Evening star., 1876-09-29
The Safe Burglary Conspiracy Trial.
Trial of Alleged C0ssspirafors.
Argument by Colonel TOtten for MI.
sOmeFvflle and C0l0n nel Cook for
General BabcOck.
NINTH DAY

general BabcOck.
NINTH DAY.
Yesterday, In the Criminal Court, Judge
Macarthur, the trial OF o. f. Babcock and
Thomas 7. Somerville Indicted with Har-
rington, Whitley, Nettleship, Bliss, alias
Miles, and Benton,) on the charge OF con-
spiracy In connection with the alleged safe
burglary In the District Attorneys Office In
April, 1874, was continued after our report
closed, District Attorney Wells aot Mr. A
q RIDDLE for the prosecutor and Judge FuI
lie ton, OF New York, and Colonel W. A. Cook
appearing lOr General Babcock, and Colonel
Totten for Mr. SomervilIe.
Colopel Iotten continued his argument 10
behalf OF Mr.. Somerville, stating that tbs
evloenee against him was so slight that he
scarcely knew how 10 attempt a defence.
He was surprised that the grand Jury had
found the Indictment, but after they had
found II, II surprised him that they had not
Included other innocent men like l.. G.. Hine
and j. Johnson and w. NJ. Evans. All of
them had been connected with BentOn's aft. :.
davit or Benton's release. General Totten
commented upon the evidence OF Hayes
Mrs. Gardner and Gessner as to the affidavit
and claimed that the evidence altogether
proved that MT: somerville had performed
only his duty as an attorney, and If he was
TO be held accountable for such action no at
forney In the District would be free from in
diCtment.
Mr.. Totten closed shortly after 3 O'Clock,
when the court I'D journed.
Tenth Day.
When the court opened this morning there
was but small attendance present, and IL
was remarked that the interest appeared to
be dying out.
Colonel w. A. Cook, for Gen. Babcock,
commenced his argument at 1O15 O'Clock,
saying that he would have preferred to re-
main perfectly silent-tO have submitted
the case without argument-but such Is not
the practice. He was anxious to do the best
he could for one who from early life had
hor tod a ia.t ok,o
In all cases there are two classes of ques-
tiOns to be dealt with-of la and of fact
ard the rules In relation thereto are for the
promotion OF justice. For little while the
Jurors had been separated from their fellow
citizens; sanctified for the hour, and the des
tiny and fate OF an American citizen has
been committed to them. Mr.. Cook, refer
ring TO the Indictment charging onspiracy,
gave the definition of the crime at some
length, and urged that the definition was
the starting point OF the inquiry. The ques-
tion then is how can conspiracy be proven,
and from its very nature II was less often
proved by direct proof than other cases; and
,b ans Gs ine
combination, the agreement mu It be proved.
without q common purpose to start from
there can be no conspiracy.
What quantity of evidence is needed to
establish a conspiracy? 1t is ruled that In
criminal law the guilt of the accused must
be fully proven. In civil and criminal pro-
ceedings the oath to the jury is not the same.
In the latter the guilt must be established
beyond reasonable doubt. In the present
case 1t is charged there was combination,
an agr cement, an undertaking, plot to in
jure Columbus Alexander. Did the con-
spiracy contemplate for its distinctive object
the destruction OF the character Of Alexan-
der? III did involve the carrying OF books to
Alexander's house the ringing OF bells. For
the first time the true object was stated by
Nettleship-that the object was not to injure
iure Alexander, but to affect the investiga-
tion. The deed he would not defend; it was
wrong and should be condemned by every
The Important question is, was Babcock
come cted with this offence? II General
Babcock told Whitley TO go TO Harrington
do, General Babcock would not be respon-
sible for what Whitley did subsequently,
unless IL was In pursuance to this purpose
w was s entered % upon. % General @ Babcock '1e WouId
be innocent unless General Babcock had
full knowledge of and entered In to that
scheme. Did BabcOck originate the con-
spiracy? Did he get 1t up? Did he have the
plot in his mind on the 18th Of March? Tno
only topic In this Interview with Whitley
that day was in the Investigation as to mea-
were to play an important part In the con-
spiracy, and the conspiracy could not have
been originated until those books had been
produced. which were not produced until the
oath or 25th OF March-nine or ten days after
the interview. 1t was utterly impossible
that Babcock could have sent Whitley to
Harrington on the 18th of March, on any
matter connected with the books. Whitley,
according TO Nettleshtp, subsequently said
he had scheme, and there is no proof that
scheme. So BabcOck could not have origi-
mated the scheme; but did he Afterwards come
into ttr Mere knowledge is no evidence OF
crime unless IL shows he entered into the
scheme. There Is no evidence he uttered q
word which would indicate that he knew of
1t. Whitley says that Babcock said on the
Sth Of April, Harrington kept him posted
up." What If this is true? Harrington kept
him posted as TO the investigation. These
words admit Of an innocent construction,
and not construction OF guilt. At this
point there is strictly an end OF the case, but
the government is unwilling to abandon the
case, but they attempt 70 trace Gen. BIS
connection with the conspiracy by pretended
IL terviews with Whitley, Nettleship. and
Others. What do they say? On the 29th OF
there had been bad management, out does
this indicate he knew anything OF the safe?
The words "Stand by your guns and I'll
tie investigation being made by Bluford
Wilson. de next referred TO the evidence
that Whitley went 10 Babcock and asking
gave w. roll OF bills, and asked does this
show any connection OF Babcock with the
matter. Could not such thing happen in
view De regarded as evidence Indicating
Gen. b Is guilt? The Long Branch interview
as 10 getting CuDz and Del O'ma places had
10 DtdIlDS WuhtcVtI III tue case. w nlLley
goes further and complains of Ill health, and
b. suggests that he (W.) could be sent to
Europe, and when w. suggests he would like
TO go TO Colorado, BabcOck said he could
slide of. There was no evil on the part OF
Babcock shown by this evidence. The inter
view with Babcock In March or April last
was next referred to, in which Whitley said,
cit looks as II I am going to have more
trouble, ,"and Babcock replied, at looks like
it but II will probably blow over again."
have trouble" 1t IL held up TO an intelligent
jury that this Indicated that Gen. Babcock
Two years before aided in blowing the safe.
He asked II the evidence OF Whitley has been
corrob0rated-the law says the evidence Of
accomplices must be corroborated. II had
been corroborated only as to an immateriAl
fact. He could not understand why the gov
ernment sought to convict on such testimo-
ny. Referring to Whitley's evidence before
the committee, he said that such man was
unworthy Of credence now, and at best bis
evidence was made up Of Impressions. Re-
ferring to the letter Of the Attorney General
granting immunity TO Colonel W., he said It
was bid for him 70 put the affair on Bah
cock, and the paper had been on the records.
IL was disgrace that the Attorney General
had etven the paper to such q mau.