New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-01-20
THE WHARTON TRIAL.
ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENSE

AhGlmENl fOh llE
BALTIMORE, Jan. 19.-At the opening of the
Court this morning Mr.. Thomas resumed his argument
for the defense dwelling upon the legal presumption Of
the prisoners innocence citing Greenleaf this point,
and the amount and character Of proof necessary
before conviction. There adequate motive for
the commission OF murder by the prisoner as charged
Gen. Ketchum $1,000 she had no obstacle TO prevent her
from going 10 Europe ana leaving the aepi unpaai gu
Gen. Ketchum The Court had instructed the jury that
the declaration OF Charles Kctchum TO Mrs. Wharton IN
regard TO statements of his father not evidence OK
cep SO far she assented TO them Il
paid her Indebtedness 10 Ketchum and the testimony OF
Mrs COtman fixed the absolute certainty OF the DATE
very day Mrs Wharton told Charles Ketchum and Gen.
Bryce she padthei money to Ketehun After rehears-
meny Mr.. Thomas proceeded to consider the evidence
in reference to the claim Of the accused Tor 1900 IN
there was no mprobability that she should have In
trusted her bonds TO him without taking receipt, as
part He reviewed the testimony OF Gen. Bryce ana
Charles Ketchum arguing that 1t did not prove that the
@ by sSt the s aeense
Counsel then alluded to the extraordinary proceedings
resorted TO the prosecution OF this case from l ncp
ton until after the commencement Of the trial The
postmortem examination had been mado without cor
Oners inquest-without the sanction OF any authority
1t the duty of DR.. Williams to have communicated
his suspicious TO the AUTHORITIES when coroner IA
TO make post norton examination, and also chemist
to assist Ak but mere was sSof there was
was unoical-uitated by Dr. Williams. and afterward
prosecuted by Inn and three Professors or the University
of Maryland They made the examination prepOssesse'
with theory 10 carried out, and aferWard eulscu
their entire faculty in support OF this theory ana wien
gone trial. and broken down In ats proof
these same parties Went to Washington disihteIeu @
body of Ketchum employed their own chemists ana hau
n second investigation Why not the defense In,
vted TO Cooperate and assist this second examination
They had then present in the Court az experts tne pest
analytical chemists in tho country ana why not give
them opportunity TO cooperate with Prof. Ioney
The Attorney General when he applied TO TINS court IoI
permission for TOncy to pursue his analysis, aier gVu
his first testimony, and II necessary, that inc Court
would adjourn for that purpose knew that these eXpeI
here and why had they not been asked TO asss
said IOneyl The precedent was dangerous, anu pr
vate parties, without Coroner or Official au-
thorty were permitted ~ make private exam
ity for the life or liberty OF any individual.
Aud what did these Investigation analyses demonstrate
Did prove that Ketchum died Of pOson and IL
did that Mrs Wharton did 1T The speaker then re-
viewed at some length, the testimony Of Profs Aiken
and Toney, arguing that their analyses were unrust-
worthy their test falhe and inconcusye, and the re-
suits failure establish poison Mr.. Thomas next
argued that not necessary that the defcuse should
show the diseases OF which Cen Ketchum died but only
rebut the evidence of the prosecution that Retchn
died by poison from tartar emetc, and THIS lie argued,
they had done.
ment for the defense He commented the interest OF
several for the State in the prosecution OF the
case and reviewing the evidence in reference to the
purchase OF tartaremec by Mrs Wharton, when, owing
to debility and ndispOsiOn, he asked To ne
cused from further addressing the jury to-day, ana the
| court adjourned until tomorrow.