William Andrew GAGE

January 9, 1836 - September 26, 1891


Husband of Angeline Margaret Hargis Gage
Son of John Andrew and Lydia Mary Clements Gage
-Samuel F. Vaughan who promised Thomas Hamilton $3,000 if he would kill ex-County Clerk Andrew Gage of Madison County in 1891, was hanged this morning for the murder of Gage. He denied his guilt to the last. His wife and children spent last night with the condemned man, and at 5 o'clock this morning his wife, when told by the Sheriff to take final leave of her husband, drooped on her knees by his side and prayed God for half an hour to kill her husband before he reached the gallows. Vaughan had to be carried to the gallows, from which his body fell a distance of eight feet, almost severing the head from the neck. Samuel F. Vaughan was twice convicted of the same crime. Hamilton will be sent to the penitentiary New York Times
April 28, 1894

New York Times
August 22, 1894
LITTLE ROCK. Ark.. Aug. 2l.

-At the Circuit Court in Berryvllle. Ark., to-day, Thomas Hamilton pleaded guilty to murder in the second degree
for killing W. A. Gage. one of the most prominent citizens of Madison County. three years ago. He was sentenced to eighteen years in the penitentiary. Hamilton was hired to kill Gage by Samuel F. Vaughan, who was hanged at Fayetteville last April.

Appeal from circuit court, Washington county; Edward S. McDaniel, Judge.


Samuel F. Vaughan, convicted of murder in the first degree, appeals. Affirmed.

The other facts fully appear in the following statement by WOOD, J.:

W. A. Gage was assassinated at his home, in Madison county, September 26, 1891. He was tired upon by some one In ambush, as he was returning to his house from his horse lot, and instantly killed. Tracks leading to and from the place of the killing were discovered. Those leading away were made by a person in sock feet Those leading up to where the assassin stood were made with shoes having plates or irons upon the heels. The shoes of one Thomas Hamilton were compared with the tracks, and found to fit exactly. Also, beggar lice and red dirt were found upon his socks, corresponding to dirt of the same description in the field of the deceased,—the way the party doing the killing had gone. Hamilton was indicted as principal; the appellant, Samuel F Vaughan, as accessory. Samuel F Vaughan was suspected and arrested on account of the bitter animosity which he was known to have had against Gage on account of a lawsuit which had been pending for years between them. Samuel F Vaughan had sued Gage for something between $2,500 or $3,000. and had been heard, at different times and places, and by various witnesses, to express great hatred towards Gage. Had said "that Gage had treated him very bad, or very mean; that it was very hard to bear; that there were two ways a man could get him to kill him,—one, in self-defense; the other, by treating him mean." Also, "that if Gage beat him In his suit he did not know what he would do; that he thought he would leave the state; had never been fooled so badly by a man In his life." And, again, "that he had decided in his mind that, If a man beat him out of his just rights, that It would not do him any good; that there was old Andrew Gage, who owed him about twenty-five hundred dollars, and, if he beat him out of it, it should never do him any good." And, again, "that he sometimes thought that, if It were not for his family, or Gage's family, before Gage should testify against him, he would take his gun and kill him." Other witnesses testified that appellant, after being arrested, and on his way to jail, when near deceased's house, fell off his mule, began crying, and sold that he had just realized that he was charged with crime; that he regretted the thought of having to be taken among his old friends and neighbors, charged with killing as good a man as Mr. Gage." After Samuel F Vaughan and Hamilton were lodged in jail, witnesses and letters were introduced to show that Samuel F Vaughan endeavored to dissuade Hamilton from turning state's evidence, all of which will be set out fully In the opinion. Hamilton, by an agreement with the state's attorney to the effect that he might plead to murder In the second degree, was permitted to testify. Omitting the details of the horrible crime, as given by him, his testimony was, In substance: That he was In most distressed circumstances,—his family sick, and he In want That defendant, Samuel F Vaughan, at different times when they were hunting together, and on other occasions, talked to him about his trouble with Gage; said that Gage was going to swear him out of his money, If he was not removed, and that he wanted him (Hamilton) to do it, and would give him half Gage owed him If he would kill Gage. Said that Samuel F Vaughan promised to let him have land to cultivate, furnish him a team, and give him all he could make; that he had nothing against Gage, but finally yielded to the requests of Samuel F Vaughan, moved through his promises to pay him, and committed the deed in the manner above described, with a double barrel shotgun furnished him by Samuel F Vaughan. Said that Samuel F Vaughan planned the way for him to do the killing, and said he (Vaughan) would be suspected, but that he could prove that he was not there, and that he (Hamilton) would not be suspected. The defendant, on his own behalf, denied all the statements of Hamilton, Introduced witnesses to show bis good character, and that Hamilton hart made statements at different times "that he (Vaughan) had nothing to do with the killing." The above, together with the facts set out in the opinion, constitute the substance of the evidence upon which the state asked conviction. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the case is here by appeal from Judgment of death pronounced upon the verdict.

J. D. Walker and J. W. Walker, for appellant James P. Clarke, Atty. Gen., and Charles T. Coleman, for the State.

Photo courtesy of Annette Shaw

Contributed on 1/17/20 by billsully060
Email This Contributor

Suggest a Correction

Record #: 1291908

Don't Follow