Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-09-07
B0B'S B0MBAST.
IngersOll Continues His Defense of the
Star Route Thieves-He is taken to Task
by the Court for NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.


Star Route Thieves-He is taken to Task
by the Court for NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
Arguments.
WASHINGTON, Sept. Cool Ingersoll, on
resuming his argument this morning in
the star route trial, referred to a state
ment by S. w. Dorsey to Postmaster
General James, and commented upon the
fact that the prosecution had not present
ed that statement in evidence.
The Court-For anything the court
knows it might have been a confession.
Ingersoll-If it had been a confession
it would have been here. If one word in
it was CONSTANT with the testimony it
would have been here.
The Court-No man charged with crime
can say because he did not deny it is evil
dence of guilt.
Ingersoll- is evidence either way, but
| if / am charged with crime and make
written statement of my connection with
the crime and the prosecution finish the
| trial without showing my statement was
incorrect, it is a moral demonstration that
my statement agrees with the testimony.
The Court don't see anything in it.
lngersoll-I see a good deal in it, and
| Ine jury may see something 1t.
The Court-The question is whether the
court is going to allow an argument to be
based upon a mere vacuum-wind moth
ing.
Ingersoll-That would simply be steal
ing the foundation of this case-vacuum.
Then addressing himself to the examina-
ton OF the improbabilities of Walsh's testi-
mony, though he thought it had been
ground to powder already, Ingersoll said
boiling Walsh's story down it amounted to
this: A rich man borrowed without neces-
sity, and poor broker loaned without Sc
curity. The improbability of this story
would breed suspicion and incredulity
itself. No man believed it; no man ever
would believe it, and it was for the jury to
say whether it was true Or not.
Ingersoll then went on to argue that as
Stunning Walsh's testimony to be true, it
affected none Of defendants except Brady
and only went to show that he had received
brides, not that he was concerned in
conspiracy. Ingersoll then took up and
replied to the arguments of the prosecution
based on the subject of extravaganza in the
star route service. What was extravaganza
If he paid more for thing than it was
worth that was extravaganza. If he did
share of the surplus money, it was bribery,
rascality, corruption. How did
the jury know the service was ex=
travagant? What witness had
appeared to swear that he would perform
the service for smaller price? The ex-
petition which has been complained about
had been urged by members of congress
and majority of both houses had earn
estly recommended the increase of service
and expedition.
The attorney general here objected that
there was no such evidence; that record
of the star route investigation had not
been admitted.
Ingersoll admitted he had been mistaken,
and asked leave to withdraw his last re-
mark. He then went ON to consider the
necessity of the mail service in the far
west. He believed a man in Colorado mad
as much right to his mails as gentleman
in New York. He laid down the PROPOSE
ton that the hypothesis of guilt must fol
low naturally from the facts proved, and
to be consistent not with some of the facts.
not with majority of them, but with
every fact. The evidence must be
such as to exclude every reasonable by
pothesis except that of the guilt of the
defendants, every fact proved must be con-
sistent with the guilt of defendants, but it
must also be inconsistent with their inno-
cence. Change that doctrine and let it be
that verdict of guilty must be rendered
II the jury have the slightest doubts of the
innocence of defendants, and even under
that rule, the jury could not find a verdict
against S. w. Dorsey.