Knoxville weekly chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1875, 1873-02-05

and was replete with all the material facts
in the case clothed in eloquent and i'm
pressive language and carried weight to
every one within the sound of his voice
COZ. JAMES r.. COOKE,
For the defense followed. 4 great deal
| had been said in regard to Boyds flight as
! presumptive evidence of guilt. But with
al the Attorney General had been as fair
as was consistent with his duty. Yet
there was really nothing in the flight that
would warrant that construction. The
| Pilgrim Fathers fled from persecution, but
of what were they guilty? So had Thos.
G. Boyd fled. The French Huguenots
! fled also, but of what were they guilty?
They fled from persecution and so had
! Boyd. David fled from Saul and practiced
! deception on him, but he had been guilty
of no crime, and why should his client be
considered guilty for doing what the Shep-
| herd King had done? Robert Bruce the
! hero King of Scotland was n fugitive at
different times, and had even shed blood,
and why, with all these noted instances of
flight before them, so much stress should
be laid upon the flight of Mr.. Boyd, he
could not, for the life of him, see.
Mr.. Cooke read extracts in support of
his position and proceeded to show the
causes which led to his fleeing from home
and from justice. The land had been sown
with spies by the Government, whose of
ficials were loaded down with documents
to procure indictments against the priso-
ner.
Judge Emmons here interrupted Mr..
Cooke, saying that he would not permit
any reflection on the Government or any
of its officers. Mr. Cooke took the view
that as in the case of Aaron Burr, the Gov
eminent officials were criticised he
thought it should be allowed now. Judge
Emmons reiterated his position, and Mr.,
Cooke proceeded
1t was well known that Schwartz and
Whitney, Government detectives, had
spent much time in East Tennessee and
that many indictments We're the fruits of
their labors. His client fled from fear of
the powers of the Government and not
from conscious guilt. The Government
had revenue of $500, 900 900 but his client
had not the purse of Fortunatus and could
not pay for the attendance of witnesses,
many of whom lived long distance of:
If the jury believed him guilty of Il thou
sand other cases, if he was innocent of
fraud in the Martha j. Upton case, the
one now on trial, as honest men, under
oath, they should acquit the prisoner.
The strongest witnesses introduced by the
prosecution were Prince Wallace and Mar
tina j. Upton herself, and he thought the
Government had weak case, in8smuch
as they brought in so much collateral evil
dence in other cases and SO little in the
case on trial, reciting an anecdote of a bird
drawing the mischievous boy from her
nest by fegning to be wounded. Mr..
Cooke made several references to authori-
ties and after reviewing the papers briefly
closed with an appeal to the jury to consid-
er the case in all its bearings and bring in
verdict in accordance Herewith.
Col. Cooke having consumed one hour
and ten minutes, court adjourned until
seven O'Clock in order to give Judge Nelson
an opportunity to make his argument
without interruption.
NIGHT SESSION.
Hon. Thos. A. r. Nelson, fer the defense
made one of those ponderous arguments
for which he is so well known, but as it
was very lengthy wecan not attempt more
than a skeleton synopsis Of his remarks.
For the last forty years he had appeared
! in different courts as counsel in all kinds
Of case, from petit larceny 10 the highest,
| and he was painfully aware that circum-
stances in this trial had been brought forth
which made it peculiar case. He was
| painfully conscious that facts had been
brought out and he might say that he ap-
peared under disadvantageous circum-
stances. Under these circumstances he
felt that it was necessary 10 make an
case were quite thoroughly understood,
and he would not dwell upon them.
He said: / have to make an appeal to
you, gentlemen, at the commencement vi
this case. The circumstances in the case
are such that L ask you to take the evil
dence in this particular case and rendel
your verdict in accordance with these
proofs. If the court should take it up Oh
himself to give his opinion as to facts in
the case, You will not rely solely upon his
charge. This is my opinion, and in sup
} port of which refer TO authority.
j do not wish to be understood that thu
court has rot the right to express his opin
ion as to the facts brought out in the case
g | ask you 10 banish every feeling Of preju
dice or bias that has been created by tn
4 conduct of the defendant, and If it will b.
: possible to discard all the circumstances o
s his flight and look with an eye single 4
q this indictment, declare to you that q
s far az the charge in this indictmen
is concerned, he ]has a defensible case
u and he can with sincerity ask 70
e an acquittal. Such verdict might aston
II ish the people of this county, but If the ev
It idence Is not sufficient TO warrant his con
e viction, trust aud / shall be able TO dem
ir onsIrate that such is the case to the jur
- and court that / shall be able TO convinC
r you that there is a defense.
n When he comes into the court he como
"a as an innocent man ami he stands as sue
W until evidence Is adduced that shall prov
r him guilty. The burden Of the proof
X upon the Government TO show that he
. guilty, and be can demand thi
- such evidence must be brought 70
h forward. The theory of the GovernmeI
- i,