passions had never been properly restrained,' would scarcely have a deep and trustful affection for a husband, who seemed incapable of supporting a manly importance as the head of his family, and who was incompetent to regulate the government of it in a manner to command respect. Domestic dissensions became frequent, and Mrs. Spooner soon conceived an utter aversion to her husband, until at length she seems to have cherished a criminal regard for another person, and, in the blindness of passion, lost all selfcontrol.

Many months before the death of Mr. Spooner, a young man became an inmate of his house, under circumstances which were calculated to enlist the warmest sympathies of the family in his behalf. Ezra Ross, at that time a youth of sixteen, was the son of respectable parents in Ipswich, and with four brothers had joined the American army on the commencement of hostilities. On returning from his first campaign, he was cast upon the hospitalities of Mr. Spooner, from whose wife, during a severe fit of sickness, he experienced every kindness. After this he became a frequent and a welcome visiter in the family, and it is highly probable that an improper intimacy grew up between him and Mrs. Spooner, although her husband never seems to have lost his attachment for

1 It is said that General Ruggles and his wife did not set a good example to their children in their conjugal relations. They lived unhappily together. When he left the country, she remained and died about the year 1785. She was originally a Bourne, and was the widow of a Newcomb, when she married General Ruggles. Tradition says that she once served up, for her husband's dinner, his favorite dog.

Ross.' But it is certain, that the subject of murdering Mr. Spooner was frequently discussed, and various projects to accomplish this purpose were suggested. Whether she was actuated by aversion to her husband, or was hurried on by the blind impulse of unchaste desire, it is now impossible to know, as she never made any revelations on the subject, and the statements of Ross are not worthy of entire confidence; but it seems probable that she was conscious that her conjugal infidelity must soon inevitably become known to her husband, and desired the death of one who must soon have indubitable evidence of her guilt. This accounts for the inconsistency of her conduct, and the desperate eagerness with which she undertook to accomplish her purpose. For, becoming dissatisfied with Ross's dilatory proceedings, she resorted to a course so bold and open, that her guilt was placed beyond a doubt, and she involved herself and her confederates in a common ruin.

Mrs. Spooner ordered a servant to call in any of the British soldiers who might pass the house; and about a month before the murder, and while Spooner and Ross were both absent, two men, James Buchanan and William Brooks, who had been British soldiers, were passing the house on the way to Springfield, when they were invited in by the servant, and

1 The venerable Major Benjamin Russell, who then lived at Worcester, recollects to have seen Ross and Mrs. Spooner riding on horseback together, before the murder; he states that the former was a fine looking youth, and that the beauty of the latter, who was a remarkable horsewoman, has not been exaggerated in the least by traditionary accounts.

on the solicitation of Mrs. Spooner, they resided in the family two weeks, being treated with great consideration. There can be no doubt that Mrs. Spooner made a direct proposal to these entire strangers to murder her husband, which they agreed to do on the first favorable opportunity. When Spooner returned, he expressed a dissatisfaction at the presence of these men. He requested a neighbor to remain in the house with him during the night, and ordered Buchanan and Brooks to depart on the next morning. They remained concealed in the neighborhood, however, and were a part of the time supplied with food by Mrs. Spooner. On the night of the murder, Ross came to the house, either by accident or design, but which is not certain, although there is reason to doubt that he had ever seen Buchanan and Brooks before.

At the next term of the superior court of judicature, held at Worcester, on the third Tuesday of April, 1778, (being the twenty-first day of the month) the grand jury found a true bill against Buchanan, Brooks, Ross and Mrs. Spooner, for murder; and the trial took place at the same term of the court. The judges who presided were William Cushing,' chief

1 Mr. Chief Justice Cushing was born in Scituate, in 1732. He was graduated at Harvard University in 1751, and upon being admitted to the bar he established himself in Pownalborough, in the district of Maine, and was the first regularly educated lawyer who settled in that state. In 1760, he was appointed the first judge of probate for the county of Lincoln, and, in 1772, succeeded his father as a judge of the superior court. In 1775 the superior court was reorganized, but he was restored to his place on the bench. John Adams was appointed chief justice, but never sat as a judge, and, the following year, he resigned his place on the bench. Cushing was then appointed his successor, and held the office till his promotion to the supreme court of the United States.in 1789. In the mean time, he presided over the convention which assem

justice, Jedediah Foster, Nathaniel Peaslee Sargeant, David Sewall, and James Sullivan, associate justices. The names of the jury were Ephraim May, Jonathan Phillips, Ebenezer Lovel, David Bigelow, Benjamin Stowell, Samuel Forbush, Joseph Harrington, John Phelps, Manasseh Sawyer, Elisha Goddard, Abraham Bacheler, and Mark Bacheler.

Robert Treat Paine was the attorney for the state. Levi Lincoln' was of the counsel assigned to the pris

oners.

The indictment charged, that William Brooks, of Charlestown, laborer, James Buchanan, of the same Charlestown, laborer, and Ezra Ross, of Ipswich, laborer, on the first day of March, 1778, made an assault upon Joshua Spooner, of Brookfield; that Brooks struck the deceased down, and, with his hands and feet gave him several mortal bruises of which he in

bled in Massachusetts in 1787, to act in regard to the adoption of the constitution of the United States. While Mr. Chief Justice Jay was absent in Europe, as envoy extraordinary, in negotiating the treaty with Great Britain, Mr. Cushing was the presiding judge of the United States court, and upon the resignation of Mr. Jay, he was nominated and unanimously confirmed as chief justice of that court. His ill health, however, compelled him to decline this appointment, and he continued to hold the place of an associate justice until 1810, the time of his death. 1 He was born in Hingham, May 15, 1749, and was graduated at Harvard University in 1772. Upon being admitted to practise law, he established himself at Worcester, where he soon came into an extensive practice, and held various distinguished offices in the gift of the people. In 1797 he was a member of the senate of Massachusetts, and was afterwards chosen a member of the seventh congress. On the second day after taking his seat, he was appointed, by Mr. Jefferson, attorney general of the United States, which office he held four years. He was afterwards lieutenant-governor of Massachusetts, and in 1811 was appointed an associate justice of the supreme court of the United States, but he declined the appointment. He died in 1820, at the age of 71. Willard's Address, page 82.

stantly died, and that Buchanan and Ross were present, "aiding, assisting, abetting, comforting and maintaining the aforesaid Brooks." The indictment also charged, that Bathsheba Spooner was an accessory before the fact; that she "invited, moved, abetted, counselled and procured" the murder to be committed.

To this indictment the prisoners, on their arraignment, severally pleaded that they were not guilty, and put themselves for trial on God and the country. Their trial was accordingly fixed for the twenty-fourth of April, and took place in the meeting-house at Worcester. A large number of witnesses were in attendance on behalf of the prosecution, and, after the return of the jury of inquest was read, they testified substantially as follows: '

Jonathan King, a physician, testified that he spent Sunday evening with Mr. Spooner, at Cooley's tavern, about a quarter of a mile from Spooner's house; Spooner went home well between eight and nine of the clock. On the next morning, hearing that Mr. Spooner was dead, the witness rode there with all speed, and saw the body of the deceased, which had been taken from the well. found the face, above his nose, and his temple very much bruised; the scalp was cut an inch and a half long. The body was carried into the east room; Mrs. Spooner could not be persuaded to look at it, and the family, except his little daughter, declined

He

The testimony of the witnesses in this case is derived from the notes of Judge Foster. It is not well reported, some portions being very obscure, but I have thought it best to make only slight alterations,