New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-06-24
Beverly Tucker Burns Ills Letters.
A PLEA FOR ARNOLD.
Adjournment to Tuesday.
WASHINGTON, Friday, June %. 1905:

sye.r and shaf He saw Clement c. Clay jr on
about IL 18th 18Th of February last at the queens
Hotel Toronto. lie did not think he was mistaken III
seeing Clay then. He also saw Sanders, Beverly
Tucker and others at Montreal on the 10th or 18th OF
the month. The witness was present at CONVEX
saton at St. Lawrence Hall Montreal on the "a or 80
Of June when the present trial was the subject dis
eussed by Dr. Merritt Beverly Tucker. Gen. Carroll OF
Tennessee and ex Gov Wescott of Florida; Beverly
Tucker said lie had burned all tie letters for fear the
"Yenkee sons f-b--s" would steal them ont OF bis
room. The witness had knowledge that DR.. Merritt
enjoyed the confidence of Tucker aud the Others
TIE ARGUMENT, FOR ARNOLD.
Mr. Ewing then proceeded 10 read the argu
ment on the prisoner Arnod's case. He re-
marked that the evidence was not vohmlnous
Horner the detective said that Arnold after nls ar
rest gave an of meeting held al the lleban
House IN WASHINGTON; the object OF Wch Was 10 up
Of compelling the Government TO an eXchahle p' prs
oners. After announcing his intention ot having
nothing do with it, if not performed within the week.
Arnold Withdrew from IT, when Booth said, for
this he ought TO ne shot Booth had pre-
viously furnished the conspraors with arms.
and so perfectly satisfied did he become that
Arnold had withdrawn from the plot that he told AT
mold to dispose of the arms placed in the prisoners
hands inst as he pleased. This statement OF AInods
was truthful and ingenious and all the evidence cor
rOboTaed and coniOrmed to il. In Booths trunk was
found letter from Arnold. dated from Hookstown.
March o. ia reply TO one from Booth, who had en-
deavored reclaim and again enlist him in his scheme
This letter showed that the rupture between them was
complete ana never TO be healed During Arnold
Il
that he engaged in the plot for the capture OF Pres
ideDt Lincoln. Arnold remained 10 Maryland from the
2ls TO the 3lst of March when he proceeded to Tor
fress Monroe for the purpose Of entering upon stua
ton as clerk with Mr.. Wharton. About the goth OF
March occurred the meeting, which resulted in the
quarrel of the accused with Booth when Arnold gave
M his room at Mrs Van 1ynes and never saw Booth
sfterwaId. The evidence established only that at one
time Arnold was party to Plot 20 capture or aoduet
the President If on the 18th of April the President
had been abducted instead Of assassinaed, Arnold
could not be punished because he had WITHDRAWN from
ihe conspiracy. AS the prisoner couni ermauded ihe
intention abduct and altogether withdrew from IT,
then there crime, ard as consequence 10 pun
ishment should follow MI Ewing quoted rom yari-
Gus legal authorities show that after Arnold had ter
minated his association with the consprators he war
not responsible for hat Was done afterward NO one
act of the oonspiTatOrs could Affect MIN. There war
not the remotest testimony TO connect Arnold with the
commission Of the murderous deed. BE repeated that
the original plot in which Arnold bore part. Wa
abandoned, and an entirely new one, with wh!cl
Arnold in way connected, was sGDsti-
tnfed Although he had conspired with the same
parties for different purpose he certainly was not re-
sponsble with the wicked men who dad the wicked
deed OF murder The prisoner, the counsel argued
could not be accessory before the Tact oil CRIME ne
did not know to be coinitied Az the time oi the
assassination Arnold was not IN Washington lie was
not nearer the scene than Fortress Monroe nor Qua he
give any guilty aid and protection to the murderer
after the crime.
the subject Of Jurisdiction arguing that neither the
Constitution of the United States, the laws passed
under it, gives them power 70 Try me prisonea, %
no constitutional legal provisions for trial IN such
court 1t must have been authorized by some mandate
from the Executive, which the Constitution prohibits
ii his client to be tried for treason ana murder
must be proved that they aided In or aoe'ted ne act
for either Of them on conviction was puhshapie win
death.
The Judge. Advocate would not on what law and
authority he rested the conviction Of these pan Ties ana
for what crime. The civil courts were open without
impedimeut foT impartial trial ard hence IN the ao
sebee OF other considerations there was no necessity
FOR this trial before military court II slch "a pitce
dent be set we may have fastened upon W military
GespOtsn. 1t might be that tbs afralgnlneht before
. military cOuTt was more convenient and conviction
more certain than before clNh tribunal. Inc JLuee'
Advocate had said that the parties we're filei under
the common military law. This was quiddlty ana
might make fictitious crime ana allach an aiD!iaT
punishment, and VINO may gslnsay tf our illes ana
articles OF war are familiar 10 Us AL. We never Aetiu
Of the common laws OF war having jurisdiction not CON
feIyed by express enactment or constlutOndi grant
II the laws governed he (Mr Ewing felt satisfied that
his clients were safe. One Of them, Dr.. Mndd.
had committed crime known 10 the law
He could not be charged with treason nor as alulhe
and abethg the murder OF the PRESIDENT Tor al tne
time Of the tragedy Dr. Mudd was at ms residence ~
miles from the place Of The crime lie certainly coud
not be charged with the commission oil the overt
net; there not two witnesses 10 sho" ". Dht
abundant witnesses TO show that he did not commit the
overt act Dr. Mudd never by himself nor with Others
levied against the Dted states nor gave ana ana
comfort to the enemy. Mr.. Ewing then proceeded to
comment the evidence, claiming that teie was
nothing which In the remotest degree connected Dr
Nudd with the conspiracy. He yenturea 10 say that
the annals OF CIVIL tlIas hdu INC ne Ol
accused been asSailed by much false testimony
had been exhibited in this case and rarely bad been
the good fortune Of an innocent 10 coute and
oyerwhem his false accuseTs by the prepOnderaDce Of
nndisputed truth. There no reliable evidence 10
slow that Or. Mudd met Booth more than
twice and that was isst November ia Charles County,
On A mere matter OF trade. He had never met Booth
an tbis civ The counsel then reviewed the evidence
relative 20 DIR. Nudd having set Booths leg ana othor
events in that connection, arguing mat nom All ths
there was nothing lead 70 conclusion unia'"raDe
10 he accused DR.. Mudd voluntarily not on coiapdl'
sion osve Information concerning the ronte by which
Booth with Harold, had escaped and, instead OF
thanking him for this good and loyal eit~ H. an
effort was made 10 punish him. Truly, The ways of ~
iary usee Ike those Of Prov idence. are mscfuilDc
and past ling out In tie cOu sc Of ms eeichs l'
Ewing said that In Oh the Writings Whlch had Dean
seized there not the scratch OF pen lu..lica.hg
DR. Mudd; nor was there anything 10 show t1at ne
had the least iutiuation or knowledge either Of The
assassination Or abduction. he concluded tiat
BIS client could not be punished rliref
as principal on an accessory before
the facts for the evidence fails 70 show either khOw-
edge or lntlmafion, suspicion 10 commit te crime
II tie prisoner YVES to be held responsible al an IL was
accessory after TIE fact ard beyond al cOntrO-
versy there was 10 proof On this point
THE ARGUMENTS FOR THg DLFENsE cos LUDED.
All the arguments for the accused having been read.
Associate Judge dyocate Bingham sad that Tues
day next be would be ready with ~ much Oh his SUN
mOnng up as touched The question OF the iuld ction
Of the Court and he hoped by tie mex. day 10 deliver
the conclusion Of his argument.
ADJoUNsiEST 10 TUESDAY.
The Court then adjourned until Tuesday morning II
II o'clock.