Williamsport, December 29th, 1838.

Sir,—

Absence from home on public duties has prevented, until this time, an answer to yours of the 1st ult., requesting particulars respecting the trial and execution of William Miller. I do not know that any paper contains these particulars, and I will therefore endeavour to comply with your request by the following brief statement.

William Miller was indicted for the murder of Solomon Hoffman, an offence committed in Jackson township, in this county (Lycoming), on the first day of February, 1838. On the first day of May, 1838, a jury was sworn to try the cause. The first count charged the offence in the usual manner. The second count set forth that the crime was committed “by lying in wait in, upon, and near a public highway.” The evidence on the part of the commonwealth fully established the facts following:—That Solomon Hoffman was a traveling pedlar, carrying a pack on his back; that he sojourned one night at Bastian’s tavern, situate at the edge of the woods between the Block-House settlement and Pont Run; that William Miller was a cabinet-maker, boarding at the same house; that these two individuals slept in the same room together that night; that Miller, on being urged by Hoffman in the morning to purchase goods, declined, stating that he had borrowed money from Bastians, and did not wish them to know that he had money, but proposed to purchase of Hoffman, if the latter would stop at the side of the road, in the woods, where Miller stated that he would be engaged cutting wood, as the other passed along on his way. This was agreed to. Miller stationed himself by the way side, with his axe, for the purpose of executing his plan of destruction. The deceased soon made his appearance; and while he was stooping down to take some articles out of the pack to exhibit to Miller, the latter killed him with the axe. Having taken such articles as he desired at the time, and all the money in the pocket book of the deceased, Miller buried the dead body and the pack under the leaves and snow, the latter being upwards of two feet deep in the woods. The deceased was a stranger—a German—and had but one relative, a brother, in this country. That brother he had engaged to meet the next day after the murder in Bloomingrove; but as he did not fulfil that appointment, the brother was alarmed, and made a most anxious and scrutinising search for the deceased, but could find no traces of him whatever after he left Bastians in the morning. The brother then came to the public house of George Duitch, in Williamsport, to proceed on his journey, giving up all hope of ascertaining the cause of the mysterious disappearance of the deceased. By what might be regarded as a singular intervention of Providence, Miller came to this tavern, which was twenty or thirty miles from his residence, introduced himself to the brother of the deceased, and, by his voluntary prevarications and falsehoods, excited suspicion, which, upon farther scrutiny, led to the full disclosure of his guilt.

The evidence was so full and satisfactory, that there was no room to doubt with respect to the agency of the prisoner in causing the death of Hoffman, in the manner already detailed. The counsel for the prisoner, in their anxiety to do all in their power to save his life, endeavoured to show that he was afflicted with that species of insanity called monomania. But the evidence on this subject consisted chiefly of the proof of cases where other individuals, whose minds appeared sound upon subjects in general, were nevertheless deranged upon particular subjects. The proof did not establish the fact that the prisoner was afflicted with that species of insanity.

In the course of the trial, the prisoner’s counsel, without objection on the part of the commonwealth, introduced Mr. O. S. Fowler, the celebrated phrenologist, as a witness. He described the prisoner as of the lymphatic temperament; and stated that persons of this temperament are more apt to be deranged upon the animal passions than upon the intellectual or moral faculties. He also, among other things, described the prisoner’s phrenological developments, as they appeared to him on an examination some days previously in the prisoner’s cell. The organs of Destructiveness, Secretiveness, and Acquisitiveness, were stated by Mr. Fowler to be immense, the head measuring about 7¼ inches in diameter from ear to ear.

In giving the instructions to the jury, I stated to them that if the evidence for the commonwealth was believed, it established a case of murder of the first degree, unless they thought proper to acquit entirely upon the ground of insanity. The species of insanity relied upon by the prisoner’s counsel, was that denominated monomania. This exists where there is a delusion on one or a small number of subjects, which no course of reasoning or force of evidence can remove. Every man, of mature age, is presumed to possess a sound mind until the contrary appears. To establish this kind of insanity, delusion must be shown to exist on one subject, or on some small number of subjects. It was stated to the jury, that the court could perceive no sufficient evidence of delusion or hallucination on any subject to establish the existence of monomania; still, if the jury believed that the prisoner was, at the time of committing the act charged, “incapable of judging between right and wrong, and did not know that he was committing an offence against the laws of God and man,” it would be their duty to acquit; and if they did so, it would be necessary to specify in their verdict the ground of acquittal, in accordance with the act of assembly of 13th June, 1836. But (continued the court) if any insanity exists in this case, it is of that description denominated moral insanity. This arises from the existence of some of the natural propensities in such violence, that it is impossible not to yield to them. It bears a striking resemblance to vice, which is said to consist in “an undue excitement of the passions and will, and in their irregular or crooked actions leading to crime.” It is therefore to be received with the utmost scrutiny. It is not generally admitted in legal tribunals as a species of insanity which relieves from responsibility for crime, and it ought never to be admitted as a defence until it is shown that these propensities exist in such violence as to subjugate the intellect, control the will, and render it impossible for the party to do otherwise than yield. Where its existence is thus fully established, this species of insanity, like every other, relieves from accountability to human laws. But this state of mind is not to be presumed without evidence; nor does it usually occur without some premonitory symptoms indicating its approach. On this branch of the case the prisoner’s counsel have introduced the testimony of Mr. O. S. Fowler, one of the most distinguished phrenologists in the United States. The science of phrenology, or rather cranioscopy, has not yet been brought to such a state of perfection and certainty as to be received and relied upon in courts of justice. Small deviations in the scull from its perfect form, not absolutely denoting insanity, appear to be too uncertain to be relied upon in the administration of justice, without endangering the rights of individuals and the more important interests of the public. It is the opinion of the court, that the testimony of Mr. Fowler proves no such development of the animal propensities as would, of itself, justify the belief of insanity in any of its forms.

The jury found the prisoner guilty of murder by lying in wait, as set forth in the second count, and not guilty on the first count. The verdict was delivered on the 4th of May, 1838, and, on the same day, after overruling a motion in arrest of judgment, the court adjudged that the verdict on the second count was a finding of murder of the first degree, and pronounced the sentence of death. On the 27th of July, 1838, the prisoner was executed. He made a full confession. Before and after the trial he was visited by clergymen, and appeared, after the trial, much affected with his situation in reference to a future world. Seemed truly penitent. Met death with great firmness, even assisting the sheriff in some of the last sad offices of the melancholy scene. His body was delivered to his parents for burial. They are in low circumstances, but not in absolute poverty. They have never shown as much attention to education as people generally do, and their unhappy son was said to be exceedingly illiterate.

Yours, very truly,

Ellis Lewis.