The Providence Journal, And Town And Country Advertiser

TRIAL OF FAIRBANKS.

Supreme Court, Dedham, Massachusetts.

Commonwealth vs. Fairbanks,
For the Murder of Miss Fales.
August 6 and 7, 1801.

The grand jury, consisting of twenty very respectable men, by a unanimous voice, returned a bill of indictment against Jason Fairbanks, of Dedham, for the wilful murder of Elizabeth Fales.

The indictment charged the prisoner, that he, on the 18th day of May, 1801, wilfully, maliciously, and of his malice aforethought, with a knife, made an assault on the deceased, and murdered her.

On this indictment he was arraigned on Wednesday, and by his own consent Thursday was assigned for his trial. On Thursday morning, at eight o'clock, he was brought into court, and being informed of his right to challenge, he challenged a number of the jury, and then the trial proceeded. He was assisted by Mr. Otis and Mr. Lowell as his counsel, appointed by the court at his request.

The Attorney General opened the trial, by stating the facts, generally, which he expected would appear in evidence. He explained the nature of positive and presumptive evidence, and informed the court and jury, that the trial would contain much of the latter—that he should not use any confessions made by the prisoner after the murder had been committed.

The government's counsel examined between thirty and forty witnesses. By the testimonies of these, a great variety of circumstances were proved, from whence the following facts were made to appear.

That the prisoner is about twenty-one years of age; that the deceased was eighteen.
That he was much of an invalid, debilitated in his right arm, and had lived an idle life.
That he had a kind of fondness for the deceased, and that she paid much more attention to him than to any other young man; but he was not allowed to visit her father's house, which was more than one mile from that of his own father. They had been in the habit of meeting frequently in company with others, walking together, and separating themselves in the walks from other people.
The prisoner had used revengeful threatenings against her family, probably because he was not allowed to visit her. On Saturday the 6th of May he told two of his friends, that he should meet her in the pasture on Monday, and endeavour to induce her to go off with him, and marry him: and that if she refused to do so, he would attempt her chastity. She was healthy and cheerful—walked to meeting, nearly two miles, on the 17th; being in the practice of singing at public worship, he joined the choristers, and sung freely. On Monday morning she began with the family business, and with her mother, sister, &c. went through the usual business of washing, in the forenoon. Being engaged to go out on a visit with her sister and others in the afternoon, she dined early on milk, which she frequently used for her dinner.
She had been remarkably gay all the morning. She went at half past 12 to Mrs. Guild's, who lived about eight rods southwesterly from her father's. Her business there was to receive a book she had lent, but the family having not done with it, she did not bring it away. She tarried there until nearly two o'clock, gay and cheerful; when she came out, she stopped at the door ten minutes or more, sporting with a child of three or four years old. No notice was taken of the way she walked, but she left the house singing as she went.
A few minutes past three o'clock, she was found in a lot called Mason's pasture, by her father and a kinsman, eighty rods from her father's house, and about the same distance from Mrs. Guild's. The lines from her father's to Guild's, from Guild's to the place where she was found, and from thence to her father's, form a triangle of nearly equal sides.
When her father came to her, she was alive. Her throat was cut into the windpipe, and nearly to the back part of it: She had a wound, made with a small knife by a stab, in her back, between her shoulder blades, beside the back bone, and not far below the neck; one stab in her side, six deep wounds in her left arm, some of which severed the tendons, two slight wounds in her right arm, and a deep one in her left thumb, which severed the ball from the bone. When her father came to her, she lay with her face upon a stone, breathed through the wound in her throat, and expired within a few minutes.
To fix the murder on the defendant, it was proved, that he had informed two persons of his expecting to meet her there, for the purposes above mentioned, and that he had about 2 o'clock proceeded to that place; that two young women heard her screams of distress for ten or fifteen minutes, about three o'clock, knew her voice, and mentioned
to each other that she was in distress; the wind blew fresh from where she was to them, the distance being about 70 rods.
Her mother became anxious for her return, looked out a few minutes after three, and the prisoner, wet with blood, holding a bloody knife in his hand, was seen by her coming to the door. The alarm being thus given, her father went to the place where the body was, on the prisoner's saying where she lay, and that she was dead. He had a wound in his throat, which did not injure his wind pipe, several in his body, and one in his thigh, made with the knife, but none of them deep, excepting one in his belly; he has recovered of these some time ago.
The knife he had in his hand, he borrowed that morning, as he said, to mend a pen; it was a small knife, and rather dull. By the side of her body, his great coat, which three witnesses swore he went out with after one o'clock, and his pocket-book, were found.
No knife or instrument was found near her body, and her mother and sister swore that she carried none with her. Her shawl and shoes were off, and a paper, purporting to be a certificate of his having been duly published to her, torn in pieces and bloody, was found near her. It appeared in evidence, that this paper was made by a young woman, a niece of his, the day before, very innocently on her part; nor did it appear that he had any intentions to use it in this way, when he requested to have it made, and her name was put in voluntarily by the young woman; but after he took it in his hand, he said, "Ah, Betty Fales, this will do."
The points made by the Attorney-General, on this evidence, were, that she was killed with that knife—that the prisoner was present when she was killed—that no other person was present with them—that he must have killed her, unless she had destroyed her own life.
His counsel defended him on the supposition, that he and she were fond of each other;—that they were both afflicted with adverse circumstances, and agreed severally to kill themselves—that he lent her the knife for that purpose, but that when she had effectually used it, he was not so successful as she was.
To maintain this position, they attempted to enquire of witnesses, whether he did not tell this tale to her mother, when he came to her, covered with blood.
The Attorney-General objected to evidence of his declarations in his own favour, because as he had not used them against him, they ought not to be used for him, relying that declarations made by criminals in their own favour, were never used in evidence for, unless they were used against them. The Court did not allow his declarations to be used. Had they been used, her mother no doubt would have sworn, that he told her Betty was dead in the pasture: that she had killed herself with that knife, and that he had tried to kill himself—but advised her father not to go, because he could not relieve her, for she was in fact dead: that when her kinsman went towards the place, he called to him to bring him—his pocket-book, which he had left by the deceased:—but this was not in evidence in that trial, but had been before the grand jury.
The counsel for the defendant introduced witnesses, principally to establish a fact of a fondness between them; and for full six hours defended him in a strain of eloquence which is not frequently equalled in any country.
The Attorney-General, in closing the trial, insisted the evidence proved his intention to violate her chastity, at that time and place, by force, unless she would agree to go off with him to be married on that false certificate; that he in resentment had torn that paper, and that he attempted by force to possess her, but, finding his strength not equal to the attempt, drew the knife, and cut her arms while they were in defence of her throat; that the wound given in her back directly in, could not have been made by her own hand; that if she cut her throat first, she could not give the other wounds, nor could she give that, if the others were first made; that as the prisoner by his own position must have lent the knife, and have seen her lacerate and wound herself, no presumptions remained in his favour; that, even on his own position, he had a heart void of social duty, and fatally bent on mischief—the genuine malice aforethought.
The Judges were accurate and minute in summing up the evidence to the jury.
The jury went out on Friday evening, after ten o'clock: and returned their verdict next morning, that the prisoner was "GUILTY!"
The Court on Saturday passed sentence OF DEATH upon him: In which the Chief Justice addressed him in terms spreading the heinousness of his crime before him, and exhorting him to repentance; but he remained, as he always has done, apparently insensible—the only person in the whole assembly who was not affected at the solemnity of the scene.
The judgment of the Court, and the final verdict of the Jury, appear to meet the public approbation.