Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-02-17

! llllyu Wa S5ODu, NC HAS Ut6u lOT several
years past prominent man in our State,
and during that time he has been pretty
well scrutinized; Mr.. Stokes introduced the
bill in the Thirty-ninth Congress; it passed
the House, but did not pass the Senate;
subsequently introduced it at the forty-firsl
Congress, and it then, after undergoing GER
tain notifications, became law.
Col Topp, of Memphis, testified to having
known Stokes for twenty years, and never
heard his character called in question.
WHAT JUDGE WRIGHT KNOWS.
Judge Wright: know Stronger; l be-
came his bail at the request of my wife,
with whom Mr.. Stokes interceded in bis be.
half; l had a conversation with Mr.. Stro-
meyer on the subject of Mr.. Stokes, and on
bis own case.
! Q. viii you relate what that conversa-
ton was?
A. My object was to understand what
liability l had assumed in going his bail;
I said that l knew that Stokes had got into
/ trouble, but that was all; he said explicit
| ly that Stokes had come here; and what
was paid to Stokes by him was given simply
for the purpose Of renumerating him for his
kindness; Stronger told me about the in
dictment against him; said he: Gas far as 1
was concerned, 1 was bad clerk, and that
was ALL" ''Stokes was as innocent as l
was"
WHAT thinker DAVE" SAID.
Col. j. Blackburn: I know Beatty,
| "Tinker Dave" for short. About the oath
of August last, Stronger was arraigned in
! Smithville, aud Murray came to us and said
that if we would help prosecute Stokes he
would give us $1,000. Capt. Beatty said ::
! ''As far as Stokes is concerned, he is per-
fectly innocent of any fraud" He said that
he got Stokes to go to Washington, and that
he got sick, and that he Beatty went to
him and paid him $500, which he would
never ask back. know Gen. Stokes, and
never heard anything against him until this
charge.
Mr.. R. will inquire of you, Colonel,
what Beatty said about the money he gave
| to Stokes; whether he donated it, gave it,
delivered it, or what?
A. He said that Stokes had gone TO Wash
ington for them during recess of Con-
gress, and that he gave him the money for
! his trouble.
MORE GOOD CHARACTER.
| Isaac r. Hawkins, r. A. Crawford, 81.
! NJ. Waterson, L. G. Houk and I'D. Lewis,
all testified to the good reputation of Stokes
! for integrity.
CHARGE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE.
Chief Justice Cartier, after recapitulating
the origin of the case, said:
"The defendant is as chargeable with an
offence in prosecuting a legal demand as in
prosecuting an illegal demand. The de-
fence consists in the fact that the defendant,
being a member of Congress, lends his aid
in the prosecution of a claim.
The court calls your attention to this
feature of the case, for the reason that you
have iEtimations, all along the line Of proof,
of fraud upon the Government-an exhi-
bition rarely made in criminal court-pro-
secuted in utter disregard to integrity, at
the expense of repeated forgery and re-
peated perjury. From the mouth of the
participatOrs in this crime we have the evil
dence of its preparation. Agents defraud-
ing the Government; agents defrauding
those whom heyrepresent, and those whom
| they represent defrauding the people.
Don't confound case that ought to be tried
! for the preparation of fraud for a simple
misdemeanOT that is here charged,viz: That
! he prosecuted the claims while member Of
] OOllSICSog SUCu DClliE d NiOlfhliOn VI bIC
/ statutory provision. That brings me TO the
case we have before us. The statute in
/ general terms provides that no member of
! Congress, while such, shall prosecute against
! the Government, or shall aid or assist as
attorney, or as agent, or in any way in his
! personal capacity for reward, the prosecu-
/ ton of any such claim; that he shall not,
after having rendered service, receive any
lr, e.
| ton whatever to be paid him. In pursu-
! aDCe of that law, the defendant il indicted
! under eight several counts.
! addressing Attorney Do you wish me
/ TO act on all of them?
Mr.. H. Upon three, if your honor please.
! The second, fourth and sixth.
Chief Justice. The second count charges
! the defendant with having compensation
/ and with force and arms, acted as agent
! for the prosecution of certain claims against
! the government, etc. This raises the first
! question that the defendant involves in this
! connection. Did he render this service for
! compensation to be paid him for the under
taking? You must find, if you find him
/ guilty under the second count by the in
dictment, that he did do this service for
payment or compensation. 1t is unneces-
sary that this contract should he in writing
! or should be formal 1t is sufficient for
you to find that it was the understanding
/ the mutual understanding that be should
receive.
The fourth count charges his having aided
and assisted i'll the prosecution. The only
difference between this and the second
is the addition Of the word aid, used instead
of agent or attorney. This aid must be aid
in consideration of compensation; aid for
compensation, etc, etc.
The sixth count charges the receipt Of a
gratuity in consideration Of having aided in
these claims. This count is based on the
| hypothesis that during the prosecution Of
the claim no engagement to pay existed,
but that afterward the defendant accepteda
graluity for the services rendered, and the
question for you, under this count is, first,
did Stokes receive a gratuity, and second,
was that gratuity in consideration of the
prosecution of these claims.
If you think the evidence sustains either
of these counts you will find the accused
guilty. If you do not thiLk so, or have a
reasonable doubt, you will return verdict
of not guilty. Take the case and dispose
of it.
VERDICT OF GUILTY.
The jury retired, and after remaining out
a short time came into court again.
After few minutes order was obtained,
and the clerk propounded the usual ques-
ito: Gentlemen, have you agreed upon
your verdict"
Foreman. We have.
How find you? is the prisoner at the bar
guilty or not guilty?
Foreman. Guilty on the second, third
and SIKH counts as indicted.
At the announcement of the decision OF
the jury, Gen. Stokes betrayed considerable
nervousness, which, however, disappeared
upon the declared intention Of the Chief
Justice to adjourn the court until the next
day.
On the 18th inst. Stokes counsel entered
motion in arrest Of judgment, on the
ground that the indictments charge no of
Tense, but are vague and defective, and that
the defect could not be cured by a verdict
On the 18th Chief Justice Cartier overuled
the motion. Exceptions were taken to this
ruling by Stokes counsel, and the case car
rind on appeal to the court in general term