and no more; that he should have heard just what was necessary to be proved, and nothing else.  Admit that this is extraordinary; still, this does not prove it untrue.  It is extraordinary that you twelve gentlemen should be called upon, out of all the men in the county, to decide this case; no one could have foretold this three weeks since.  It is extraordinary that the first clew to this conspiracy should have been derived from information given by the father of the prisoner at the bar.  And in every case that comes to trial there are many things extraordinary.  The murder itself is a most extraordinary one; but still we do not doubt its reality.

It is argued, that this conversation between Joseph and Frank could not have been as Leighton has testified, because they had been together for several hours before; this subject must have been uppermost in their minds, whereas this appears to have been the commencement of their conversation upon it.  Now this depends altogether upon the tone and manner of the expression; upon the particular word in the sentence which was emphatically spoken.  If he had said, “When did you see Dick, Frank?” this would not seem to be the beginning of the conversation.  With what emphasis it was uttered, it is not possible to learn; and therefore nothing can be made of this argument.  If this boy’s testimony stood alone, it should be received with caution.  And the same may be said of the testimony of Palmer.  But they do not stand alone.  They furnish a clew to numerous other circumstances, which, when known, mutually confirm what would have been received with caution without such corroboration.  How could Leighton have made up this conversation?  “When did you see Dick?” “I saw him this morning.”  “When is he going to kill the old man?” “I don’t know.”  “Tell him, if he don’t do it soon, I won’t pay him.”  Here is a vast amount in few words.  Had he wit enough to invent this?  There is nothing so powerful as truth; and often nothing so strange.  It is not ever suggested that the story was made for him.  There is nothing so extraordinary in the whole matter, as it would have been for this ignorant country boy to invent this story.

The acts of the parties themselves furnish strong presumption of their guilt.  What was done on the receipt of the letter from Maine?  This letter was signed by Charles Grant, Jr., a person not known to either of the Knapps, nor was it known to them that any other person beside the Crowninshields knew of the conspiracy.  This letter, by the accidental omission of the word Jr., fell into the hands of the father, when intended for the son.  The father carried it to Wenham, where both the sons were.  They both read it.  Fix your eye steadily on this part of the circumstantial stuff which is in the case, and see what can be made of it.  This was shown to the two brothers on Saturday, the 15th of May.  Neither of them knew Palmer.  And if they had known him, they could not have known him