The Tiffin tribune. (Tiffin, Ohio) 1868-1887, 1872-01-04
CoLunrRIA- s. G. Dec %

SOADAADAAT - III DOSs ~
To-day testimony for the defense
was offered in the case of the United
States VS.. DR.. Thomas b. Whitesides
and Capt. John w. Mitchell.
1t has evidently become a settled
conclusion here that further attempt
to conceal the existence Of Ku-Klux,
or further efforts TO defend it must be
abandoned. The trials have lost all
appearance Of any political siglifi-
canoe, and the defense is now cOnfin-
ed to the vindicatiOn Of the individu-
al prisoners at the bar. In the previ-
GUS trial, it will be remem bered, the
interests Of the prisoners at the bar
were utterly submerged in the more
vital interests of the Democratic party;
now, however, the guilt Of the Demo-
cratic party, is wholly conceded, and
the conspiracy of which IL Is guilty is
admittedly the most atrOciOus that
mind can conceive. Hence, the tri-
ais have subsidized into an ordinary
prosecution and defense of prisoners
charged with crime.
BY the testimony for the prOsecu-
tion, Mitchell and Whitssides were
both identified as members of a khan
Mitchell as a chief-and they were
also proved to have participated in
whipping raids. The DEFENDANTS test
imOny to-day was confined 10 proof
Of an alibi- To prove that a man Is
not guilty Of a murder, or Of an as
sauIt, alledged to have occurred on a
specific day, might be done very well;
but to prove an alibi to clear a man
Of conspiracy, which is the only
charge here, savOrs very much OF
Weller's recommendation in BardelI
VS.. Pickwick, The progress Of the al
ibi to-day is marked by testimony OF
DR.. Darwin, a physician, who swore
that he was at MitchePs house, and
sat up all night with MitchePs moth
er, the night Of an alleged outrage by
the Ru-KluX, and that Whitesides
and Mitchell were both there all night
His testimony was considerably sha-
ken on cross examination, but il may
90 for what il is worth. A Mrs.
Howe, mother Of a young man in
dicted for being Klu-Klux, testified
to substantially the same thing, add
ing that her Klu-Klux son vas there.
Miss Howe, a daughter, testified %
the facts, but couldn't speak as b
dates. Mitchel's son was abused, and
his sister also. Well, this showed, Il
the testimony could be relied on, thai
Mitchell Waa not on this raid, and a.
others had been proved against him,
an effort was made TO spread abroad
his innocence of them also. A yOung
gentleman was sent 10 the stand who
testified that he was member Of the
Klu-KluX; that he had been on one
Of these raids upon which it was said
Mitchell had gone, and that Mitchell
was not there. That appeared pretty
conclusive as to that raid. The wit
ness was turned over for erOss-exam-
inatioE. "Whose klan do you belong
tO?" John W. MitcheI's. 'SThe pris-
ouer at the bar?'1 "Yes sir" SIS be
a KIu-Klux ?U 'rYes, sir.n aHow
do yoa know? % 81 have seen him al
Klu-KIux meetings, and be was chic
of nv klan.U FYOu are certain thi,
is the MANI" II an; I know him
we'll"
Let it be borne In mind that tn,
existence Of Klu-KIux, and its politi.
cal nature as q conspiracy, were vel
proved, and not eontradicted; anC
that Mitchell Is charged with being ,
member Of that conspiracy, and no
Of any particular overt act, although
overt acts were proved; now, wbai
better evidence can a jury want thar
this evidence ola witness for the de
Tense, who testifies that the defend
I ent was his chief?
/ The case looks dark, the counsel
look blue, aud tie testimony is SICK
ening. One feels like asking II ne
] has not fallen upon a nation OF oar
( barians. whose only excellence Is in