New-York tribune., 1878-02-02

THE THEORY AND THE FACTS.
NOS,i is an accepted rule. that theory to be es-
tablished must only be adapted 10 the facts In the
case facts in the and every one OF thcm
must exclude the possibility OF every other theory Here
are two plans The first, Smith Gays that he knew OF
the second he AYERS his ignorance. He was iuorbidly
averse 10 boodshed He Mortified by invasion, and
fell into insanity at the He Geprecatcs being
o. 249) again drawn into the subject which once over
threw his reason and for the sufficient cause that It's
discussion he feared would renew his former maady.
and feared the pOignantiy that he knew that
although innocent, yet censorous rubc would as MS
biograper has conf0und his knowledge OF the Old plan
with completely IN the new His pathetic prayer
p 2I7 that the history OF the transaction might be
Withheld from the public until after his death, or that
his might slightly be used as possible If thc
natural euson OF this painful conviction and should not
be tortured into evidence that he was Implicated IL John
Browns invasion. Indeed, there Is not soil
tary fact which the biograpbcr mvokcs to prove
Mr. Smiths knowledge Of the plan, that docs not
intimately A. and the necessary adjunct of his
cooperation with John Brown in hs Old plan, while one
has been shown 10 be utterly irrccOncabic with the
theory OF his knowledge OF the new one In in
the biography appears TO have fallen upon ques
tonabie methods. The connection of " the wholehand-
ell destruction OF documents Immediately the failure
OF the project with failure connect Mr. Smith
more closely with it p 242), and the recurrence TO the
subject on page 243, apparently intended to be
significant OF the charge that Mr.. Smith Its author
Had he have been It's author unprotostngy cog
nlzaut OF it, fact would have gone far toward con-
yictng him. But insanity had forcclosed his faculties
noh Of action and intent while the undsputed fac'
accessible that others. without MI Smiths kno~!edtc
made away with the documents.
AZ page 2Gl the biography records the particulars OF
Mr Smiths controversy with me ChicdGO ITbbHt. on
occasion OF It's charge that he had fcigned irsaiy 10 e
cape arrest accessory 10 John Browns pIec' ana
them with the probabilities which " carefully
groups, OF Mr. Smiths guilt. II spreads before lis read
the process by which the editorial mind Drenchcd
Itself in ts belief OF the charge and presents with
view 20 sustain IT, the information OF which Horace
White. the editor claimed to be possessed We're nOt
This hcarsay AS II stands tue page plainly wrought
into the texture OF the evidence against Mr. Smith, II
might be thought impossible that verdict should be-
ssed, In the nineteenth century by evidence rejected by
every court IN Chrisendom since the memorable conylc
ton al Jerusalem In the first COllated with the
live OF this controversy is the announcement (p 26D
that In March, 1867 at Utica. where evidence taken
in regard his (HT Smith'sl insanity. he heard from
witnesses details which were wholly new to him, and
which shocked and excited him that recurrence Of
the deInentia was threatened" The surprise and
anxiety Mr. Smith with which these disclosures were
charged are advanced suggest the inference that
they affected him and unexpected evidence Of his