Parrott Murder - Trial Aftermath

 “At 1:02 the jury returned, after being out one hour and twenty minutes. Their solemn faces were a strong indication of what was to follow.”

Hamilton Times.                        April 19, 1899.

Barely four hours since the start trial of Ben Parrott for murdering his mother, it was over. Just over an hour since the jury had left the court room for their deliberations, they returned :

“Juror John B. Davis carried in his hand the paper having on it the written question of the chief justice; but it was not put to any use.

“ ‘Have you agreed on your verdict?’ asked Clerk Ghent.

“Juror Davis rose from the twelve and read from a paper these solemn words: ‘We find the prisoner Parrott is guilty of murder.’

Chief Justice Armour asked Parrott to say why sentence should not be passed, but the prisoner was silent.”¹

¹ “Ben Parrott, Jr. is Guilty of Murder”

Hamilton Spectator.   April 19, 1899.

In his summation to the jury Parrott’s lawyer, George Lynch-Staunton did not deny that Parrott had killed his mother:

“He asked the jury to give, with fairness and impartiality, an unprejudiced consideration of the evidence. He asked the jury to consider the prisoner’s moral training and the terrible life he had at home. He reminded the jurors that one brother was now in the asylum, and that the crime was the result of an accumulation of an accumulation of hate, engendered by a weak moral nature. Mr. Staunton, after reviewing the evidence, closed with an eloquent appeal to the jury to consider well the facts presented in the case and save the prisoner from the gallows.”¹

Crown Counsel McLaren had taken a different view as to Parrott’s sanity in his final address to the jury :

“The learned counsel went on to define insanity as legally recognized. The statute said that it was admissible when the accused was laboring under natural imbecility or disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act and knowing that it was wrong. There was nothing in the evidence to substantiate such a condition of affairs. There was certainly no delusion on Parrott’s part. Did the prisoner know what he was doing? Was he an imbecile or insane so that he did not know he was doing wrong? There was no moral perversion shown in the evidence; nothing to show he did not know what he was doing.”¹

In his summation and charge to the jury, Chief Justice Armour had addressed the question of sanity versus insanity directly:

“His Lordship pointed out that it was not because the prisoner was half-witted, or not ‘all there,’ or was laboring under some natural disease that he should be acquitted; but because his mental condition must be to the extent he did not appreciate the nature and quality of his act. The jury, further, must not judge of the atrociousness of the crime. The father naturally had not minimized the condition of his house or his son’s mind. It was to be noted that the defense had called no medical man to state what the prisoner’s mental condition was, or whether he was incompetent of judging what he had done. The evidence presented fell short of showing the prisoner’s mental condition.

“The brother’s case had been referred to, but there was nothing shown as to the cause of his insanity. One member of the family might be insane, while the other members were perfectly sane. In the case of the prisoner, should he be found insane, he would be held during the pleasure of the lieutenant-governor-in council, and might eventually become sane and be released. In reviewing the evidence, the chief justice referred to the prisoner seeking to hide in Richardson’s barn. Would the jury consider that evidence of mental incompetency? In closing, Chief Justice Armour gave the jurors the following question to answer:

“ ‘Was the offence committed by the prisoner when laboring under mental imbecility or disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act, and knowing that such an act was wrong?’¹

With the guilty verdict entered and with Ben. Parrott’s reluctance to accept the opportunity to say why the sentence of the court should not be given, Chief Justice Armour proceeded to the sentencing:

“The chief justice then proceeded to address the prisoner ‘You have been found guilty of murdering your mother under circumstances of most barbarous atrocity,’ said he; ‘you have been ably defended by a learned counsel, and an intelligent jury has found you guilty on evidence that left them no other recourse.’

“The chief justice, continuing said it was his duty to order that the prisoner be taken hence to the jail, and from there on June 23 to the place of execution, there to be hanged until he is dead, ‘and God have mercy on your soul, added his lordship.

“Parrott received the sentence calmly, and when the chief justice had ceased, the prisoner turned and looked round the court room with a half grin on his face.” ¹

Ben Parrott’s brother, Dan, with the assistance of their father set to work to get the execution cancelled:

 “Mr. Daniel Parrott, brother of Benjamin Parrott, Jr., who was sentenced to be hanged on June 26^th, is doing all in his power to save his brother from the gallows. His father, who believes Benjamin insane, says he will spend all the money he has to keep the rope from his son’s neck. Arrangements, Mr. Parrott says, have been made with Dr. Clark, the Toronto Insane Asylum and Dr. Russell of the Hamilton Asylum, to examine the condemned man as soon as permission is received from the Minister of Justice. A lawyer has been engaged to go to Ottawa and plead for executive clemency.”²

² “To Try to Save Parrott : Arrangements Made for Medical Examination”

Hamilton Times.   June 01, 1899.

The initial response to the idea of another examination of Ben. Parrott to determine whether he was sane or not was to reject that idea:

 “The Attorney-General has refused to allow Dr. Russell, of the Hamilton Asylum, and Dr. Beemer, of the Mimico Asylum, to examine Benjamin Parrott, the convicted murderer., who his relatives still believe to be insane. Mr. S.F. Washington had been retained to endeavor to obtain an examination of Parrott by experts. In answer to the lawyer’s request that the Government officials above referred to be allowed to make the examination. Hon. Mr. Hardy wrote today that on no account would he interfere personally in the matter or permit any Ontario Government official to do so.

“Mr. Washington will make another effort next week to secure the examination sought. Less than three weeks intervene between today and that of the execution”³

³“Refused the Request : Government Officials Must Not Get mixed Up in Parrott Case.”

Hamilton Times.   June 03, 1899.

With just two weeks before the scheduled date for Parrott’s hanging, his family received some good news:

“His relatives have not yet given up hope of being able to convince the authorities that Ben is insane. Last week, it will be remembered, an effort was made to have the Attorney-General, Mr. Hardy, consent to having Dr. Russell, of the Hamilton Asylum, and Dr. Beemer, of the Mimico Asylum, act as a commission to examine Parrott as to his insanity. This request the Attorney-General declined to accede to intimidating that he understood Parrott had had an examination by experts, previous to his trial, there was no necessity for interference by Government officials, such as Dr. Beemer and Dr. Russell were.

“Yesterday Mr. S.F. Washington, solicitor for Benjamin F. Parrott, the prisoner’s father, was greatly surprised to receive the following telegram from the Minister of Justice:

“Ottawa, June 8. – If formal application is made, declaring belief that Parrott is insane, I will name a medical commission to examine him. No time to lose.

“This morning the prisoner’s father made out the required declaration, and Mr. Washington sent it to Ottawa.”⁴

⁴ “Ben. Will Be Examined : Minister of Justice May Interpose in Parrott Case : To Appoint a Commission”

Hamilton Times.   June 09, 1899.

Arrangements to have two mental health experts examine Parrott were soon made and the process of interviewing Parrott started:

“As far as the appointment of an insanity commission was concerned, the Minister of Justice acted with commendable promptitude. Immediately on receiving the sworn declaration, furnished by the murderer’s father, as to his belief that the prisoner was insane, the Minister wired Dr. D. Phelan, of Kingston, and Dr. Stephen Lett, of Guelph, instructions to proceed to this city and make a complete examination of Parrott. Dr. Lett arrived here Saturday night and Dr. Phelan yesterday morning. Shortly before 4 o’clock, the two experts accompanied by Dr. Balfe, jail surgeon, drove to the jail and were soon in the presence of the condemned murder. Although Parrott could have had no previous knowledge of the identity of his visitors or even any notice of their arrival in the city, he was not long in doubt as to who they were. In fact, he ‘got on,’ to use a vulgarism, before they had been with him many seconds.

“The experts immediately proceeded to examine him on the circumstances leading up to his crime, and the details of the crime itself, and Parrott was able to tell a decidedly clear story of the whole affair. The doctors were with the prisoner for over an hour, and except for brief intervals of apparent stupidity, he was much the same as he has been ever since his incarceration.

“In the afternoon, the experts drove to the Asylum for the Insane, and had an interview with Parrott’s brother, who is confined there for lunacy. The object of his visit was to endeavor to discover any traces of similarity between his mental equipment and that of the murderer, but they were speedily convinced that the impairment of the asylum’s inmate’s brain power was due entirely to disease.

“Although the guards of the jail say that during yesterday’s interview with the insanity experts, Ben acted somewhat differently from what he has done during the ordinary routine of prison life, he soon wearied of any pretense and talked as rationally as he has talked as rationally as he has talked at any time since his residence in the jail.

“It will be remembered that when Dr. Russell and Dr. Clark, examined Parrott prior to his trial, the prisoner at first denied all knowledge, and cunningly, it is said, endeavored to bolster up the idea that he was insane. On seeing that this course was not making any impression on the examiners, however, he changed his tactics, admitted all the horrible facts of the murder, and then proceeded to justify it on the ground that his mother deserved to meet such a death earlier in her career.

“On being seen yesterday, after the labors of the day, the visiting experts proved to be decidedly uncommunicative. Dr. Phelan said that he could give practically no information about his visit or its result. “Our report will be made directly to the Minister of Justice,’ said he, ‘and we may be here until Tuesday. I cannot say how often we will have to see the prisoner.’

“Those who were in close contact yesterday with the experts are strongly convinced from their observation of the visits to the jail and asylum that the condemned man’s relatives have little to hope from the findings of the experts.

“Both Dr. Phelan and Dr. Lett have had considerable experience in similar missions. The former is surgeon of the Kingston Penitentiary, and has entire charge of the insane ward of that institution. Dr. Lett is superintendent of a private asylum at Guelph. Dr. Phelan returned only a few days ago from Winnipeg, whither he went to examine the two Galicians who were hung there last week for murder.

“Both experts paid Parrott a visit before returning last night and left for home today.”⁵

⁵ “Will Parrott Escape Rope? : Little Chance of Experts Declaring Ben Insane ; Was Examined Yesterday : Dr. Phelan and Dr. Lett Were the Commissioners : Visits to the Condemned Man :Experts Saw Him Twice at the Jail – He Gave Them a Lucid Account of His Crime – A Comparison Who Is Now in the Insane Asylum”

Hamilton Times.   June 12, 1899.

The family’s and Ben Parrott’s hopes for a reprieve were still present when the day June 17, 1899 began. It was just six days before the hanging was to take place, when a response from the Minister of Justice was received regarding the insanity plea:

“At noon today Sheriff Middleton received instructions from the Minister of Justice that the law in the case of Benj. Parrott, the matricide, must take its course, and the sentence of the court must be carried out.”⁶

⁶“No Stay For Parrott : Minister of Justice Says Law Must Take Its Course’”

Hamilton Times.   June 17, 1899.

As for Benj. Parrott himself, his every move was watched while he was in the Barton Street jail:

“Parrott has not yet been officially advised that the medical experts reported he is sane, and that there is no reason for commuting the sentence, but he may have heard of it, as he has passed sleepless night since Wednesday. All Thursday night he walked in his cell, cursing and swearing. He has received some flowers from local women, and a woman in Fulton wrote him a letter, advising him to make peace with his Maker.’⁶