Newspaper Page Text
72
THE COUNTRYMAN.
TURSWOLD, GA., FEBRUARY 7, 1865. j
The Trial of Joseph Ashficld, Jr.,
(Charged with the Offence of Arson) at
the March Term, 1856, of the Superior
Court of Putnam Co., Ga.; Containing
the Testimony in the Case, and the
Speech of J. A. Turner, in Defence of
the Accused: Embracing a full Expo
sition of the Law, and Philosophy of
Circumstantial Evidence.—Countryman
Print': Turnwold (near Eatonton) Ga.,
1864.
The State, 1
vs. > Arson.
Joseph Ashfield, Jr. )
SPEECH OF J. A. TURNER.
(continued.)
1 think you will believe, gentlemen of
thejury, that there are too many ways in
which you may reasonably conclude Dr.
Adams’s house caught on fire, for you to
convict my client of arson. I think you
will conclude that the house probably
caught on fire by accident. Or if you
suspect any one of having set it on fire,
the finger of suspicion points with ten-fold
more force to another person, than my
client—and that is the negro girl Jane.
Now upon what do the prosecution base
their belief that my client burned Dr.
Adams’s bouse ? What first induced them
to suspect the prisoner ? It was the fact
that he probably bore Dr. Adams ill-will
because he had beaten him. Malice, which
the prosecution allege on the part of the
accused towards the prosecutor, is the
corner-stone of the mighty pyramid of ev
idence they have been able to raise against
my client—and it is the cap-stone of the
whole superstructure. This alleged mal
ice, coupled with some silly remarks made
by the accused, is the alpha and omega
of the evidence which has been offered
here to convict the prisoner of arson.
Now I assert that there was just as much
ground for malice, and even more, on the
part of Jane, than there was on the part
of Joseph. And if this malice can convict
Joseph, why may not it convict Jane ?
And what is the proof of the tremendous
malice on the part of the accused? It is
that he presented Dr. Adams to the grand
jury for beating him, and the facts that
old Mrs. Ashfield heard some one, she
does not know who, say, “ there were
more ways to kill a dog than hanging,”
and that the accused told Henry Walsh,
“what strength couldn’t do, fire could.”
And for doing this one act, which he had
a perfect right to do, without being sent
to the penitentiary for it, and for making
one foolish remark to Henry Walsh, and
because old Mrs. Ashfield heard somebody
else, perhaps, make another, my client is
to be convicted of arson. This is the out
rageous malice—the diabolical, fiendish
malice which the prosecution allege on the
part of the accused, against the prosecu
tor.
Now, gentlemen, I say there is more
ground to believe that malice, which
would lead to arson, existed on the part of
Jane, than on the part of Joseph. It
aeemg they bad been carrying on their il
licit amours, and for this Dr! Adams beat !
the accused, who is a white man. It is
reasonable to suppose that he laid more
stripes upon Jane, than upon Joseph.
Because, in addition to her being his own
slave, he knew very well that if Jane
would cease to encourage Joseph to come,
and reject his amorous advances^ there
would be an end of the matter, and Joseph
would" no more trouble the prosecutor’s
premises. I think, in such a case as this,
Hero is more to blame than Leander; and
Leander would hardly seek Hero, under
such difficulties as my client had to con
tend with, in the way of broom-sticks, un
less Hero was making herself uncommonly
agreeable. And I think my friend Dr.
Adams would think so too,"and would
punish Jane accordingly. Smarting, then,
under the stripes which her master inflic
ted upon her, and being forbidden to meet
her paramour, it is natural to suppose that
Jane bore her master more malice than
the accused did. Gentlemen, in alluding
to these things, as I do, it is only because
justice requires it of me. Truth demands
that it should be fully made to appear to
you, why Joseph Ashfield ever troubled
Dr. Adams’s premises at all. And you
will excuse me if I allude to a subject
which had better be placed under a bush
el, than published upon a house-top. You
know the nature, and character of such
girls as Jane. You know that when they
take it in their heads to form a liaison
with a white man, that of all she-devils on
the face of the earth, they are the worst.
It makes then\ disobedient, renders them
insubordinate, discontented with their sit
uation, insolent, and reckless, ready to
commit any, and every crime, especially
if any barrier is interposed to their im
moral, and profligate course. Cast your
memories about you, now, and see if you
cannot recollect instances in which all I
say is true. See if you cannot recollect
poisonings, or attempts to poison, burn
ings, or attempts to burn, on the part of
such negro girls as Jane, simply because
their masters cut off their illicit amours.
Their fury is then like that of the Bengal
tigress, that has been robbed of her
whelps. Jane’s malice to her master was,
no doubt, seven-fold what that of the pris
oner was. And no doubt if we could only
bring into this court of justice, what Jane
said, to negroes—for she would not say
anything to white people—her words,
or.threats would come laden with the mal
ice and venom of hell itself, compared
with which the words of Joseph Ashfield
would be as honey, in the honey-comb.
Then, gentlemen, if a little malice on
the part of Joseph Ashfield—and really I
don’t see any, as I shall show when I come
to comment upon that part of the testimo
ny intended to show malice—if a little
malice on the part of theAiccused, because
Dr. Adams beat him, is seized upon, by
the prosecution, as a “subterfuge” to in
duce you to believe him guilty, how much
more will you believe that Jane, and not
my client is the guilty party, when I show
you that her malice was probably “blown
into seven-fold rage ?” If I show you
that Jane’s malice must have been greater
than my client’s, and if I show you that if
| it had been admissible for us to rake and
scrape, for months, to get together her
declarations, or threats, and bring them
into this court, as the prosecution have
those of my client, they would probably
have been charged with the very venom
of hell, since her malice that vented itself
in words, must have been that of the arch
fiend himself, then I think you will agree
that if anybody burned the house, it must
have been Jane, and not Joseph:
Don’t you believe, gentlemen, that Jane
occupies a little worse ground, already,
than Joseph does, in this matter, so far as
malice is concerned? I will show you,
now, that in one other respect, there is no
comparison between the positions of my
client for innocence, and that of the negro
girl, even admitting that their malice was
equal. Jane had the opportunity to burn
her master’s house, and the accused did
not. And, gentlemen, this one fact ought
to fix my client’s innocence in your minds.
Jane was always on her master’s premises,
at home, with every opportunity to com
mit the crime, undetected. She could
pick her time, she could watch her oppor
tunity, she could seize upon any favorable
circumstance to ply the torch directly, or
place the ash-box in such a position, with
fire in it, as that the house must inevita
bly be set on fire. Jane was at home on
the premises—Joseph Ashfield, after hav
ing bad experience in the broom-stick line
of what were the consequences of visiting
Dr. Adams’s premises, would no more
have gone into his yard, than he would
have thrust his head in the lion’s den.
Besides this, the dogs would have barked,
and told of my client’s presence—as this
probably was the way that Dr. Adams
found out be was on his premises, when
he gave him the broom-stick. But at
Jane, they never would have barked. The
negroes, too, who were probably up when
the house first caught on fire, would have
seen my client, and given the alarm, if
they had seen him with fire about the
house. Jane, they would have taken no
notice of. Wouldn’t Joseph Ashfield have
looked like a pretty fool, going up to Dr.
Adams’s bouse with a torch in his band,
right in the midst of his negroes, and dogs,
to set the house on fire ? And if he had
no torch, wouldn’t he‘have looked just
about as pretty, staying at the house to
blow the coals, or the brand, into a flame,
after he had placed them about the house?
For he never would have arranged the
fire, and then gone away, without first
seeing that it would accomplish what he
went to do.
Gentlemen, if the house of Dr. Adams
was set on fire, Jane did it. And if the
truth could be known, I have no doubt
she gave the alarm of fire. Dr. Adams, of
course, in the confusion of the moment,
and in his solicitude, not only for the
safety of his property, but of his family,
could not recollect who gave the alarm of
fire, amongst the negroes on his premises.
And this is why I know several, if not all
the negroes were up at the time the house
first took fire. If there had been only one
negro up, Dr. Adams would have recol
lected who gave the alarm. But as seve-
' ral raised the cry of fire, at the same