Knoxville weekly chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1875, 1873-01-29
8noHrille 9}'eFkly Chronicle.
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY %, 1873.
THOMAS G.. BOYD.
EAST TENNESSEE CLAIM SWINDLE.
OplnIon Of Judge EmmOns.


Emmons' opinion overruling the motion
to continue the case Of the United States
against Thomas G. Boyd:
His Honor said that where there had
been such lapse of time as l)rinld .Jdcid to
afford opportunity to prepare for trial, three
things i'll all cases were necessary to be
shown in order to continue Il criminal
cause. That there was defense on the
merits, that material witnesses were alb
sent and that the defendant had used due
ditigeRce to procure their attendance.
When active eXertions had not been made
so as to comply with the last requisite facts
which eccuSed it would satisfy the rule.
Last evening counsel were informed that
as the affidavit then was, the existence of
a defense and the absence of material
witnesses sufficiently appeared. There was
no necessity for an amendment in that re-
gard, but as there was not word to show
iCAy the witnesses were not here in a case
two years before the court, there was moth
ing upon which we could act.
There was a recommendation to amend
the paper by showing some reason why
preparation FOR trial had not been made.
A second postpOnement was granted
for this purpose He had listened
any iousiy to its reading as now
amended and patiently to the impas-
stoned and really impressive appeals of the
or argument had there appeared fact or
suggestion having the slightest tendency
to show that there had been any effort to
procure witnesses. 1t does not appear
that even a request for their presence had
been made, and no subpoena has been is
sued and served. The only reference to
such q process is that two terms since
part of the witnesses acknowledged SER
vice for their appearance. But this is
wholly immaterial. 1t did not bind them
TO 90 So and the affidavit cOnclusively
shows not only that the defendant did not
expect them ut the term referred TO, but
was himself absent. He had fled from
Justice in circumstances so extraordinary
and so carefully planned a. to enable his
BAIL as he swcars he intended they should
do, to suggest his death upon the record,
with the intention of still further defraud-
ing the Government of the sums in which
theywere bound for disappearance. Where
he was during his absence, what commune
cations he held or might have held with his
witnesses, whether they are friendly or hos
tile and would have ComeupOn request, why
he did not subpoena them, what reason
he has hereafter to expect them or had that
! they would be here now, or even that he
! expected them at all is not even limited at
in this extraordinary affidavit. None of
! the manifold circumstances which we can
! conjecture migH have given him reasOna-
]
| prepared for trial, or showing at least a
plausible excuse why he omitted prepara-
! ton and could therefore ask continuance,
| are given.
Upon what ground learned counsel sup
| posed the court could, without gross viO-
| lation of law, continue this cause We are
/ unable to conceive. The paper presented
seems to have been framed in the idea that
there was no CItty OF diligence incumbent
upon the defendant. Its apparent argu-
ment would seem to assume that the Gov
eminent must not proceed until the con-
Venience and even the caprices and
desperate experiments of the defendant in
endeavoring to defeat a trial at all had left
him leisure to attend to the ordinary and
lawful modes of meeting public accusa-
ton in court, 1t presents but the bald
unrelieYed case of q defendant fleeing from
Justice after trial in one case, and from
twenty-five other similar indictments, anC
without detail of any kind return q day
or two before the trial, and an announce
ment that, for some wholly unexplained
reason he is not ready for trial-lcby, is no
said. No frank, eXcusatOry explanation
; of the years negligence is made, but in TIN
latitude of an accused the high officials o
the government and its counsel, the actor
of grand jurors and prosecutions are de
nOuneed as oppressive.
The number of indictments is assume,
per sc to be evidence of tyrannical publ
= action and continuance demanded, no
D because the defendant in the peculiar cir
cumstances attempts to modify and palliat
his exceptional conduct but because of til
character of the governmental proceeding
against him. The paper is unprecedente
and was suffered to be read because in tn
rapidity Of its reading the court was i
doubt as to its real purport. We thin
there is much in 1t highly improper. /
its relevant and legitimate averments,
does not contain facts constituting eve
plausible ground for continuing the caus,
Counsel have pronounced it the strOnge
affidavit they ever presented for a smils
purpose. tbs strong in its pathOs and til
beautiful and touching manner in whic
il describes the misery and dependency
an innocent man, fleeing from the .tdb
accusations Of enemies, the oppressiN
power of a great and bad government an
,, uncomfortable and unjust suspicious
friends. Did the facts which the san
eloquent paper so fully comedies to he tru
sustain any appreciable relation to the
> affecting appeals, we might in quite dtie
- enU considerations, find some cause for
continuance.
The condition of public opinion is sa
TO be so against the defendant az TO wa
ranta continuance on that ground. The
r, is nothing but the unsupported affidavit
a. the defendant to show this. such collatC
al facts are never left to he unsupport
q. opinion Of defendant. There are abu
dant reasons in this case why we can n
act upon il alone. such au eXtraordina
fact must be sustained by the statement
leading, responsible citizens who kuC
Dublic feeling II would ne 11nsppmIv