov. Bigler.

                   LETTER  OF WM. BADGER, ESQ.

                                                 Phil'a, Jan. 13, 1855.
His Ex. Gov. Bigler:—
  Sir: At the request of some of the friends of Dr. Beale, I feel constrained
to suggest some reflections on  the subject of his application to you for a pardon.
  The history of Dr. B.'s case I am familiar with, though with the man I have no
acquaintance.   I do not feel disposed to trouble your Excellency with my views
as to the guilt or innocence of Dr. B. But  I unhesitatingly say, that in view
of all the circumstances connected with this extraordinary case, I would not have
sentenced him upon the finding of the jury who tried him.  It rests with you
to say, whether, influenced by such or similar considerations, you will exercise
the prerogative of mercy.
                                                      WM. BADGER.

                     LETTER OF W. L. HIRST, Esq.

                                                 Phil'a, Dec. 21, 1854.
To his Excellency, Gov.  Bigler :—
  Dear Sir:  This will be handed to you by Mrs. Beale,  who visits you upon
a mission of duty and affection.   Since the sentence of Dr. B., I have turned a
good deal  of my attention  to the evidence given in the case, and the state of
public feeling upon the subject, and am of the opinion that it would be a judicious
exercise of your constitutional power to grant a pardon. There is a general
feeling that perhaps the offence was not committed ; that may be the young lady
at that particular time may have been under a delusion; in short, that it is
totally wanting that firm belief of guilt which ought to accompany ever a con-
viction of such a man for a high crime.
  Then there are views of a different character, varied on the probable theory
of guilt, that the recommendation of the jury, the condition of the family, the
suffering already of him and  them, the ample vindication of  the young lady,
ought to operate promptly and immediately  on your Excellency.
                                          With great respect,
                                                       W. L. HIRST.

  We next present an extract from an interesting, able letter to Gov. Bigler,
dated  Dec. 15th, from the Rev. Dr. Henry A. Boardman, of Philadelphia.
Our limits will not permit the insertion  of  the letter entire.   Dr. Boardman
says:— 
22
  I have hesitated much whether I ought to write to you respecting the case of
Dr. Beale.  Perhaps my decision has been  hastened by meeting his wife, yes-
terday (with whom  I have no  acquaintance), who, from being  an unusually
hearty and happy-looking woman, has  become emaciated and desponding in
her appearance to a degree which startled  me.
  I have seen none of the petitions which are said to be in circulation, nor has
any one asked me to address you : I do it  simply on the prompting of  duty—
duty less to Dr. Beale than to the community at large.....The position I
lay down is this :  that if the principles which rided this trial are to be sustained,
no man's reputation or liberty in this State is safe.  Dr. B. was convicted on the
testimony  of a single witness, who was  under the influence of ether at the  time
the imputed outrage, to which she testifies, took  place.  Not  to  advert to the
inconsistencies in her own subsequent conduct, there was no medical examina-
tion  of her person, no examination even by her own mother, nor was  there a
solitary witness to corroborate her statement.  A very slight acquaintance with
the effects  of ether upon the human system, might seem sufficient to draw this
testimony  into discredit.  In conversing, a  few days since, on this subject with
my physician, Dr. Hodge, whose reputation, as you know, belongs not to Phila-
delphia but to the Union, and whose excellence as a Christian is commensurate
with his professional skill, he said to me, in the most  emphatic terms, that he
would not have believed Miss Mudge's testimony under oath, and that no phy-
sician was safe if men were to be convicted of crime on such authority as that.
This, I am told, is the feeling also among the Bar.  Waiving the question of Dr.
B.'s guilt or innocence, the sentiment is that the verdict was not warranted by
the evidence......

                              RUMORS.

  With such an array of influence, backed up by petitions bearing the signa-
tures of six or seven thousand persons,  many of them of the highest respecta-
bility and  weight of character, the  speedy release of Dr. B. was confidently
anticipated.   But there were stealthy and most corrupt efforts put forth  to
thwart the endeavors of the friends of virtue and of truth.   Rumor, with her
thousand lying tongues, was seen gadding about, mouth wide open, " scatter-
ing sharp  arrows, with coals of juniper."   She  insinuated, slyly and darkly,
that even  if Dr. B.  was  innocent of the specific  charge on which he was con-
victed, he was guilty of like offences, and had got no more than his just de-
serts.  Dark hints, sly innuendoes, and  a significant wink from Madam Rumor,
did a  thousand-fold more to crush this  unhappy man than the testimony
against him in Court.   Sober, intelligent, fair-minded men were, for a time,
in consequence of  the rumors  widely disseminated, biassed  against the accu-
sed ; but on the investigation of these rumors, they proved as " baseless as the
fabric of a vision."   There was nothing in them any more than in the testi-
mony of Miss Mudge;  and no intelligent  man will think much of that  after
perusing the letters of Judges Lewis, Black, and Woodward.  When it is
known  that Dr. Beale  had  administered ether in more than twenty-five hun-
dred instances, it is not strange that half a dozen nervous girls should  have
got awful  impressions of some undefinable, dreadful thing done to them while
under its influence; especially, since the effects of this drug, in the language
of Judge Woodward, upon " the mental faculties, its tendency to excite impure
passions " and to induce strange delusions, have been so fully established.
   We will mention two or three  facts  touching these rumors, and they are
but a fair specimen of others.   A  man, professing to have  some standing
wrote a letter to one of  the  Senators at Harrisburg, to be  laid before Gov.
Bigler, in which it  is stated that  Dr. B.  had been guilty of  a  gross outrage
upon a certain young lady, described.  On  investigating the charge, it ap-
peared, from the statement of the young lady's mother and herself, that she 
23
had never met Dr. Beale.   The entire story, intended to influence the  Go-
vernor to refuse a pardon, was a wicked fabrication.   It  did not contain  a
single element of truth.   How any man could deliberately sit down and write
a letter, the design of which was to keep a husband and a father in  prison,
without taking the pains to inquire whether his representations were  true or
false, is quite beyond our comprehension.  It evinces a disregard of truth and
honor and the claims of humanity which we would fain hope is not common.
   A  rumor, prejudicial to Dr.  Beale, was to the  effect that he manifested
unbecoming attention to a young lady, the niece of his wife, frequently riding
out with her, &c.   Something of this kind was brought out in the testimony
on the trial.   On inquiring into this important matter, it appears  that the
young lady resided, during the summer season, a few miles from the city, and
went back and forth daily in the discharge of her duties  as a music teacher.
Dr. Beale, coming into the city in his carriage, gave her a seat by his  side,
and in  the evening conveyed her home.   How much there was in all  this,
that is wrong and scandalous (and this was the whole of his offending in this
matter), an enlightened public will judge.
   Another rumor, deeply injurious to Dr. B., had respect to an alleged gross
outrage attempted upon Mrs. -----, while under the influence of ether.   But
when it is known that Mrs. Beale was in the adjoining room at the  time this
atrocity is said to  have been attempted, that the door communicating  was
unlocked, and that Mrs. Beale opened it, called her husband to her to speak
with  him, and saw this woman  sitting in the  operating-chair, we leave  this
case to the judgment of the public without a  word of comment.
   Three letters now lie before  us, from three ladies, who were  reported to
have  made charges against Dr.  B.   The first is from a lady  whom the com-
monwealth summoned on " an  anonymous communication," to appear, and
give testimony against the accused.   The lady says:—
   "I stated to Mr. Reed that I had taken ether repeatedly from Dr. Beale, and
that I never saw aught but the most gentlemanly conduct in him.  I felt great in-
dignation to think my name had been thus used."
   The lady who writes the second letter says :—
   "I consider it my duty to say  that there is not the least truth in the report.
Neither myself nor any member of my family have been patients of Dr. Beale,
nor have we any personal acquaintance with him."
   The lady who writes the third letter says:—
   " Having been informed that a report is in circulation, to the effect that Dr.
Stephen T. Beale had acted in an improper manner towards me, I think it a
mere  matter of justice to say, there is not the least truth in the report.   I  have
for eight years been acquainted with Dr. B. (he having acted professionally for
me), and I always had, and still continue to have,  the highest regard for him
as a gentleman.  In his conduct towards me he  has been uniformly kind, as
well as dignified, and I should  consider  him one  of the last persons in the
world likely to do an act such as he has  been convicted of.   I esteem him a
deeply wronged man, and  most sincerely trust he will very soon be liberated
from the terrible evils which surround him."
   The nature of the bitter hostility against Dr. B. will be understood by the
statement of  a single  fact.  A few days since, a man, whose only claim for
standing and influence consists in his wealth,  said, with an awful oath, if he
knew  Dr. Beale was entirely innocent, he would not ask for his release, because
it  would gratify the long-faced, villanous clergy.   Poor Beale !   His honest
endeavor to be a decent, conscientious, reputable  man, was made, in certain
quarters, the  motive to send him to prison, and to keep him there. 
24
                          CORRESPONDENCE.

    A letter, said to be in the hands of Wm. B. Reed, Esq., from Dr. Beale,
 containing admissions and confessions of guilt, had a powerful influence  in
 prejudicing the  minds of  many.   An  earnest effort was made to procure a
 copy.  Mr. Reed was applied to personally by Mr. Mitchell, one of Dr. B.'s
 counsel, for the favor of a copy.   The  request was refused; but Mr. M. was
 permitted to read the letter.
    Mrs. Beale then addressed to Mr. Reed the following note :—

                                                 Phila.,  Dec. 25th, 1854.
 Wm. B. Reed, Esq.:—
    Sir : You are  doubtless aware that an application is now  before  the Gover-
 nor, praying for the interposition of Executive clemency in behalf of my hus-
 band.  A serious obstacle in immediately obtaining what I so earnestly crave,
 seems to be an impression, or a rumor, that you have facts in your possession,
 in regard to other cases than that of Miss Mudge, which indicate that he is a
 guilty man.  Permit me respectfully to ask, is this true ?  If  so, will you have
 the goodness to transmit to me the names and the residences of the persons who
 make these charges ?  I will, by the aid of friends, institute  an immediate in-
 vestigation, that the truth may be known.
   I respectfully ask you, also, to give me a  copy of the letter of my husband
 in your hands.
   A messenger will call at your office to-morrow morning, at 9  o'clock, to re-
 ceive your reply.
                                   Respectfully,
                                                  LOUISA B. BEALE.

    Mr. Reed returned the following answer :—

              District Attorney's Office, Philadelphia, Dec. 26th, 1854.
 _ Mr. Reed has received Mrs. Beale's letter of yesterday. He  cannot recon-
 cile to his sense of duty to the public, to comply with her request, by either
 giving her the names of the witnesses, or a copy of the letter  in his possession.
 The witnesses were in  attendance on the  trial, and, had they been sworn,
 would have been subject to public examination, and cross-examination in Court.
 Had the names been asked for then, they would  have been given.  They were
 not, and to  furnish them now, would, in Mr. Reed's opinion, be uselessly to
 subject respectable females to annoyance and most irregular inquiry.
   The letter, to  which Mrs. Beale refers, was shown to  Dr. Beale's leading
 counsel several days, if not weeks, before the trial, and an explanation of it
 anxiously asked  for.  It was  known to exist by many. No  explanation was
 offered while Dr. Beale was at liberty, and now it is not susceptible of expla-
 nation by others.
   Mr. Reed desires further to say, that while he hopes no further correspond-
 ence on this painful subject will  be  expected, he much prefers  corresponding
 with Mrs. Beale's counsel or male friends.
   No one  feels more sincerely than Mr. Reed for the situation of Mrs. Beale
 and her family.  He regrets very much that ever, in the discharge of duty, he
 has been compelled to add to her  sorrows.

   Mrs. Beale rejoined in the  following note:—

                                           Philadelphia,  Dec. 26,  1854.
Wm. B. Reed, Esq. :—
   Sir : You will  excuse  this note, notwithstanding an intimation in yours of
this date that nothing farther from me would be agreeable to you.
  You decline furnishing me a copy of my husband's letter in  your possession
because " no explanation"  of its contents' "was offered while Dr. Beale was at 
25
 liberty, and now it is not susceptible of explanation by others." Perhaps not.  But
 this I can and wish to do, publish it entire, that the community may see exactly
 what it is, and form  an intelligent opinion  upon it.   I know that the general
 impression in regard to that letter is entirely different from what it would be if
 it could be seen.   Surely, you will not deny a  desolate, broken-hearted wife,
 the favor  of a copy of her husband's letter, if she is willing to take the respon-
 sibility of making it public.  If it is as bad as  has been  represented, all the
 better, so far as you are concerned.  My husband and myself should be the
 losers and the sufferers.  Three gentlemen of high intelligence and undoubted
 integrity,  have seen and read the letter with care.  I have a copy from their
 recollection, and as it  is a very short letter, it must be nearly verbatim.  Still, an
 exact copy would be better.
   Fancy yourself, my dear sir, in my circumstances, tossed as with a tempest,
 struggling for my life and the lives  of eight young, helpless children, my hus-
 band cruelly and wickedly torn from me and shut up in prison ; and would
 you not think that so small a boon as a copy of a letter, a letter which has been
 misrepresented, perverted, and made by lying rumor to contain admissions and
 confessions of guilt, which it does not, ought to be readily conceded ?
   I am sure, on reflection, you will change your purpose, and permit me to have
 a copy of  that letter.   If you will grant me this favor, I think I can promise I
 will not soon trouble you again.
   A messenger will call for your answer to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock.
                                      Respectfully,
                                                   LOUISA B. BEALE.
 Wm. B. Reed, Esq.

   A verbal message  was sent by Mr. Reed, declining  to  furnish a copy of
 the letter.   Being thus foiled in every effort to procure  an attested copy of
 this famous letter, we are obliged to rely on the impressions  and statements
 of those who were permitted to see it.  The Hon. Judge Black says: "I have
 seen and read  Dr. Beale's letter in the hands of Mr.  Reed.  There is nothing
 in it to implicate the doctor."
   Mr.  Mitchell, on perusing the letter at Mr. Reed's office with special atten-
 tion, went directly to his own, a distance of some two or three squares.  Im-
 mediately he penned7/rom memory, the following, as the note in  Mr. Reed's
 possession :—
   Dear Madam : I regret exceedingly that you should believe  that I intended
 to insult you.  I certainly did not intend so to do, and for the sake of my wife
 and seven little children, I hope you will believe me, and say no more about it.
                                                STEPHEN  T. BEALE.
   P. S. I shall never give ether hereafter to  any  person, except in the presence
 of a friend of the patient-
   The  above must be very nearly the contents of Dr. Beale's note, which,  by
 its suppression on  the ruling of  the Court, did him so much injury.  Judge
 Black's recollection of the note differs from Mr. Mitchell's only in one word.
 " Verily, how great a matter a little fire kindleth !"
   Mr.  Mitchell says, this note is without date and addressed to  no  one.   If
 the name of  the person for whom it was intended could be obtained, we sus-
pect a good deal of light would be  thrown upon the whole affair.
   Dr.  Beale  said  to  the  man who came to him with the complaint of this
 woman: " I  understand, sir, the  game she  is playing.  She wants  to extort
 money.  How much of it  do you expect to receive?"   "0, no,"  said he;
 " she don't want money.   If you will write her a note, I  think she will be
 satisfied."  It  was in  just these  circumstances that this note was written,
 which  has been so much magnified, and so grossly perverted, and had such a
powerful influence in  hastening the doom  of this unhappy  man.
  Dr. Beale  has been much censured for violating the promise contained  in 
26
the above postscript, in administering ether except in the presence of a third
person.   He has  experienced overwhelming calamities in consequence  of a
departure from this wise and safe rule.   But it should be known that, when
asked on the day or the day after what he meant by a declaration so positive,
he replied:  " I had reference to persons with whom  I was not familiarly ac-
quainted ; to persons who might, from  sinister purposes, take advantage  of
me."   In regard  to Miss Mudge, he had no more apprehension of danger, to
use his  own  language, than  if he was "administering ether  to his  own
daughter."
  A remarkable feature in this  case from the first has been, that nine-tenths
of the respectable, virtuous married women have not had the slightest confi-
dence in the truth of the charge against Dr. Beale.   They have  said, in the
language of the Vicar of Wakefield, "fudge, fudge."


                              ROGUES.

  Mean  and mercenary  influences were brought, in strong array,  to  bear
upon  this case. There were men who were resolved to fatten upon  the dread-
ful  calamity which  had befallen Dr. Beale.  They were willing his prison
door should be opened, if they  could obtain the price of their  disinterested
co-operation, ranging from fifteen thousand, to five thousand dollars.
  The first movement, soon after Dr. Beale's sentence, was on comparatively
a small  scale.  A  man  representing himself an  attorney, boarding at the
American Hotel,  called on  Mrs. Beale, and said  to her  that he had it in his
power to produce  an affidavit, which would conclusively show that her  hus-
band  was the victim of a foul conspiracy, and  would procure his immediate
release.   He asked, for his services and trouble, the moderate sum of twenty-
five dollars.   Mrs. Beale was fearful that some knavery was connected  with
the proposal.  But after appealing to his honor as  a man, and saying to him
she should have but two dollars left for  the necessary expenses  of her large
family, and receiving the most solemn  assurances that he  would  faithfully
fulfil  his promise, she gave  him the money.  It is  needless to say,  the whole
thing was an infamous imposition.
  The last  effort of these  miserable, human  harpies, was bold, systematic,
and skilfully devised.  The proposition made  to Mrs. Beale, through a near
relative,  earnestly anxious for his  release, was to  raise ten thousand dollars
as a compensation for her husband's pardon.   The paper indicating the way
to bring it  about, is without name, and without  date, but the individual is
known who  lent himself as  the agent for the accomplishment of this diabolical
scheme.   The paper reads thus ::—
  " In the first place, her own" (Mrs. Beale's) " friends have given up all hope.
There will be no chance under Gov. Pollock. Mr. Reed has said this much."
  " There is scarcely a doubt  but what you could bring the proper influence to
bear, if your terms  are complied with—there  is not a  moment  to lose.   Let
Mrs.  Beale write  to the Doctor immediately, and tell him what you  say of the
case,  and what your offer is, and request him to send his answer by  the person
that takes her letter.  Tell Mrs. Beale exactly where she stands, for  I am  more
than  fearful that  she hears but one side of the case, and however sincere her
friends may be, they are far from being skilled  in such matters.   Should  Mrs.
Beale be disposed to do as you wish in this  matter, let her send  for  whoever
takes her letters,  and let the Doctor's answer be obtained to day if possible, if
not, to-morrow.   She might arrange it, I think, through Mr. Mullen."
   Let an intelligent,  virtuous community look at this  infamous  plan.  A
near relative of Mrs. Beale, intensely anxious for his restoration  to his family 
27
is made to believe that the only hope of such a happy consummation  rests
upon an immediate raising of ten thousand dollars, to be given to two gen-
tlemen of potential influence with Gov. Bigler, who would insure the pardon
sought.
  If there is a depth of infamy beyond that practised by infamous men, it is
in a stealthy, concealed, deep laid plot like this, to appeal to the fears and love
of a disconsolate, heart-stricken  wife, and by  impressing her mind  that the
liberation of her husband was hopeless without paying a large sum of money,
induce her, if possible, to sacrifice everything she  possessed for the  accom-
plishment of the object so dear to  her heart.  The  man, or the men, who
could thus deliberately " pile on  the agony" upon a faithful wife, already
staggering and sinking under her accumulated sorrows and woes, are fit  for
treason  and stratagem, and every  kind of atrocity which their master, the
devil, may choose to employ them  in effecting.
  An interview was  sought  and obtained  by Mr. Chambers  and a friend,
with this man, who was the professed agent in accomplishing this nefarious
scheme.  They drew from him all the facts and details of the plan, so far as
they were able, when Mr. Chambers said to him : " Who are these  men  so
ready to engage in this labor of love for ten thousand dollars ?   Are they
fathers? Have they human sympathies? Who are they? I can conceive," said
Mr. Chambers, " that men may be depraved and degraded enough to be
horse-thieves, but infamy like this is beyond my comprehension."  The man,
feeling  his honor somewhat impugned, undertook a defence of his mercenary
friends.   He said they were professional men,, and  the  ten  thousand dollars
demanded was not a bribe, but a professional fee for important services  ren-
dered.
   These Pardon-brokers, who are ready to insure " so much mercy for so
much money," are worthy the thoughtful consideration of a  virtuous  commu-
nity.   They still continue to hover around  this distressed, desolate family,
like hungry vultures,  and seem determined that no efforts for the relief of this
suffering  man shall  prove successful until they shall obtain a round sum.
We wish them to understand that they are quite certain to fail in the object
of  their  grasping, unprincipled cupidity.   They  will not get one dollar.
 Their influence is not asked.  The remission of Dr. B.'s sentence will be ob-
tained by the presentation of truth, facts, and fair arguments, or not obtained
at all.   Let  the old Roman, heathen as  he was, rebuke  these merciless
sharpers:—
                     "Procul, 0, procul, este profani."

   Mrs. Beale communicated by letter to her husband  the assurances, verbal
and written, which had been made to her.   The manner in which tkey were
received by Dr. Beale will be best understood by his reply to the letter from
his wife.
                                    Motamensing Prison, Jan. 8th, 1855.
  My dear Wife:  Since your letter of this morning came, I have  been re-
flecting upon the principles involved in the  proposition made by the friend of
Gov. Bigler.  You  know how anxious I am to get home, and yet I never  can
consent to do  anything that is not right to get there.  Now, if it is right that I
should  be pardoned, it is Gov. Bigler's duty to do it, but if his conscience says
I ought not to be pardoned, it would be wrong in me or any other personto give
him money to violate  his conscience ; therefore I never can consent to  give one
penny.
  It is our duty to do all we possibly can to convince the Governor ot my in-
nocence, and of his duty to pardon, and leave the event  to the Lord.   I  have
been convinced for months, that justice and conscience are with some men like 
28
things of merchandise, to be bought and sold to the highest bidder.  Perhaps
I am too stubborn in this matter, but I ask only what my conscience says I am
entitled to.   I have been unjustly deprived of my liberty, and I can not think
it right to give money for its restoration, as it must be a matter of justice and
conscience with the Governor......Good night, my love, I
have to close.
                                       Your affectionate husband,
                                               STEPHEN T. BEALE.


             EXECUTIVE  INTERPOSITION SOUGHT.

  Gov. Bigler was visited  by committees large and small, urging  upon  him
the immediate  consideration  of this case, and that speedy relief which he
alone could give.  The first  formal visit was  early in  December, while the
Governor was in the city.   The gentlemen who called upon him at the Mer-
chants' Hotel, where he lodged, were Dr. F. A. Van Dyke, Charles B. Pen-
rose, Esq.,  Dr. James Bryan, George R. Graham, Dr. Patrick, Daniel Stein-
metz, A. H. Burtis, R. W. Davenport, and Rev. Messrs. Brainerd, Chambers,
and Rood.   The interview was protracted, and  the unhappy condition of Dr.
B. was urged by every consideration which the  facts in the case justified.
  Numerous letters from all quarters poured in upon the Governor, and  yet
there was on his part  painful delay, whether  needless or unavoidable, it is
not our object to  inquire.   This much, however, should  be said, as  due to
those whose frequent visits to him must have been inconvenient and annoy-
ing.   If he had frankly said: " Gentlemen, it is not my purpose  to meddle
with the case  of  Dr.  Beale, and  you  will  save your time and trouble by
ceasing  to  press it upon  my consideration," all efforts would at once have
been suspended, and intense  anxiety, and agonizing suspense for six long
weeks, would have been saved.  But the Governor held out just enough en-
couragement to call forth untiring effort and sleepless energy, till the last hour
of the last  day of his official  term  brought the sad tidings that he had come
to the conclusion that  " he would best perform his duty by passing the case
of Dr. Beale over to his successor."

                  PARDON ALMOST OBTAINED.

  We would not speak unkindly of any man, and certainly we would not
speak without due  deference, of a man  holding a high official position.   But
the truth should not be suppressed  out of false delicacy to the feelings, or
the exalted station  of any man.  To say nothing of numerous previous visits,
Gov. Bigler was called upon in  Harrisburg, on Monday, Jan. 15th, by three gen-
tlemen in behalf of Dr. Beale.  The interview was  long, quite  too long, if
the object had been of less  importance than the  relief of a suffering, innocent
man.   In the evening, the visit was repeated, and  the prospect of success
was bright, cheering,  and satisfactory.   At the suggestion of the  Governor,
Mr. Secretary Black prepared a paper  to accompany the  pardon,  briefly as-
signing the reasons for the interposition of executive clemency.   It was read
to the Governor in the presence of the three gentlemen above referred to.   The
Governor objected  to a portion of it as being too strongly expressed.  He
then remarked: " Leave  it till morning; I can make it  out  in ten min-
utes, if I conclude  to  do so.   You will hear from me  before 11 o'clock to-
morrow."
  The three gentlemen left with the  strongest hope, and with nearly a full
conviction  that  their  mission would prove successful.   Early  on Tuesday 
29
morning a messenger was sent to the public house where they lodged, saying
the Governor desired to see them.   Without any delay, they called at his
residence, thinking it probable that the Governor would gratify, but not sur-
prise them, by handing over the papers, wishing them all joy in having ob-
tained the object they so  earnestly sought.   The interview was very brief.
The Governor said : " The pardon hangs on a hair.   I am disposed to grant
it, but there is one thing into which  I  am inquiring, and the result of that
inquiry will  decide the case.  You will hear from me by 11 o'clock."  The
three gentlemen  left, so certain that they had obtained the object of  their
anxious solicitude that they would  hardly have given one dollar to  have had
the  pardon insured. They felt confident that the agony of suspense was  over,
and that Dr. Beale  would that evening be in the bosom of his family.  A
telegraphic dispatch was arranged to be sent at 11 o'clock—the carriage  to go
down to the prison was to be at the depot, and the glad tidings were to make
a desolate family joyful and happy.  The gentlemen returned to their  lodg-
ings, and waited patiently as they could for the arrival of the papers. At 11
o'clock, a knock, and the door is instantly opened.   But instead of the  anti-
cipated papers, the following note from Mr. Secretary Black, addressed to the
 Rev. John Chambers, was handed in:—
                                            Harrisburg, Jan. 16th, 1855.
   Dear Sir: You know how far the Governor had gone to comply with your
 wishes.   Since you saw him the circumstances to which he referred have been
 understood,  and  readily brought him to the conclusion that he would best per-
 form his duty by passing the case of Dr. Beale over to his successor.  In this
 decision I most heartily concur.
   It will be commended to the early attention of Gov. Pollock.
                                    Yours, truly,
                                                        C.  A. BLACK.

   This unexpected and most remarkable turn of events, was  borne with as
 much patience and resignation as the frailty  of human  nature  would permit.
 " You know how far the  Governor had gone to comply with your wishes."
 True, indeed, that was known, and rendered the final disappointment the more
 strange and  trying.   But " the hair" on which the case hung;  there was the
 mystery.  What was it ?   Who could explain ?   The mystery, however, was
 solved sooner than was anticipated.   On the  evening  of the  same  day, Mr.
 Secretary Black was asked, what the Governor  meant  by  "the hair?"  He
 promptly replied,  " It was a political aspect of  the case."  Mr. Black may
 have been mistaken.   Good  men,  everywhere, will hope he  was mistaken ;
 that a higher and a holier motive led Gov. Bigler to keep this suffering man
 in prison.
   But, be the motive what it may, Dr. Beale was left in his cell, and is still
 there.  His  desolate family is still  left to drink, to the dregs, the bitterest cup
 of sorrow.   The beseeching importunity of an agonized wife,  and  the cries
 of eight young, helpless children, have thus far been unavailing. How it will
 be in future we  do not know.
   The large mass of papers, embracing letters, numerous facts relating  to
 ether cases, memorials and petitions laid  before  Gov.  Bigler, were passed
 over to Gov. Pollock.  The case of Dr. B. has been presented to Gov. Pol-
 lock, and while he did not feel  justified  in acceding at  that  time to the
 request  for his release, we have every confidence it will finally  be disposed of
 according to the dictates of a sound discretion, and a conscientious regard to
 truth and duty.
   The health of Dr. Beale, at best delicate, is severely suffering by his con- 
30
finement.   We fear, greatly fear, if his release is not soon obtained, it will bo
fatally undermined, and that his faithful wife, and eight young children, will
be left to buffet the storms of life unprotected and alone.
  We have seen him but once since his sentence. The interview was brief. W e
need not relate the particulars.   One thing we noticed, with what feelings it
is unnecessary to describe.  As we entered his cell, we observed the care and
neatness with which his hair was adjusted.  This was the only thing that
could remind  him " of his former self."   His coarse prison  garments, his
pallet of straw, and the iron door with its bars and bolts, showed him where
he was, but he seemed anxious to retain  something about  his looks that
would carry him back  in momentary imagination to those pleasant associa-
tions and scenes from which he has been torn away.   If  an innocent man, as
we believe he is, we say, in the language of Judge Black, his case " is an
awfully hard one."
  With this concise,  truthful statement of the  leading facts connected with
this extraordinary, painful case, we commend the whole subject  to the thought-
ful, serious consideration of an enlightened community.  We  were  resolved
from the first, that we would not be identified with  a guilty man, if honest
inquiry and careful scrutiny of the outside rumors  in regard to Dr.  Beale
could prevent such a misfortune.   These rumors have been carefully inquired
into, and we now most solemnly aver, that  not one of them, in our conscien-
tious  belief, is entitled to a grain of credit.  We say, in the  emphatic lan-
guage of the Rev. Albert Barnes:  " If there were  sufficient  and clear  evi-
dence of his guilt, the sentence of  the Court would  be, in our judgment, too
mild, and  nothing in his past character, or in his present circumstances, could
induce us  to sign a petition for his  discharge."
  The Hon. Henry K. Strong,  Speaker of the  House  of Representatives,
Hon.  John C. Kunkel, Col. F. K. Boas, Eli Slifer, Esq., State Treasurer,
elect, W.  R.  Morris, Esq.,  Robert Carlisle, Esq., and R. M. Foust, Esq.,
have manifested a special interest in restoring Dr. Beale  to his family,  and
this public acknowledgment of their kind offices  is due to them, and is most
cheerfully rendered by those who have been actively engaged in behalf of
this suffering  man.                  •
                                            A. ROOD,
                                            JAMES  BRYAN, M.D.,
                                            JOHN CHAMBERS,
                                            S. S. MOON,
                                            THOMAS  WHITE,
                                            JAMES  BERRY.
   Phil'a, March 2, 1855. 
/ 
 
         TRIAL  AND CONVICTION

                     OF


   DR. STEPHEN  T.  BEALE;


             WITH THE LETTERS OF

CHIEF JUSTICE LEWIS, AND JUDGES BLACK AND WOODWARD;

               ALSO, LETTERS OF

  PROF. GIBSON, PROF. WILTBANK, WM. BADGER, Es<^,
       W. L. HIRST, Esq., REV. ALBERT BARNES,
          DR. HENRY^ A. BOARDMAN, &c.
T. K. Collins, Jr., No. 8 North Sixth St. •

              'V   i.....9 
 
 
< a ( c +*.-k  c
OF MEDICINE
t« (
Lfl  0232536=1  2
'1*7
c  <c_
CCCCTC (X
^<x c c:«c  c C  <^ «7 <C <\

zc.  «  < «-cc ^<.<:c


        C c ^C  ■
	
	
r ^ r « <_ .< «	
-Sv^
H7*.
 id  '.
 AC  <
:cc  <
 .cc
 . «<.


  C
 c  U c c c c



;<A C.CccXL
 c >> v c *.< c. *■ *■----
  <  r  < c < <
<  X CCCCC^^,. v

 <  C  CCUC<f._<
c ' <  cca<rcccc <

< <  <  cc  r -
  c  c  ««,«.•»«...«
<  c  C  CCt« ««<
< <  1  c«ix«: «l-*-c
C cs, C  CC.CCSC C'vC
< c < k  <:c> <.<:<; <• ■• c
< t c i  c< cere  <" <
< t'  r  c< jb: <? «■ r

<  f-  ca<CT<  cc
 c • • x  cc c«T < k

"<■c  <L*r.<i  tc
CCCC CCCC  «T<oe<<
CCCC c< c  <tCc C'Cc
cc «■ CC
<LCc^ <
<C< c t
«Lc  f

  «•, « i  <-*:  <c < ««:

c -ice  <«c  «; cccc
< . ££,'<  <>C  «3C eCOC .
<   ^ c  <;<«:  <-C c«L' ■
<   v c «ac  «: •:*«:
: «<. c c c c
**** . c'c - <. •■-• <

  •Vakc 6 <^ c<r r c c^,
NLM023253892