The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1909-02-26

were heated, and for the greater part
OF the time that he spent on the
stand Wednesday afternoon, his cross
examination was exceedingly hot.
A large part of the day Wednesday
was spent in argument by counsel as
to the competency of evidence, and it
was necessary to remove the jury
from the court room twice. The chief
argument, and the one that lasted the
longest, was that as to the admission
of the evidence in regard to the Maury
COUNTY chanceTy court affairs. Al
most every lawyer on both sides took
F: part, including Judge Ed Baxter and
| Charles n. Burch for the defense, who
have not heretofore addressed the
court, and the law point was closely
contested, the defense making heroic
efforts to keep the past life of Colonel
Cooper covered up, despite the fact
i that they had introduced his war rec
J ord with great gusto.
His Record.
When Colonel Cooper TOOK the
stand, he became witness, and the
state proposed to treat him as wit
ness, and introduce everything that
tended to show whether or not he was
such a man as could be given credit
on his oath. The defense objected on
the grounds that such testimony as
was sought to be introduced was too
remote under the rulings OF the SUI
preme court; that a mere charge
against the witness could not be even
incurred into even if the charges were
sworn to: and that, If the testimony
was competent at all, the utmost that
the state could do was to ask him II
he was a defaulter.
Along this line General Washington
gave some very interesting opinions
to the effect that the community had
long since forgiven Colonel Cooper II
he was careless" and that ne, for
one did not believe the man was de-
faulter. and that whatever trouble
there may have been had been settled
satisfactorily, and was no stain on the
character of Colonel Cooper.
The state took the position that this
was such evidence as would affect the
credibility of witness, showing his
character and antecedents, and that
il was too remote to be introduced.
The state insisted that il was clearly
competent, being a matter of court
record and a matter of such a nature
that it directly affected the credibility
of the witness.
Under the ruling of the court, the
state was able to bring out the gen.
eral facts of the case. including the
fact that Edmund Cooper was forced
to nay $4,000 for his brother, and
that Col Cooper didn't remember
whether he had to pay the other bonds
of an equal amount or not.
Col Cooper admitted that he had ex-
ercised his right of citizenship in sup
porting various candidates for office,
but was too modest to admit that he
was a power or a factor in Tennessee
politics or that he was so considered.
He also stated that he had never heard
OF the editorials in various papers, just
after Patterson's first election. declar-
ing that the position of state auditor
was to be created for Col. Cooper, and
declared that he wouldn't accept any
public office.
However. he did admit that he was
connected with the Tennessee Lancet,
a Patterson campaign paper, published
in the Patterson-Cox campaign. in an
advisory capacity, and this admission
brought on long argument which
lasted until $50 o'clock Wednesday
afternoon.
The state attempted to introduce