The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-04-23
NO ONE GOOD REASON.
COOPER DErENsE HAS roo MANY
 VARIETIES FOR NEW TRIAL

VARIETIES FOR NEW TRIAL. Captain Fit.Assh ,says That the only
 Fnuit That Could Be Found With N the Verdict Was Because of
 It's Lenfency.
 Nashville. Tenn, April 22.--The sec ond day of arguments in the motion for a new trial of Duncan B. and Robin !. Cooper, convicted of the murder of former United States Senator E. W. Carmhck and sentenced to serve twenty years in prison, began here today. Captain Fitzhugh. for the state.- was the first speaker.
 s'The defense" he said. ''have as signed forty-seyen reasons for a new trial. If they had found one good reason for new trial <. they never would have given those forty seven va- rietfes We are not going to review the caSe in detail. We feel that the evidence abundantly justifies the yer diet
 "The defense seems to depend upon three points. First. that Robin Cooper shot in self-defense and therefore was not guilty; secondly, that D. B. Coop CT did not fire q shot and his guilt or innocence depends upon Robins guilt or innocence: thirdly, that the court failed~fo set out this hypothesis in its charge. Now we maintain that the ey- idence shows that Colonel Cooper crossed the street deliberately for the purpose of bringing on a difficulty. which would serve as an excuse for murdering Senator carmhck. There fore, Robin went along as party to the affair. Robin knew his fathers i'm tehtions. for he knew of the threats. he knew his father was armed and he knew all this so well, that he went out and armed himself with the most dead iy weapon yet Invented, He says he went over with Ahim father to protect him. Why, if his father was going on a peaceful miseien, az they both say he was, did Roi5in have to go along to protect his father7 Under our law this means that Robin went along to share with his father in the responsibility of whatever happehed.'
 New Features Interjected.
 But there is new feature inter- jeeted now, which did not appear in the case when on trial. Robin. they say now, acted in hts own defense. self defense But on the stand, your hon Or, Robin swore that he was out in the street, when Carnack drew his gun and pointed 1t at his father. Duncan B. Cooper. He swore himself he was out of danger and that he ran into the danger zone, to protect his father. How in the name of justice then, can he plead seIf-defenae when no one was bothering him7
 "This shows piainiy. your honor. that the crux of the case is Colonel Duncan B. cooper's Intention. He simply took Robin along and Robin Is bound by his fathers intent and acts"
 Captain Fitmugh next quoted au- thorities at length to sustain his con tention.
 Colonel Cooper was not in court this morning. Judge Anderson saying that he was suffering from headache Robin was present accoanpanied as usual by his sister, Mrs. Barch.
 We will take Robins own testimony again." said Eitzhnah. He says. I went along to intervene and protect papa if could 4 There is the story. Robin went along with hIs father at his peril. if his father we're the aggrsseor, and he cassr1st aasaz esetE sdefenSs f his father moment that Colonel Cooper could plead self defense. therefore Robin cannot avail himself of that defense.
 q do not intend to detain the court longer These men are convicted By a jury of their own selection, after q fair and impartial trial. and the only criti- cissn which can be passed upon the ver- dict Is that 1t Is too lenient and should have been murder in the first degree"
 Judge Anderson replied to Captain Fitzhugh. discussing solely the de- fense's objection to the courts instruc- tiona to the Jury. "It Is not that we object to what the judge did say" ne argued, 'bur we think the court should have gone further and show what is meant by aggression. We hold that no matter what Colonel Cooper did. Robin was not an aggressor, he was a peacemaker, and further, that Colonel Cooper had a right to make demand on Carmack, even if he believed that such a demand would provoke Senator Carmack to an assault. Tn this coun- try no man can be made to surrender one right because he fears the exerci SC of that right may force him to exor- else another--the right of self-defense. And it makes no difference who Car mack aimed at or who he shot at. they were received in Robins person and he had a right then to fire in seh-de- fense.
 .'The State contends that Robin had Knowledge of his fathers intention. We contend that he did not and we be- lieve the evidence proves our conten- tion."
 Attorney General McCarn declined to argue the case. saying he was satisfied with Captain Fitzhugh's presentation of the States side. Judge Hart then announced that he would take the case under advisement and decide 1t next