The Chester County Courthouse in Chester built in 1724 still stands in the 400 block of the Ave. of the States. It is the oldest courthouse in the U.S. The above picture is from the 1850's.
Some early trials in Chester from the 18th century
Note: From it's opening in 1724 the courthouse was part of many major trials in Penna. early history. Delaware Co. was created from Chester Co. in September of 1789
When the Courts of
Chester County first formally occupied the 1724 Courthouse in Chester, George I, whose coat-of-arms hung
conspicuously above the arch over the Judge’s bench, had ruled Great Britain
less than ten years. William Penn, the
Founder of the Commonwealth, had been dead less than six years. Benjamin Franklin poor and friendless, a lad
of eighteen landed in Philadelphia in search of fame and fortune the same year
the cryers’ Oyer proclaimed that the first Courts ever held in the building
were in session; John Morton, whose life was closely connected with its story,
was born the same year that saw the completion of the building; eight years
were to come and go before George Washington entered upon the Stage of Life;
less than fourteen years later Benjamin West, born in Springfield, was
subsequently to win in foreign lands, immortality, while it had scored twenty
years when Wayne, “Mad Anthony” who is associated with its history was born
within the County over which its Courts then exercised jurisdiction All of these illustrious men, save the
English King and Penn, to a greater or less degree were connected with the
history of the old building which is the central theme of my talk tonight.
The influence the trial of William Battin had in aiding in the
ultimate erection of the old Court House was important.
The case was heard by the Great Provincial Chief Justice, David Lloyd,
who will be ever memorable in our City’s annuals; two years before the old
Court House was built Lloyd had read law with Geo. Jeffreys, a well-grounded
lawyer, but devoid of all morals, honest and humanity, who is now generally
remembered only as the “Bloody Jeffreys” of the English Rebellion of 1633. The Battin case, so far as I have knowledge,
is the first instance in our State’s legal annals where the punishment of death
was supplemented with gibbeting. William Battin, a mere lad of seventeen, a
redemptive, whose time had first been purchased by John Hannum of Concord, but
who after a year’s trial, had disposed of the incorrigible boy to Joseph Pyle
of Bethel. One day when his master and
mistress were absent, leaving their three children in his care, the degenerate,
feeble-minded servant fastened the children, on a mere babe, securely in the
house to which he deliberately set fire and they were burned to death in the
destruction of the dwelling He was tried
for arson and convicted. He was
sentenced by Chief Justice Lloyd to be hanged and “hung in chains in the most
public place at such times as the Governor may appoint. The sentence was carried into execution August
5, 1722. After he was pronounced dead
his body was enclosed in a crude network of iron straps, running from the head
under the feet, and hoops were drawn at designated places, such as the knees,
waist and neck, as you would strap a bale of cotton. The longitudinal straps at the head were
drawn into a loop which was welded to a chain about three feet in length. An upright post planted in the ground, with
an arm extending from the top, known as a gibbet, was erected at a conspicuous
place, usually where two main roads intersected. Here the body hung, gradually decaying as a
spectacle and a warning for the public.
There it remained undisturbed until rust ate the chain or caused the
cage itself to give way when the authorities were only too glad to hide
underground the ghastly thing that for months had polluted the air and offended
the sight of the many. I have been unable
to locate the place where this gibbet stood, but I believe it must have been
set up at the intersection of Edgmont and Providence Great Road, a locality
which afterward on account of the many executions which had occurred there, was
popularly known as Gallows Hill. While I
do not state as a fact that the gibbeting of Battin was the first time that
additional punishment was inflicted in Pennsylvania, it is well known that
Thomas Wilkinson, convicted of piracy in 1781 was the last instance in our
legal history where it was inflicted. He
was gibbeted on Mud Island, were is now Fort Mifflin. The body hanging “in chains on the north and
of said island” was so placed that it might arouse terror in the minds of
sailors leaving the port of Philadelphia for the high seas.
A
REMARKABLE CASE – The great case of Creug, against the Earl of Anglesy, which
began in the Court of Exchequer, Ireland, on November 11, 1743, aroused intense
interest throughout the English-speaking world.
It is remarkable in the annals of judicial history, because it consumed
two weeks in its hearing, the longest trial up to that time, in the history of
Great Britain, and because in it for the first time was laid down the rule that
what is proposed to be proved by a witness when called to the stand, can be
demanded from the side presenting him.
The question really involved was whether James Annersly was Lord
Anglesy, who had been kidnapped by his uncle and sold as a redemptioner in
Pennsylvania. The incidents in this case
were still fresh in the minds of the public when Smollett, in 1748, published
“The Adventures of Roderick Random,” founded upon James Annersly’s story, which
under the title “The Memoirs of an Unfortunate Young Nobleman,” had shortly
before been issued from the press. Sir
Walter Scott, in 1816, gave to the world “Guy Mannering,” founded on Annersly’s
adventure, which is acknowledged in Scott’s life, by his son-in-law, Lockhart,
who, in an appendix, gives in substance Annersly’s story. In 1818, three years later, Lady Sydney
Morgan, issued her “Florence McCarthy,” an Irish tale, founded on the Annersly
narrative and Charles Reade’s “Wandering Heir,” in 1870, openly acknowledged the
sources of his novel and later produced a very successful drama founded on the
like incidents. Burke’s “Celebrated
Trials Connected with the Aristocracy,” accepts the narrative of Annersly
without question, and in5thHowell’s State Trials, almost five hundred double column
pages are given to the Annersly trial.
This man’s connection with the Old Court House in Chester can be briefly
stated. When a lad of 13, on April 3,
1728, he sailed for the Colonies and on landing in Philadelphia in June
following, he was sold for seven years as a redemptioner, to one Drummond, a
planter in New Castle County, Delaware.
I shall not follow his narrative only as it relates to the Old Court
House. Some two years subsequent to his
arrival he escaped in the night time and lost his way. Three days later, weak, half famished, and
foot sore, he overtook two men and a woman near Columbia, Lancaster County, and
shortly after they were all arrested in a hue and cry; carried to Chester,
where the next day they were placed on trial on a capital charge of
robbery. The girl was the daughter of a
rich merchant in this town. She had
eloped with her lover after robbing her father, in which a servant of the
family had taken part. The hue and cry had all along traced three fugitives but
here was a fourth party. The jury found
a verdict of guilty as to all the defendants.
When Annersly was asked “Prisoner at the bar, what have you to say why
the sentence of the law should not be imposed upon you?” the stripling in reply
told his story. He had never before been
in Chester, had never committed robbery and declared that nothing in the
testimony involved him, save that he was in company with the others when
arrested. The Chief Justice (I think I
can show it was Isaac Norris, for David Lloyd had died a short time before),
was so impressed with the lads plea in arrest of judgment, that he immediately
sentenced the three to death at a date to be set by the Governor, while Annersly
was remanded to the custody of the Sheriff.
The next day the Court ordered that he should be set in the pillory,
which then stood at the southeast corner of Market Square, on each market day,
Thursdays from dawn till noon with a paper affixed to his breast requesting all
who should read it, to report to the Court whether the boy had ever before been
in Chester, and if there was anyone who could corroborate his statement. For five weeks, every Thursday, he stood so
exposed in Market Square. On the fifth
market day, he saw Drummond in the crowd and, although he beckoned and at last
shouted to him, his master paid no attention and James heart sunk when his
owner turned and walked away. Later,
however, Drummond appeared at the jail, for he had established his ownership of
the lad; the truth of hiss statement and his servant was delivered to his
master’s keeping. Next morning, Friday,
the girl and the two men, were hanged and Drummond compelled Annersly in witness
the infliction of the extreme penalty of the law, as an example which might
deter him from attempting in future, to escape.
I have given but a brief synopsis of the incidents in the case that
associates the wandering heir with our Old City Hall. It is my intention, at some future time, when
I have command of more data, to consider this trial in detail.
NOTED
TRIALS – While the act creating such a tribunal, was
passed January 121, 1705-6, (for a former act of like tenor, was disallowed by
Queen Ann;) it had been on the statute books of the Province fifty-six years
before such a Court was held in Chester.
The provisions of the act assuredly were offensive to the Friends,
because it made any judge appointed to such office, or any of the six most
substantial free holders of the neighborhood to assist in its proceedings; who
should “neglect or delay to serve as a member of the Court” liable to a fine
not exceeding five pounds, while the High Sheriff was ordered “duly to execute
the sentence” of this Court, “on pain of being disabled to act any longer in
that post or office.” The first court of
which John Hannum and John Morton were commissioned Judges, and six of the most
substantial free holders of the neighborhood, sat I the old Court House, May
27m 1762. Abraham Johnson, a Negro slave
belonging to Humphrey Marshall was arraigned on an information exhibited by
Benjamin Chew, Attorney General, charging the defendant with “murdering a
certain negro man named Glascow, the slave of Alexander Boyd.” For the first time in the legal history of
the Commonwealth, so far as I have knowledge, it was in this case that the
Court assigned Counsel for the defense.
In this instance, it was Joseph Galloway, one of the foremost lawyers of
his day, who in the Revolutionary struggle was attainted of treason, and his
property, which was large, confiscated.
At all events, it was a lucky assignment for Johnson, since, as the
record reads, the “Court finds the defendant not guilty of murder but that he
is guilty of homicide di defend,” and thereupon, discharged the prisoner from
arrest on the information, but held him for payment of costs.
A
second special Court was held March 2, 1764 before the same justice and Josiah
Preston, Elisa Price, David Cowpland, John Salkeid, George Grantham and
William Sevalfer, six of the most substantial free holders of the neighborhood,
before whom Negro Phebe was put on trial for “feloniously and burglary breaking
and entering the mansion of Thomas Barnard” (of Aston) and stealing therefrom,
divers goods and chattels, the property of the said Thomas Barnard. Attorney General Chew presented the
information, the Court found Negro Phebe is guilty of felony and burglary
aforesaid in manner and form, etc. and thereupon it is further considered and
adjudged by this Court that the said Negro Phebe be led in the prison from
whence she came and from there in the place of execution and there be hanged by
the neck until she be dead.” This
sentence was carried out for while I cannot fix the date of execution, I find
that under authority of the Act of March 5, 1725-6, providing that slaves
executed by law should be valued and such sum should be paid to his or her
owner out of the Colonial Treasury.
Joseph Richardson was paid fifty-five pounds, the value at which Phebe
had been appraised.
A
special session of the Court was held March 1, 1770 before Judges William
Parker and Richard Riley at which Negro Martin the slave of Thomas Martin was
convicted of an attempted attack on a white woman. He was sentenced to thirty-nine lashes “to be
branded with the letter R on his forehead,” and to be exported out of the Province
by his master within six months on pain of death to the slave. This time was allowed so that his master
might find a purchaser for his chattel, but the branding was done in open Court
in the presence of the judges. High
Sheriff, Jesse Maris, or his deputy, heated the iron on portable furnace and
the prisoner being bound, the red hot brand was applied to the flesh and held
there, notwithstanding the agonizing screams of the victim, until the letter
“R” had been indelibly affixed. This
special court was abolished by the Assembly March 1, 1780.
TRIAL
OF FITZPATRICK – The trial of James Fitzpatrick, who was arraigned on September 15,
1778 on an indictment for burglary. I
have given much space to the trial in my History of Delaware County” and I now
allude to the case merely to draw attention to it as another literary link in
the old buildings’ annals. Bayard
Taylor, in the Story of Kennett, makes Fitzpatrick an important figure in that
novel in the character of “Sandy Flash,” and Mitchell in “Hugh Wynn” makes
mention of him, but that author represented him as an ill-looking ruffian,
while all other authorities describe him as of handsome personality of which he
was excessively vain.
The
County authorities, March 18, 1788 sold the old public buildings in Chester to
William Kerlin for £415, provincial money, which was in value half that of a
pound sterling. The residents of the
Eastern section of the County succeeded, largely through the activities of
General Wayne – tradition tells us, and in having the Act passed September 28,
1789, erecting Delaware County. Governor
Mifflin appointed Henry Hale Graham, the first president, judge of the new
Judicial District, and Kerlin on November 3, 1789, sold the Court House and the
jail to the County for £603, 3s. 8d, which was a comfortable business transaction
for the vendor.
As the
western end of the County grew in population and wealth, much complaint found
voice regarding the inconveniency to which the people of the remote sections or
as it was termed the “Back woods” were put to in attending the quarterly Court
in Old Shire Town. As early as January
28, 1706, petitions were presented to the Assembly, asking that the Courts be
removed to a more central location, but the oncoming storm of the Revolution
held the subject in abeyance until March 20, 1780, when an Act was passed,
creating a Commission of seven men with power to purchase a site and erect a
Court House and jail in a more central location. This was the beginning of troublesome times
and much conflicting legislation, received the approval of the Assembly and
Governor, but finally the Removalists were victorious and on September 25, 1786
Sheriff Gibbons removed the prisoners in the old jail at Chester to the new
jail in Gotham Township, now West Chester, and not a few believed that the sun
of the ancient town had set forever.
Old
Chester had lost the Court, but its citizens had no end of merriment over a
case tried at the New County Seat, November 29, 1788, when John Tulley was
convicted of horse stealing and sentenced “to stand one hour in the pillory,
between the hours of 9 and 1 o’clock tomorrow morning; to be whipped with
twenty-nine lashes on the bare back, well laid on; to have both cars cut off
and nailed to the pillory and to be imprisoned six months,” beside the payment
of a fine and costs. The jest consisted
in the fact that the Act of September 15, 1786 two years prior to the trial,
had abolished the punishment of the pillory.
But it was no jest to John Tulley, who was to learn that Judges like
Kings can do no wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment