Evening star., 1912-02-25


trial. That was satisfactory to us, and we
furnished bail.
Our trial came on in the following July.
Good old Judge Brown, who would have
been a noble filibuster if he had not been
great iurist, again defined the difference be-
tween IAN armed, organized expedition and
one that simply carried arms.
Horatio Rubens, in our defense, argued
that as the men and arms had been taken
on board and put ashore separately they had
no relation to each other, SO tar as had been
established by the evidence, and he con-
tended that at the most we were guilty only
Of smuggling arms into Cuba, an ottense
with which an American court had nothing
to do. He pleaded SO eloquently that the
jury disagreed: it was said to have stood
eight to four for conviction.
We never were tried again; but the indlct-
ment was held over our heads to annoy us
until sometime after the opening OF the
Spanish sh-American War, when it was dis
missed, along with lot of others, by order
OF Attorney General Griggs.
THE trial of Captain Brabazon, which
came up at about the same time as our
own and in which all of us were interested,
illustrated the rare genius OF Horatlo Ru-
bens. Captain Brabazon had preceded me
in command of the Bermuda, and had been
arrested for trying to get out OF New York
with the Garcia expedition. He was prose
c1ted by Assistant District Attorney Hin
man, who had him dead to rights. In pre-
senting the Governments case MIR. Hin
man established all the facts connected with
the attempted departure of the expedition,
the seizure of the arms and the arrest OF
Captain Brabazon, along with General Gar
cia and his companions, all OF whom had
forfeited their ball.
This was all expected; but good sized
charge of dynamite was exploded in the
camp of the defense when Secret Service
agent testified that Captain Brabazon had
confessed when somewhat under the l1lfiu-
ence of liquor, that he knew he was in com
.1and of tiibustering expedition, and that
his confession had been reduced to writing
and sworn to- This was the first intimation
Rubens had that the Captain had made
confession; for he had been ashamed to ad
NIT it.
Though taken completely by surprise,
Rubens saw his way out of the mudde. In
ways of which he was master, but without
making any definite statements, he con-
veyed to the Judge and jury the idea that
at the proper time he would attack the au-
thenticity of the alleged confession. Hin
man got the same IMPRESSION and made the
fortunate mistake OF not putting lne COLI
fession in evidence From what had been
said he figured that the Captain would go on
the stand and deny that he had made any
confession, whereupon he expected TO tear
the defense to pieces. Rubens encouraged
this belief by stating to the Judge IN open
court, in response to a question from Hin
man, which that gentleman considered
adroit, that the defense would not take up
more than half day.
When the Government closed its case,
Rubens set off a bomb himself by announc-
ing that he would present no defense, the
inference being that the evidence intro
duced by the prosecution was so weak that
he did not consider it necessary to combat
IT, This altogether unexpected move lett
Hinman with a useless confession on his
hands; for, under the rules OF legal proce-
dure, there was then no way OF getting 1t
into the record.
Rubens made the opening argument to
the Jury He denied that there had been
any confession. 1T is foolish to suppose,
he said, with a courtly bow in the direction
Of Hinman, that SO able a lawyer as the
Assistant District Attorney would have neg
lected to introduce such a damaging piece
Of evidence. if it had been available.
Hinman sneered audlbly at this thrust
and tossed the Captains signed confession
across the table to Rubens, in a theatrical
manner calculated to impress the jury.
Rubens glanced through the document, and