The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1876-02-11
The Babcock Trial.
Very respectfully,
WILLIAM ORION.


among revenue officers as "Form No. %"
and told how the disposition of illicit
whisky was covered at rectifying houses.
Bassett was followed by Abiah NJ.
Everest, who testified that he became col
lector for the ring in August 1874 aud con-
tnued to act as such until the seizures IN
May 1875. The collections during that
time ran as follows each week: Ulric's dis
tllery, $50 to $2,700 Bingham, $4,000 to
$4,000 Jonetts, $1,000 to $ll 900; Be-
Wis & Prayers, $1,000 to S2,70O. Coming
down to the spring of 1876, either late in
February or early in March, Everest said
Joyce once sent him to the sub-treasury
with package of $1,000 in small bills to
get two $500 hills. He brought them back
and Joyce put them in an envelope and
told him to take them across the street and
put them in letter box. Witness said he
did SO. He was then asked If he had oh.
served the directions tho lo.e-
Before he could answer the defense in
terposed an digestion, asserting that the
prosecution was now trying to show that
BabcOck's name was ON one of the letters
and tn the evidence was not competent
An argument ensued.
Judge Krum said This evidence is
competent because it is presumptive, and
is inten ed 10 show that the envelopes or
one of them was addressed to the defend
ant. AT this stage of the case it is intend
ed to establish the conspiracy between the
parties at st. Louis and the defendant. 1t
is the connecting link in the theory of the
prosecution. Thus far the case is barren
in evidence to show that the defendant had
any connection with the conspiracy in st.
Louis. The naked question is presented
that the defendant did receive letter con-
flaming money from the conspirators No
such presumption can arise now the evil
dence Of the witness has in fact no rele-
vancy to the question because there is no
evidence to follow to show that the de-
PENDANT ever, received The envelope, even if
they were deposited in the mail box there
is not scintilla of evidence before your
honor or the jury to show thus far that the
defendant ever had any connection with
the ring in st. Louis, and therefore there
can be no pre.umptive evidence that he
ever received the envelope.
Judge Porter followed also, arguing the
irrelevancy of testimony
Col. Broadhead for the government, said
it is not question as TO the conclusiveness
as to testimony, but as to the competency
and that is all we claim for 1t. We claim
that it is competent to show to the jury
whether or not Gen. Babcock was men,
Der of the conspiracy. We don't say that
it is conclusive as to that point. We don't
say that this is all tue evidence we have to
submit on that point, but we must make
start and introduce part of the testimony
here and and part there to establish the
charge. No proposition in the law of ev-
idenee is more thoroughly established than
that jury or any other tribunal may infer
from one fact the existence of another fact
Mr.. Storrs gave pretty much the same
Argument as Mr.. Porter, and added, there
is no evidence thus far to show that the
money was placed in those envelopes.
Night there not been dexterous manipu-
lation by which the witness was induced to
believe the money was put in the envelope,
but which in fact might have slipped into
Joyce's pocket or elsewhere. There is
utter absence of proof to show that the
money was ever sent for a corrupt purpose.
Men cannot be cor ciured into the gal
lows, or guessed into the penitentiary.
The pivotal question is, does the deposit OF
this envelope into the mail box prove that
1t was ever received
Judge Dillon-I understand that the
prosecution hold that the deposit Of the
letter into the mail box addressed to a per
son raises the presumption that the letter
reached it's destination.
Judge Storrs-That is what they claim,
but we deny there is any legal presumption
of such result.
Judge Dillon--ln order to have this pro-
pery put to the jury I would ask the wit
ness were there two envelopes.
Witness-Yes, sir.
Judge Dilon-w We're they prepaid ?
Witness-Yes, sir.
Judge Dllon-You say you don't know
! whether they contained letters or not