Brandt v. Commonwealth
Decision Date | 09 February 1880 |
Citation | 94 Pa. 290 |
Parties | Brandt and Hummel v. The Commonwealth. |
Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
January 5, 1880
1. Under the forty-fourth section of the Criminal Procedure Act one who is an accessory before the fact may be charged as a principal in an indictment for murder: Campbell v. The Commonwealth, 3 Norris 187, followed.
2. Where several men are indicted for murder, and they waive a demand for a separate trial, it is competent for the Commonwealth to introduce any evidence that tends to prove the guilt of any one of the defendants, although it might incidentally prejudice the others on trial.
3. Several men were indicted for murder. It was alleged by the Commonwealth that two of these men murdered the deceased in furtherance of a nefarious speculation in human life; that while two had committed the murder, the others had procured policies of insurance on the life of the deceased, and hired the two to commit the deed in order to procure the insurance money. They all elected to be tried together. Held, that it was competent for the Commonwealth to introduce any testimony that tended to prove the guilt of either of the parties on trial.
4. The ingredients of murder in the first degree proved in this case.
Before SHARSWOOD, C. J., MERCUR, GORDON, PAXSON, TRUNKEY and STERRETT, JJ.
Error to the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Lebanon county: Of May Term 1880, No. 38. Certified from the Middle District.
Indictment of Israel Brandt and Josiah Hummel for the murder of Joseph Raber.
The following was the form of the indictment:
" In the Court of Oyer and Terminer and General Jail Delivery for the county of Lebanon, of April Term A. D. 1879.
LEBANON COUNTY ss.
The Grand Inquest of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, inquiring in and for the body of the county of Lebanon, upon their oaths and affirmations respectively, do present: That Charles Drews, yeoman, late of the county aforesaid, Frank Stichler yeoman, late of the county aforesaid, Henry Wise, yeoman late of the county aforesaid, Josiah Hummel, yeoman, late of the county aforesaid, Israel Brandt, yeoman, late of the county aforesaid, and George Zechman, yeoman, late of the county aforesaid, to wit: on the seventh day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-eight, at the county aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this court, with force and arms, & c., in and upon the body of one Joseph Raber, in the peace of God and the said Commonwealth, then and there being, feloniously wilfully and of their malice aforethought, did make an assault, and him, the said Joseph Raber, then and there feloniously, wilfully and of their malice aforethought, did kill and murder, contrary to the form of the Act of the General Assembly in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania."
At the trial before Henderson, A. L. J., the following facts were disclosed by the testimony: In the autumn of 1878, Joseph Raber, a man about sixty years of age, lived in a shanty on the Blue Mountain, in Indiantown Gap, Lebanon county. He was very poor, and was engaged in no business, depending entirely for support on his daily labor and the charity of his neighbors. Israel Brandt lived about three-fourths of a mile from Raber's shanty at a place known as St. Joseph's Spring. Brandt's house had been used as a hotel at some previous time, but at this time was not licensed. Charles Drews lived about two hundred yards from Brandt. Henry Weise, Josiah Hummel and George Zechman lived down the valley, along the mountain, from four to six miles away.
In the latter part of July 1878, Israel Brandt and Josiah Hummel (the defendants) together with Henry Weise and George Zechman, agreed to procure the insurance of Raber's life for their benefit. They accordingly applied to George W. Scweinhard, an insurance agent, living in Lebanon, for the purpose of having applications made out to procure insurance on the life of Raber. Schweinhard met Brandt and Weise, with Raber, at the house of Brandt in the beginning of August, at which time applications were made out for insurance, and the necessary entrance fees paid by Weise. Some time after, when the applications had been favorably considered by the insurance companies and policies had been issued, on receipt of a letter from Weise, Schweinhard met Brandt, Hummel, Weise, Zechman and Raber, at Lebanon, " for the purpose of having the assignments made of the policies that were on hand, and having more applications taken out" on the life of Raber. At that time the policies then on hand were assigned to the parties above named, by Raber; among others, a policy for $2000 in the Home Mutual Life Association to Josiah Hummel, and a policy for $1000 in the New Era Life Insurance Company to Israel Brandt. There were two other policies on hand amounting to $5000, one of which was assigned to George Zechman and the other to Henry Weise, making the whole amount of insurance at that time on hand, and assigned to the said parties, $8000. At the same time they told Schweinhard that Raber was a very poor man, and that they had agreed to support him during life and see him decently buried after his death.
The insurance having been thus secured, the parties met frequently at Brandt's; were often seen together; sometimes one or two; sometimes more, on the public road going to and from the direction of Brandt's, and differed from others who were present in their actions, by calling each other aside and consulting together apart. This conduct was noticed, and continued for and during three or four months before the death of Raber, after which it ceased.
Charles Drews, the neighbor of Brandt, had no insurance upon the life of Raber, but proposed to Frank Stichler that he should assist him to kill Raber, and when Stichler inquired why he wished him killed, he gave as a reason that he was highly insured. The plan then agreed upon was to drown him in Kitzmiller's dam. Raber was to be asked to go with them to fish in the dam. They were to take the flat. Drews was to push Raber off the flat, and then Stichler was to pole over him and drown him; after which Stichler was to jump into the water, get wet, and then go to Michael Kohr's, who lived near the dam, for a change of clothes, and say that he had gotten wet in trying to save Raber from drowning. Drews was to give Stichler $100 for this service. This was about two weeks before the alleged murder of Raber. Brandt and Hummel visited the dam together about this time. Brandt afterwards urged Stichler to comply with Drews's request, saying that Drews was to get $300 for doing it, and that if Stichler helped, he, Brandt, would give him a good share, and each of the others would have to do so also. He further told Stichler that they had this thing going on for three months; that they first intended to chloroform him, but that he, Brandt, had struck upon the plan to drown him. Frank Stichler did not assist, and after the death of Raber, Brandt told him that if he said anything about the matters he had told him, he, Stichler, would be a dead man. In the latter part of November, or the beginning of December 1878, Joseph F. Peters, a son-in-law of Drews, who had before that time enlisted in the army of the United States, returned home, and took up his residence with Drews. A short time after he arrived--perhaps within a day or two--Drews told him, while chopping wood on the mountain, that he was to receive $1500 for killing Raber from Brandt and Hummel, amongst others, and wanted him to join in the killing. About the same time, Brandt quarrelled with Joseph Peters??s wife, because, as he said, she prevented Drews and Stichler from killing Raber, and Weise also came to Drews and gave him notice that he must kill Raber before Friday or Saturday of that week. On the 7th of December 1878 Drews went to Raber's shanty and asked him to come down to his house for tobacco. Drews left for his home, and Raber followed him. When Raber arrived at Drews's he was induced to go over to Kreiser's, which necessitated the crossing of Indiantown Creek. The creek was crossed by means of a plank, and at the plank was about twelve feet wide and seventeen inches deep. Drews and Stichler were seen accompanying him down from the house of Drews, through the fields, until they reached the creek. Stichler went first, Raber next, and Drews brought up the rear. When Raber reached the middle of the plank, crossing the creek, Stichler turned around and put his hands on Raber's shoulders, tripped him, and threw him into the creek. This was between 4 and 5 o'clock in the afternoon. In a few minutes Drews and Stichler were seen returning to the house of Drews without Raber. They entered the front room, and Stichler began to take off his clothes, which were wet. He directed Mrs. Drews, who supplied him with dry clothes, to hang his wet ones up to dry, and if any one came in, to remove them, so that they would not be seen. Both Stichler and Drews spoke of the difficulty they had experienced in holding the old man down and drowning him. About 6 o'clock the neighbors were notified by Brandt and his son that Raber was drowned in the creek. Perhaps a dozen assembled and looked at the body of Raber, which was lying in the water, but they did not remove the body. Raber was dead.
Hummel and Brandt went to Lebanon for the coroner that night. Brandt became considerably intoxicated, and boasted to the coroner that they had insurances on the life of Raber to the amount of $20,000, and offered him $20 each to make a good report.
Some days after the murder, Hummel told Drews, in a conversation about Raber, that when he got his money for drowning Raber he had better leave that part of...
To continue reading
Request your trial