Radio Script #1047

Little Talks on Common Things
April 13, 1975

One of the most popular subjects among the more than 1000 broadcasts of this program was the story of Waterville’s first murder, in 1847, when young Edward Mathews met death at the hands of a local physician, Dr. Valorus Coolidge.

So today I want to tell you about another Maine murder that occurred in Weeks Mills in 1881. As most of our listeners know, Weeks Mills is a village in the town of China, that at one time had the distinction of being the junction point on the Wiscasset, Waterville and Farmington narrow guage railroad, where one spur went on to Albion while the other went through China, East and North Vassalboro, into Winslow.

On the evening of February 19, 1881, a fifty-four year old woman disappeared from a farm at Weeks Mills. Mrs. Deborah Merrill, whose husband was away at work in a lumber camp, was at the farm with her 23 year old son. Living in the same house, but somewhat estranged from her mother, was a daughter, Mrs. George Lily, and her husband, an engineer at the Insane Hospital in Augusta.

The son, Charles Merrill, did not have a good reputation. He had been several times arrested for petty larceny. The previous autumn his mother had turned him out of the house and told him he must earn his own living. He could find no work for any length of time, and after his father left for the woods, Mrs. Merrill took Charles back into the home. It soon became clear that he was still rankled by his earlier rejection.

On the afternoon of February 19, the daughter saw mother and son drive off in a pung in the direction of Weeks Mills village. They returned about 4 P.M., and Charles drove around to the barn. That was the last time the daughter saw her mother alive, according to her story.

On Sunday morning, Mrs. Lily went to the kitchen in her mother’s part of the house. She noticed that the windows and doors were open, and she detected the smell of burning meat. One of the stove doors was slightly open, and through the chinks she could see what looked like sizzling meat on the red coals. Her brother was then down cellar picking over potatoes. Mrs. Lily called out to him, “Charles, what smells so?” He replied that he was cleaning out the stove. Knowing that Charles despised cold food and was accustomed to throwing cold meat into the fire, Mrs. Lily thought no more about it.

On Monday morning Mrs. Lily asked Charles where their mother was. He said she had gone to visit several sick families in remote part of the town. He said she had put on her best clothes and left early Sunday.

Monday afternoon Charles went to Augusta with a load of potatoes. When he returned, he built a roaring fire in his mother’s fireplace. That seemed logical, because a howling, cold wind had sprung up. It was such a blaze, however, that Mrs. Lily feared it would set fire to the chimney, and she remonstrated. In the midst of the burning wood Mrs. Lily saw what looked like another junk of meat. Her brother said it was only a big pitch knot.

Several days passed without the mother’s return, and Mrs. Lily’s anxiety increased. She finally asked a neighbor to notify Deputy Sheriff Frank Percival, who visited the house and talked with Mrs. Lily. The sheriff found charred portions of what looked like human remains in the manure pile and he summoned Coroner Libby from Augusta. The result was the arrest of Charles Merrill on the charge of killing his mother. In a short time, the sheriff and coroner had Charles in tears and blurting out a full confession. Charles said that, on Saturday afternoon, he returned from the village with his mother about dusk. While he was putting up the horse, his mother came to the barn to get the sleigh robes. Charles crept up behind her and struck her on the head with a hammer. He struck her a second blow that killed her, and he then hid the body in the hay. He decided to burn the arms and legs, then put the rest in the hay under a load of potatoes, taking it out and burying it in the snow in the woods on his way to Augusta.

Feeling was so strong in the town of China, especially in Weeks Mills, that the sheriff feared Charles Merrill would never get to trial, but that attempt would be made to take Charles from the county jail in Augusta and lynch him. But no such attempt was made.

During the man’s confession and subsequent trial, the only motive that could be assumed for the crime was possible revenge for his earlier eviction from the home. But he had never shown strong enough resentment to bring him to murder. Charles kept saying, even on the witness stand, that he didn’t know why he did it. While he awaited trial, several newspaper men were allowed to visit him in his cell. Those reporters repeatedly asked Charles why he killed his mother. He did say that his mother was hard on him when she put him out, but since his return they had had no trouble and she had been good to him. He repeated again and again that he did not plan to kill his mother, and did so on a sudden impulse when he picked up the hammer in the barn.

The trial defense was sudden insanity, and the prosecution was unable to prove malice aforethought. However, the jury did convict Charles, not of murder, but of manslaughter, and he got a sentence of twenty years. It is reported that he died soon after his release.

The trial disclosed that Charles had had very little schooling, frequently running away from school even when he was a small boy. He never learned to read well enough to read the papers, and he never attended church. He spent his Sundays hunting and fishing. When asked if he knew what was the penalty for murder, he said no.

It became clear the Charles Merrill was a man of very low intellect, but not a hardened criminal. Yet the jury was convinced that he did know the difference between right and wrong. In fact, on the stand, he testified that, after he committed the deed, his first inclination was to run to the nearest neighbor and tell what he had done. He couldn’t bring himself to do that; so he tried to dispose of the body.

The crime may indeed have been the inexplicable act of a mentally retarded youth.

A recent discovery of an old clipping from the Kennebec Journal concerns another much more important murder. Among the several persons arrested after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1865, was the landlady of John Wilkes Booth, Mrs. Surrat. Rising to her defense was a Washington Catholic priest, Rev. David Walter, and his successful attempt to see her in her prison cell, led to such heated controversy that the Inspector General felt compelled to issue a statement, which the KJ printed verbatim on May 21, 1865. That statement said: “The Secretary of War, Mr. Stanton, authorized me to issue a pass for Father Walter to see Mrs. Surrat. I sent our Mr. Barry to caution Fr. Walter about what he might say to the prisoner. Mr. Barry reported to me that Father Walter had used violent language with regard to the trial. I then went personally to Fr. Walter to caution him against such inflammatory language. I asked him, in a friendly way, to stop talking publicly about the case. I said that, however much he might believe in Mrs. Surrat’s innocence, angry harangues would not help her case. Unless he could use prudent and restrained language, he had better not see her. Replying to me, Fr. Walter was even more violent and denunciatory, calling me, the attorney general and the secretary of war pernicious villains. He said much more than a prudent priest or an ordinary man of sense would ever utter. I continued to counsel moderation, but without result. I did not tell Fr. Walter that he could not have a pass unless he promised to say nothing of Mrs. Surrat’s innocence.

“I did intend to tell the Secretary of War that Fr. Walter was not in a proper frame of mind to be a suitable religious attendant upon a federal prisoner, and that he had better find another priest.

“When Fr. Walter said he would be prudent in his conversation with Mrs. Surrat, I did issue the pass and at that time said nothing to the Secretary of War. To my amazement Fr. Walter now says I objected to a Catholic priest seeing Mrs. Surrat. That is nonsense. Not only did he see her himself, but I personally gave him the pass. Another priest was also allowed to see her.

“During the war, in my official capacity I have allowed many clergrmen to see federal prisoners in need of spiritual counsel. I never threw so much as a straw in the way of any clergyman of any faith, whether he was loyal or disloyal to the Union.

“Even when Fr. Walter came to our department and stated, this in company of Mrs. Surrat’s daughter, he wished admittance to the Executive Mansion to lay the case before the President, I gave him the needed pass. I emphasize that the Secretary of War definitely assented to a Catholic clergyman’s visit to Mrs. Surrat.”

What that angry priest was trying to do was to get an executive pardon for the woman, whom a jury had already convicted as one of those who plotted the assassination, although they agreed that the actual murderer was the actor John Wilkes Booth. Along with the men involved, Mrs. Surrat, the only woman among the defendants, was convicted and sentenced to be hanged.

Fr. Walter was not the only person who tried to save Mrs. Surrat from the gallows. Even some members of Congress considered her less guilty than the others, although the crime had evidently been planned in her house. However Andrew Johnson, the VP who had succeeded to the presidency on Lincoln’s death had enough opposition from Congress, press and public without adding fuel to the flames by pardoning Mrs. Surrat. So he did nothing and Mrs. Surrat went to the gallows.

Year: 1975