Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1883-03-30
VERMONT PHGN1X, RECORD FARMER FRIDAY MAR
a Theological side show In the star
Route Trials..DOrsey on the stand.
Washington deqpatcb QGth1

a Theological side show in the star
Route TrialsssDOrsey on the stand.
Washington despatch, 26thl
Dorsey came into court for the first time
since this trial began, just after the noon re-
cess He wore the black goggles that he
wore last summer, and looked otherwise very
much as he did then, save that he was fatter.
He sat down by his counsel and quietly wait
ed until the prosecution had finished with one
Of his clerks. It was $3.50 O'Clock when In.
gersoll said, quietly Call Stephen w. Dor
sey." Nobody called him, but he got up and
made his way through the lawyers to the wit
ness stand, between the Jury and the Judge.
The court crier handed him the court Tesla
ment, and the clerk rising, began the recital
Of the witness oath. Merrick rose and OBJ
iected to his being sworn until he had said,
on his COir dire, whether he believed an oath
binding on his conscience. Dorsey, still
standing on the witness stand Redeemed and
then, leaning forward, shook his fist at Mer-
rick, with the remark that an oath was Just as
binding on his conscience as on Merricks.
That won't do" said Merrick sternly.
"No,' said Ingersoll, who saw what bad
effect display Of temper would have upon
the Jury answer directly"
"Well, then" said Dorsey, in the same hot
headed way, 81 do consider an oath binding
on my conscience"
Mr.. Merrick was not satisfied with this. 81
want to know" he said, "whether he believes
in future state of rewards and punish
ments"
II object to such a question, said Inger-
soil. "Iobject to dragging the barbarisms of
the past into the light of the last quarter of
the 10Th century" And then for quarter
of an hour Ingersoll denounced this "bar-
barism of the past" and asserted the right
of every man to testify Notwithstanding his
attitude toward those "old exploded theolog-
ical dogmas." He said this was law in every
civilized state in the Union A man was
sworn on his conscience or his honor or his
reputation. He wanted to know whether
Judge Wylie proposed to import the devil of
the middle ages, hoofs, horns, tail and all
with three pronged fork to stir Dorsey's
conscience with. Ingersoll became very elo-
quent as he warmed up to his work, and half
unconsciously worked in some of the best
portions of his lectures. Incidentally he re-
marked that the prosecution, after clamoring
for Dorsey's evidence, were trying to pre-
vent him from testifying Merrick replied
that what Ingersol called the "barbarism of
the past" but what might rather be called
the light that has ilumined the centuries
needed no defence from him. He did not
propose to go into that. 1t was not true that
.
from testifying. They simply wanted the
| jury to be able to judge what his testimony
was worth. The law prescribed the oath.
/ The law said that no man could be a witness
/ who did not believe in future state of re-
wards and punishments. He must have that
/ fear as well as the fear of the pententiary,
before his eyes Merrick was as eloquent in
/ his way as Ingersol had been, and every
body enjoyed the little contest very much.
Ingersoll returned to the charge rs soon as
Merrck sat down. He reiterated what he had
said. He thought the law ought to be broken
/ if it was bad. All laws were not good. Some
very honest men was bound to violate the fu-
| gitive slave law, for example. But it was
! not good law in this case, because this man
was a defendant and had right TO testify.
| Whatever his belief might be he believed
| Dorsey honest enough to avow his belief. He
would not respect himself otherwise. He,
| himself, if called on, would say he did not
! believe in future state of rewards and pun
ishments, although he had hopes Of such a
state. II called upon, he would say that be
did not believe in II personal God, although
his dearest interests were trembling in the
balance. What would induce him to tell the
truth His selfrespect, his love of truth,
his regard for his fellow man. He denounced
a rule that would have excluded Huxley, Oar
win and every other great free thinker from
the stand aud admit it to a diseased wretch
without a conscience. However, the law ad-
mitted defendants to the stand without quail
ication. Merrck replied, as before, in ia
vor of law and order. Judge Wyle said that
the whole theological discussion was super
Auous. The question involved was one Of
law. Under the law defendant could testi
fly in his own behalf, under the pains ant
penalties of perjury, no matter what his be
liefs were. Accordingly he ordered Dorsey
sworn. The latter had said at first he woulC
affirm. but he now said "Oh, I'll take the
oath, and accordingly did. Then he sal
down, adjusted his goggles and told lnger
soil, in response to Il question, that his nam,
was Stephen W. Dorsey. In response to con
secutive individual questions, he admitted
that he knew each of his co-defendants; de
MED that he had ever cOnspired with then
for any purpo @ denied that be had eve
had either an honest or a dishonest transac
ton with Brady involving so much as on
cent, directly or indirectly, and pronounce'
Rerdell's testimony tissue of lies. He wa
very irascible, and the Ragging objections 0
counsel for the prosecution did not tend +
cool him of. His denials we're for this rea
ron less impressive. At O'Clock the cour
oR