Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1872-01-19
Gloomy View ofPoliticaI Prospects I'm
The wharton Trial.
coNTINUATIoN oF AR.UNENTs ron

NON I'M h1lhN Ahtsi MINIS FOR
DEFENsE.
ANNhFoLIs. Nh, Jan. l9.-The court met az
10 O'Clock. Every part OF the floor packed
With spectators. and even the window >ils were
hled 10y ladies. Many seats were occupied an
hour in advance OF the opening The court.
The audience ~ about equally divided I'M seN.
oulslde oi the court room speculation and di,
cnssion of the probable verdict OF the jury is
almost the sole subject Of discussion. A. well a.
on all the trains and i'm the CITY OF Baitimore
MI. Thomas resumed his argument for tie
defense, dwelling upon the legal presumption OF
the prisoners Innocence, reclting Greeneaf on
THIS point, aud also the amouni aud character
OF prO0f necessary before conviction. No AIDE
quzte motive for the commission OF murder by
the prisoner, a. charged, had been shown by tie
testimony OF the state. and even upon the sup
position that Mrs. Wharton owed General
heichum 5000, She had no obstacle 70 prevent
her going 10 Europe and lesy .ng the debt unpaid.
But there was no evidence 20 show that Mr..
Wharton owed General ketchum. The Court
had instructed the jury that the eclsrationS OF
Charles ketchum TO Mr.. Wharton IN regard
Ia state ments Of his father, were not evidence,
except 20 far as she assented 20 them.
The speaker next cOntended that there was no
evidence that Mrs. Wharton had not paid her
indebtedness 70 General ketchum. aud the tes-
tlmony of Mrs. Co;tman, which came prOyiden
tally, almost as il from Heaven. hSed 90 an
absolute certainty the date OF Mrs. wharton's
Writ 10 Washington, and that was the very day
Mrs. Wharton told Charles ketchum and Gen
eral Brice she paid the money 10 Gen. Ketchum.
After rehearsing and further commenting on
Mrs. Cottmans testimony. Mr.. Thomas pro-
ceeded to consider the evidence in reference to
the claim by the accused for four thousand dol
lars in bonds against the estate OF ten. Ketch-
UNI, and argued that there was no improbability
she should have entrusted her bonds % him
without taking receipt, a. their previous rela
tons justified such confidence on her part. He
reviewed the testimony of General Brice AMI
Charles hetchum, arguing that IL did not prove
the debt had not been paid and the bonds en-
defence.
The counsel then alluded to the extraordinary
and unusual proceedings resorted TO in the pres.
ecutlon OF the case, from it, inception until after
the commencement OF the trial. The pos, naorfsa,
examination had been made without coroner, ,
inquest and without the sanction Of authority
1t was the duty of DIR. Williams a. have comm
nicated his suspicious 20 the authorities when IN
coroner's inquest had been held, and the physi
clan designated 20 make the post morton. AMI
also the chemist 20 assist Aiken; that there Wa
no such investigation by official authority: Nhat
investigation there was was unofficial Initiated
by DIR. Williams, ard afterwards prosecuted
sity OF Maryland. They made the eN-
animation prepoSSessed OF the theor,
10 be carried out, and afterwards enlisted their
entire faculty IN support OF this theory, aud
when the state had gone TO the trial and broken
down on it, proofs, these same parties went 20
Washington, disinterred the body OF Ketchum
employed their own chemists, and had a second
investigation. Why were not the defence in
vited 10 cooperate and assist i'm this second eN-
animation? They had then present in court a.
experts the best ANALYTICAL chemists in the
anu WI. give litfil OPPORTUNITY
10 cooperate with Professor TonryS The At
torney General, when he applied 90 the court
for permission for TOnry TO pursue his ANALYSIS.
after giving In his first testimony, and III neceS-
ssry adjourn the court for that purpose. knew
there were experts here, and why had they not
been asked 60 assist said Tonry? The pre-
cedent was dangerous, and if private par
ties, without coroner or official authority,
were permitted 20 make private examinations
and prosecutions, IL this were allowed and sane
toned there was no security for the lite or lib
erty OF any individual. Aud what did their in
yestigation and analysis demonstrate? Did IL
prove that ketchum died OF poison, and il IL
did that Mrs. Wharton did IL?
The speaker then reviewed for sOma time the
evidence OF Aiken and Tonry, arguing that their
analyses were unreliable; their tests falliable
and inconclusive; and the result a failure 20
establish poison.
Mr.. Thomas next argued that IL was not ne
cessary the defence should show the disease of
which ketchum died, but only to rebut the evil
dence OF the prosecution that ketchum died by
poison from tsrtar-emetic. and this, he argued.
they had done. Mr.. Thomas concluded his
argument at 100.