People v. Mills

• Decision Date: 17 February 1893
• Citation: 94 Mich. 630,54 N.W. 488
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: PEOPLE v. MILLS.

54 N.W. 488

94 Mich. 630

PEOPLE v. MILLS.

Supreme Court of Michigan

February 17, 1893

Error to circuit court, Washtenaw county; Edward D. Kinne, Judge.

Michael K. Mills, having been convicted of carnally knowing a girl between the age of 14 and 16, appeals. Affirmed.

Atkinson, Carpenter, Brooke & Haigh, for defendant. A. A. Ellis, Atty. Gen., Samuel W. Burroughs, and Allan H. Frazer, for the People.

McGRATH J.

Respondent was convicted under Act No. 143 of the Laws of 1887, which is as follows: "Any male person of the age of sixteen years or more who shall carnally know any girl, theretofore chaste of the age of fourteen years, and not more than sixteen years of age, with consent of such girl, shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment in the state prison," etc. The complaining witness. Bernice Bickle, was 14 years of age in January, 1892. She had lived in Sarnia until December 21, 1891. Her father and mother were members of a sect styling themselves "Israelites," and respondent claimed to be the leader of that sect, with headquarters at Detroit. In October, 1891, he was at Sarnia, preaching at the home of Bernice. On that occasion Bernice was induced to play on the piano and sing for the respondent, whereupon respondent said to her mother that she should play the piano at headquarters. On December 15, 1891, respondent wrote the following letters the first to Mr. and Mrs. Bickle, and the second to Bernice signing them "Michael:"

"Dear Brother and Sister: I wrote Bernice for her to come. See that she comes as soon as possible with her piano here to headquarters, as early Monday morning, God made known that represents obedience the last piece, the age of youth, or a child. Unless ye become as a little child, ye can in no wise inherit the kingdom of God; and the flesh shall become fresher than a child by obedience. Enclosed $10, and I desire you to get it changed in ten gold dollars, and give to her in my behalf. Michael Ishi Husband, representing the ten pieces we have only had nine, but the women swept the house till she found the tenth which is now found. Probably Pa and Ma would like to come to, if so come on. Last Tuesday as sister Court and I was being driven down town to do my business where about a mile from our house, the Power said, Get to the Wabash depot soon as possible and take train for Toronto-which I did just getting there in time to intercept Thomas H. Baxter, and had to fall before the Great Light as Saul which he represented as he said he went to Penefule the Church of God, and it turns out that he is the Apostole Paul, the man that had been bound in chains for the hope of Israel, and the learned man who sat at the feet of Gamalia, the School-Master. Mr. John Michael he is security to the pillars and the one who laid down the laws to Baxter. Bro. Baxter is a changed man and by the Spirit Power that is thrown on him he will understand Paul's writings; and as I represent both new and old testament we are the boys to gather Israel. See that Bernice is here as soon as possible. Yours with love, Michael."

"Well dear Bernice, come to me. You are requested by the living God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to come and place yourself in obedience to Michael my son as the last piece is now found, and you are that piece, the tenth piece in the God-Head. Obedience thus saith the Lord God. Come with the piano, music, dear one, as you remember the words; piano with Bernice to head-quarters. Thine with love, thine praise God, praise God, praise God. Michael."

On December 21, 1891, Mrs. Bickel took Bernice to Detroit, and delivered her over to respondent, at the house occupied by respondent, which was termed the "God House." The occupants of this house were respondent, his wife, Mrs. Eliza Court, Alice Court, Emma Butler, Nellie Armstrong, May Webster, Carrie Bendry, and Ellen Rowlinson and Bernice. There were four beds in the house. It is unnecessary to go into the disgusting details of what took place in this abode. It is sufficient to say that respondent, taking advantage of the innocence of the prosecutrix, and of her religious instincts; representing to her that he was inspired, and acting by divine command; that he was the son of man, and had been purified; that his purpose was her purification; and that her duty was obedience to him,-after repeated attempts on different occasions,-overcame her scruples, and had illicit intercourse with her, which he afterwards repeated. The prosecutrix and two other inmates of the house were called by the prosecution, and, although it was shown that for several nights respondent occupied the same bed with prosecutrix, and had reported to other inmates of the house her obstinacy in refusing to submit to him, the respondent did not take the stand to deny any of these allegations. One of the other inmates of the house was called by the defense, yet she was not interrogated as to these facts, and, although five other persons occupied the house at the time, no one of these was called to deny the story.

Error is assigned upon remarks made by the prosecuting officers in the argument of the case to the jury. At the conclusion of the opening of the case to the jury by the prosecuting attorney, counsel for defendant outlined the defense. He gave a brief history of the sect known as the "New Israelites," and of respondent's connection therewith, stating that in October, 1891, respondent claimed to have undergone a physical change, in which he suffered great agony, and by which the evil was burned out of his body; that from that time he claimed to be, and his followers believed him to be, the "Michael" spoken of in the twelfth chapter of Daniel; that he believed himself to be divinely commissioned to gather the lost tribes of Israel; that the habits of this sect were peculiar; that the presence of these people in such large numbers affected the price of real estate in the part of the city where they resided; that a mass meeting of citizens was called to devise means to rid the community of them; that the newspapers published sensational articles, charging them with immorality; that the chief of police detailed one of the captains of the force to look up evidence upon which to found some accusation against them; that respondent's wife was induced to make a complaint of adultery against him, and respondent was arrested upon that charge; that all of the occupants of the house known as "Headquarters" were taken into custody, and lodged in the police station; that Bernice Bickle, May Webster, Alice Court, Carrie Bendry, and Emma Butler were taken separately before the chief of police, and asked to make a statement against respondent; that they all denied that they knew anything against him; that they were cross- examined, threatened, and locked up; that a statement was written out by the assistant prosecuting attorney, which Bernice Bickle was directed to sign; that, later, Bernice was ordered to copy a statement which had been made for her, alleging that respondent had had sexual intercourse with her; that the police had had constant charge of Bernice; that, in case she gave the testimony promised by the prosecuting attorney in his opening, it would be shown by her own admission that she was not, at the time alleged, a chaste girl; that she had been assured by the police officers that she would be taken care of after the trial was over; that money and inducements had been offered to one of complainant's witnesses, who had been taken from the colony by her parents, to induce her to come from Toronto, to give her testimony; that it would be shown that May Webster, another of the witnesses for the prosecution, had, in a habeas corpus proceeding brought before respondent's arrest, testified as to the absolute purity of the respondent and his coreligionists. The learned judge who tried the case gave to respondent's counsel the widest latitude, and the line of defense indicated in this opening was followed in the cross-examination of the witnesses for the people and in the examination of the witnesses for the defense. The press, the police department, the prosecuting officers, and the witnesses for the prosecution were attacked, and the motives of the neighbors were impugned. It is the duty of police officers, not only to aid by all proper means in the arrest and conviction of criminals, but to detect and discover crime. It is the duty of prosecuting officers to procure evidence of the commission of crime, taking whatever means are necessary for securing of witnesses, and their protection when secured. The gravity of the offense here charged, the situation of the parties, and the environment of the witnesses would seem to have demanded prompt, vigorous, and heroic action by the police authorities and prosecuting officers. There was no evidence in the case that would warrant the attack made upon either prosecuting officers or police. The course taken placed the prosecuting officers upon the defensive, and invited comment and criticism of respondent and his counsel that otherwise might not have been proper. Counsel for defendants in criminal trials cannot be allowed to provoked comment and criticism, and then procure a reversal because charges and insinuations are resented and criticisms are made. Respondent's general character was put in issue by the defense, and comment upon that character was clearly proper. Conduct, rather than professions, is the test of character, and it was not improper to apply that test.

On cross-examination of the prosecutrix, it appeared that a statement of the facts had been prepared and signed by her. The witness...