Note: all typos and grammatical mistakes are original to the article.
The Memphis Daily Argus
Wednesday, April 25, 1866
Page Two
From the Interior—No. 18.
Holly Springs Intelligence – Captain Fort – Change of Feelings – A new Version of the Homicide of Cohen – The Story of McQueen – A Celebrated Will Case – Singular Eccentricities of Peter McQueen – Crazy or Demoniacal – Etc., Etc.
“On the Wing” Toward North Alabama near Grand Junction, April 24, 1866.}
I have just obtained, through a reliable friend, the following budget of intelligence – including the wonderful “McQueen Story” – from Holly Springs. The celebrated Captain Fort is in prison at that place, awaiting his trail for the killing of Cohen, a groom or clerk in the livery stable of Mr. Jim House, of that place. Nearly the whole bar of that “city” – and an able one it is – has been retained for the defence; and there does not now appear to be half so much feeling against Fort among the people as there was at first. It is now understood that the Captain was in a state of almost unconscious, certainly irresponsible, intoxication at the time he committed the fatal deed; that he had that evening had a falling out with House, who had threatened to turn his horse out of the livery stable, and during Fort’s absence in quest of a pistol, did take the horse out and hitch him to the fence hard-by; that Fort, returning and finding that the threat had been carried out, drew his pistol and commenced firing upon Cohen, the only person in the stable at the time, thinking it was House; and so unintentionally killed a man with whom he had no quarrel. My informant says it is now generally believed that Captain Fort thought he was shooting at House; and that although this does not excuse him, yet it takes away some of the more atrocious features the case at first presented in the current reports, for the reason that House is a man quite able and always prepared to defend himself, and was the party with whom Fort was quarreling, and was expecting a difficulty; whereas Cohen was a perfectly harmless individual, and, only a moment before, was on the best of terms with Fort. Certainly, (continues my informant,) whatever view the law may take of it, there was no ‘moral’ malice in the heart of Fort against the man who fell by his hand; for, so far as Cohen was concerned, it was an accident – a mistake – the blind blunder of an excessively drunk man….Capt. Fort is reported to have many friends who sympathize with him in the great misfortune which has come upon him through the too free use of spirits, and they are raising a sum of money by the subscription to pay his lawyers’ fees and other expenses incident to imprisonment and a trial for his life. Many of you readers will doubtless remember the Captain as the son of one of the early settlers of Hardeman county – a gentleman who formerly lived on the stage road five miles North of Bolivar but is now, I believe, a resident of De Soto county, (Miss.) He paid a visit to his son in prison last week, at Holly Springs. Capt. Fort was educated for the bar; and, with all his reputation – as a rough, stern, partisan fighter, is a man of considerable culture and fine native powers of mind. He was practicing law in Arkansas at the breaking out of the war, and, though not liable to military duty on account of “club-feet,” he immediately ranged himself under the banner of his State and section, and was in active cavalry service in various capacities – as partisan ranger, scout, staff-officer, &c., from the fighting of the first gun, through four years of almost constant hard-riding and fighting, till the last flag was furled and the cause of secession forever lost.
The Mc’Queen Will Case – Singular “Eccentricities” – Crazy or Demoniacal.
The Probate Court of Marshall county – which, under recent legislation, is a still more important Court than it was before – was in session at Holly Springs last week, Hon. Thomas A Falconer, presiding. Among the business before the Court was the trial of a somewhat celebrated will case, which presented several points of interest to the community, and the the public at large. The contest was over the will of the late Peter McQueen, a queer old merchant and planter of Marshall county, of considerable wealth, who was killed during the war – but not in battle, as will hereafter be related. By this will, Mr. McQueen left his whole property to a niece and her four children – thus completely ignoring and disinheriting his only child, a daughter, who is a widow – being the relict of the late Dr. Cottrell of that county, and a most excellent and highly respected lady. Long before his death, and while they were still young girls, McQueen had disowned both his daughters – one of whom died before her father – and driven them from home: – and for what, do you suppose? Because they attended a camp-meeting, made a profession of religion and joined the Methodist Church! He even went so far as to declare that he would rather see his children the inmates of a brothel than members of a church! The only charitable mode of accounting for conduct and language so hideously unnatural, is to presume that he was insane, – certainly not of that “sound, disposing mind, the law requires in a testator; – and it is upon this ground that Mrs. Cottrell and her friends are contesting the will. Quite a mass of curious evidence (eighty witnesses, in all, were examined in the trial) was introduced, bearing on this point.
A half-dozen witnesses testified that they heard the old man declare, in the Spring of 1861, that he, living on his farm in Marshall county, Miss., had distinctly heard the guns of Forts Sumter and Moultie, in the celebrated artillery duel of Gen. Beauregard and Maj. Anderson, a few days before! Upon its being suggested that the distance was so great such a “fear in acoustics” was impossible, Mr. McQueen assured that his sense of hearing was for more accurate than any other person’s in the world, and what might be impossible to all others was quite practicable to him; certainly he had heard the thunder of the first guns of the war sounding over mountain and valley, a distance of more than seven hundred miles as the crow flies! He also said that he had distinctly heard the firing at Pensacola a short time afterwards.
My informant related several other instances of Peter McQueen’s exceeding “eccentricity” – to call it by no harsher name – which are almost beyond belief. Surely, they were not all put in proof on the trail last week, or the jury would hardly have made a “miss-trail,” – and this is th3e second time, too: – as I am told they did. Eight of the jurors, it is stated, were for, and four against “breaking” the will. So the “hung,” and the case is “hung up” in court for another term or two – perhaps till the best part of the property is consumed away in lawyer’s fees and court costs. Assuredly, the institution of “trial by jury” would appear to need revision, as it exists in this country. In civil suits, at least, it seems to me that a majority, as in Scotland (and in France, too, I believe) ought to be permitted to bring in a verdict. A majority of justices of the Supreme Court of the Union decide great questions of law, – why should not a majority of intelligent jurors decide questions of fact and law, under the advice and instruction of the Court? If not a majority, why not two-thirds, or three-fourths? This thing of requiring perfect unanimity of every jury of twelve men, before a verdict can be made up, is unreasonable – has resulted in millions of useless expense, and has done more to make “the law’s delay” a hateful proverb among men, than any and all other of the old “mouldy prescription of the Past” that could be named.
But to return to McQueen’s ‘idiosynacracies,” to call them by another too mild name. Before the was, one of his negro men ran away, but after a considerable time voluntarily returned and requested to be taken into favor again. McQueen told him he would allow him to remain without punishment, on one condition, and that was, that if he ever ran off again, he (McQueen) was to have the privilege of hanging him, if he ever caught him thereafter! To this, strange to say, the negro man consented, entered into a contract to that effect, and, stranger still, ran away again during the ware – not long after the Federal troops occupied Memphis; was by some means, captured by McQueen, and did positively suffer the extreme penalty of hanging, upon which he himself had agreed, at the hands of his ruthless and “eccentric” master! A coffin was prepared and a grave dug beforehand, and the neighbors invited to see that the “contract” was duly and properly carried out. The neighbors expostulated with McQueen and used their best efforts to prevent the execution, but to no purpose…. And this, I am credibly informed, happened on the farm of Peter McQueen, in the neighborhood of Byhalia, in 1862. I can hardly believe it yet.
Another “eccentricity” of this strangely instance old man is thus told: He cam into possession of a horse a few years ago, which cost him only $15. Not long afterwards, some one stole this horse and “decamped with him to parts unknown.” By some means or other, McQueen got on the track of the thief, and immediately started in pursuit, on horseback, with a greased rope in his saddlebags, which he carried along, as he afterwards stated, for the purpose of hanging the thief with it when he should come up with him. With that greased rope in his saddlebags, he followed the flying rogue across Mississippi, across Arkansas and Louisiana, into Texas, and up and down Texas, for a distance of 1,500 miles – undergoing incredibly hardship and fatigue _ and he past sixty years of age, – all to reclaim a stolen horse worth $15, and hang the thief with his chosen rope! Hanging seemed to be his favorite mode of punishment!
The last of McQueen’s wonderful “eccentricities” that I shall attempt to record – one that led to a direful tragedy, involving his own destruction; causing him to be hunted and shot down as if he were a veritable wild beast – had its development in Choctaw county, (Miss.) whither he had removed with his negroes the second or third year of the war, in order to be without Federal lines, and as far away as possible from Federal troops and Federal “raids.” It appears that during one of his absences from his temporary home in Choctaw, two favorite young dogs (McQueen was a great lover of hounds and hunting), had strayed away from home, and by accident, got to the house of a poor man, named Flowers. On his return home, and missing his canine favorite, the old man took his gun and hunting horn and got upon his horse, and went blowing around through the neighborhood, in order to call up the puppies and find out where they were – knowing that if they heard the horn they would be sure to come to him. The neighbors and the negroes, it seems, had evaded telling him where they were, because they were pretty sure he would kill the supposed abductor or whoever might happen to have them in possession. After blowing his horn sound through the neighborhood for some hours without success, McQueen finally reached the house of F;lowers, some six or seven miles distant. He called Flowers to the door, and asked him if there were any stray dogs there? Flower replied he did not know – if there were, he was not aware of the fact. Where upon, McQueen blew a blast upon his horn, which of course brought all the dogs to the spot, and among the rest the missing pups. Some angry words then passed between McQueen and Flowers, when the former, suddenly raising his fun, shot the latter down in his own door, killing him instantly. The neighborhood was soon aroused by the news of the terrible deed, and a number of exasperated men came together for the purpose of executing summary justice upon the unhappy, but to my mind, evidently insane perpetrator. But McQueen hearing of their intention, mounted a fleet horse and attempted to make his escape Northwardly in this direction. The “avengers of innocent blood,” however, soon got upon his track, pursued him as far as Calhoun county, where they caught up with him and mercilessly “shot him to death” in the road. Thus ended the career of one of the most remarkable men whose history has come to my knowledge for this many a day – a man, i am informed by those who knew him, remarkable for the exhibition of extraordinary intellectual powers at times, but more frequently for the strangest and most insane “eccentricities,” both of the head and heart, that ever cursed poor humanity, with the appearance of being closely akin to the rankest and most rampant diabolism.
-In the “McQueen Will Case,” Messrs. Featherstone, Harris, and Ricahrd Watson are the counsel for Mrs. Mullen, the niece of the testator, who claimed under the will; and Messrs. Walter, Falconer, and John W.C. Watson are of counsel for Mrs. Cottrell, the only child of the deceased, who seeks to invalidate the will on the ground of the testator’s evident insanity. Offers to the compromise have been made by the latter (Mrs. Cottrell); but as the children of the niece (Mrs. Mullen) are also legatees under the will, and they are all still minors, these offers have been on this ground refused. It should be mentioned to the honor of both parties to the suit, that they joined in order to the Administrator of the estate in Choctaw county to set apart a comfortable support for the family of the man – Flowers_ so madly murdered by McQueen on account of the “stray dogs;” and this order, I learn, had been properly carried out. J.P.P
P.S. – Since the foregoing was written, I find that the “breaks” in the Memphis and Charleston Road beyond Iuka, caused by the recent freshet, will cut short my intended trip to North Alabama for the present. The first “break” is at the crossing of Bear Creek. This, however, I learn will be repaired and made ready for the trains by Wednesday evening or Thursday morning.
I have also learned from gentlemen who left Holly Springs this morning, that the “hung jury,’ referred to in the above remarks on the “McQueen Will Case,” did not stay “hung” as was reported, but finally came to the unanimous, sensible conclusion that Peter McQueen was too much of a lunatic to make a will, and thereupon Judge Falconer refused to admit the will to probate. It is believed that they case will be taken up to the High Court of Errors and Appeals. Already, the Court costs (according to my information) have reached near $1,500. F.
