New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-09-08

port of the Government II had been one Of the scan
dals of the case and OF the scandaous anu
lies that brought him here. that those VINO representa-
the people Of the United we're disposed to dS
fvcr This prosecution and allow these 10 20 clear
What n base and wicked falsehood! lie came
here to testify that the Government was In earnest lie
was not asking the jury TO do vain ana idle 'n'hs
The Government IN earnes-fearfully In earhesl-
and these knew It, Why should the Government DC
persecuung these men What motive was there Tor
prosecuting these meni 1t was wicked thing 10 en-
deavor to impress the jury with the idea that these men
were being prosecuted The motive was found III 'he
records OF the Post Office Department In the paper7
which e there, and IN the vouchersfor the vast
OF money which were paid out IN tne
West for expedition Of routes The motive was
In those records. in those sums OF Ho"',
wrongly paid, wckedly paid, corruptly PAID
There motive in the prosecution except 'he pun
lie good. . IL fundamental and elemenai Id"
that where issue raised as to an esSehtia lac
and II was within the power OF party 10 prouuce
witness who could explain IT, the failure TO produce tua
witness raised Il presumption against the party he
commented upon the fact that Dorseys letter ooOA
had not been produced and claimed that that raised
presumption o. guilt. The counsel for : W. Dorsey salu
that he had nothing whatever to do with these thsac
tOns and Mr. Ingerso his especial champion had uohe
nothing bu assert his clients innocence 3 w dorsey
had nothing 10 do with them, and had gone INTO 'Ir
thing from motives of personal feelings lie hhu
a brother tinsunith from Vermont, who came 10
Washington enter business lie dld not uhucrslhhu
In order TO aid his brother IN this business ne pro5' Al
Boone, but finally shGilled him out anh orOusH'
in Vale Nothing do with It Where was Bo,eri Wy
did he not come here and explain With an uneNalhcu
erontery counsel defence had stood up ana lo
the rry and the Court that prosecution was bonhu
70 pr)du Bosler and that If they did not the peSf
ton was against them What did the prosecution "''
with HIM He was not essential 10 the Government
case. 3 W. Dorsey, this head conspiraor WIN breuy'
bound to produce Boser. II was atrocIous ioI
counsel to tell Jury that the prosecution was oouhd
to produce Boser II of the most daring ieat9
Of criminal practice he had ever experienced man
who a great criminal lawyer sometimes occupieda Il
position that far removed from that OF great
criminal Men who employed In the defence OF bad
tempted to do things which brought the u tHe
verge of criminaity.
BRADYs ACTION AND ATTITUDE.
Coming 10 consideration Of the claim Of the defence
that Bradys action warranted by the PETITIONS OF
members Of Congress and others, the AtoIneyGenera
took the opposite view, and argued that Brady Should
have informed himself Of the requirements OF the SER
vice in order TO act upon those petitions In an honest
and intelligent manner. What the attitude he occu
MED here II was an absolute surrender OF everybody
who was indicted. except himself With eold-blooded.
etod vicious calous nature he turned round ana sad
OF the other defeudautstha they were se o. scoun
res-every one Of them. 81 agree with hm,' com
mented the Attorney General. q" 20 was he He Is "a
good judge Of scoundrels lie sad wa WI Chgaeu, ,
and would you convict for the exercise of an hoheS
discretion = say that that Is mean thllg 70 40. ne
il wiling to surrender theln Us tney are "lhns 10 M
render Rerden They would rejoice 20 see herutu con
ycted. Hardly word was sald Ia herden ihvor, anI
that was mere generality All brduy ie.Shcv enc ~
was deceived. am sorrj. was cheatei foDi >oIl!
mani Lamb one Of those amos that never were
shOrn If you undertook TO shear him you "odid gel
more bristles than wool ,
Tne Attorney- eneral then quoted from tabu1ted
statement the amount OF expediu9n Wlca hau Deen P
on the routes embraced IN the Indictment anu I'o hc
and the amounts paid by them to the suieco1i racor-
showing that the former foF dGhs notlng ree1iNeu
Xerf flf iurV V-l.f
Of sincerity, that Brady was an Innocent man VINO de-
The next proceeded detail the connection OF
stephen Dorsey with the conspiracy, showing from
the evidence that his name appeared III connect On with
the transactions complained OF not less than nnetyX
tunes II said tdat 1t vas monstrous thing to drag
MIN in Was that because he was united states sen
ator lie hat the day would never come when the
United states senate would be SANCTUARY Ior scoun
drels. There was day "1eu III I n ~ =, ~ ,he
ary for protection That day mas passed Dy was me
United States senate 10 be sanctuary III thls country
for scOundres God lorOld lie Would rather naNe 10
senate would rather change me form OI he Govern
it Ioht nod in the Republic convert ed INTO sanctuary
for scoundrels. 1t was sad tnat senator coulu
Aaron Burr presided the senate and was tried Tor
treason Other had been IN the senate who lei II
covered with shame and opprOhrum. In al hlgn Ohce
reptiles would creep in where men c0uld not walk we
tlings wOd!d enter every where eteplrh W. DoIsSl
drew pay on eleven Of them NOW, geAti elnen sald
the 4 liorney- General, 81 come 10 the emu VI
rms case so lar as / aIn concerned"
A QUESTION OF OVERT ACTS
TIE Court-It was cOntended yesterday ny Mr. Inger-
soil with great confidence apparently, tAat the overt
et st out in the indictment are not the acts proved III
tis case OF MS observations Ou that point can
not have escaped counsel do not know whether you
have ANYTHING say that subject or not, but the AZ
gsment may possibly have made an impression In some
quarter aud you do not kno" what Impression IL may
nave made on the Court
This case Dristllng with overt acts.
Tne Court-It is a question Of variance. Mr lnEcrsOu
claims overt acts set out ID me Indictment are
not the overt acts winch nave Deen proved
His argument based on the dates OF the adayits
filed III the case Whether tlat pc lsct Oh an! cohst
uu.uce or not il variance when counsel seemed
t. regard az OF very great Importance II this case.
All tnese sdavits nave been set out as overt acts ana
you are bound to prove them as yOd dVer4ed thclu
rner mas be other overt acs Get out when Daye been
PGe Attorney Those afidavt- dated of
date On which the order was issued
Mr. Me.rck-ThaI l. H.
lie Attorney Generd-And mat II al OF H. mat 10
at,xt tnat does moi require a long sermon
The Attorney Gencra then went on to deprecate the
urasce OF accused bringing his wife into court.
and commended the warIncst terms some remarks
maze recently by Judge Butler, OF Penns vaia on thai
subject. criminal court not place for WIFE aud
| "a man had the senslhlliIles oi man would
| not Drlng his wife there. Yesterday the Court
which ought 10 be referred to III court OF justice
the cruchxOn Of the saviour-the object Of which was
10 affect sympathy OF the jury Al appalled, Inn TO
contemplate the introduction OF that great and terrible
occasion for the purpose for which 1t was Introduced
Aud introduced by gentleman OF whom ne had L. say
What has he got TO do with the crucn1iOn DID ne
it, that he used FOR the purpose Oi iunlenc-
ing jury {" When man applied 10 an occasion for
an illustration, lie should believe what he said. Or
| what value was IT, II lot true such tning
should never be said in court Of iur-
nee. such appeals should be madr.
All ne wan ell was iaIT play Let there be nothing ioul
| III cOurt-rooIl.
In conclusion, the Attorney General related the fable
Of the swallow from wmcn all her ncdgelings were
stolen, VINO deplOrrd not thai fact much he
fact tuat they mad been stolen from under
caves the courthouse where she had e1pectcd find
| security. " Nov, Senucincn, concluded nr, hat
AK If you Is that when !, conhding Ike the swallow
bring here and trust with you TINS case, you do nothing
corrupt or base permit II TO be done turOugh means
Of he forms OF law administered IN tins sacred place
IA courthouse"