Newspaper Page Text
THE COUNTRYMAN.
141
much passing in and out, that night, that j
this fact alone, without the other, would
ufficiently account for "Sturdivant’s mere
ly passing in and out of the house, not
awaking the accused, on the ground that
his ear had become accustomed to, and
disregarded the passing.
Well, if Sturdivant did not go to the
room of the accused, to wake him up, no
one else did, so far as we know, or have
grounds to believe. For Sturdivant was
the only one who seems to have taken any
interest in the matter. And, in fact, so
far as he has been brought out positively,
by testimony, wo know of but three occu
pants of the witness’ house on the night
of the fire, and those wore the witness
himself, the accused, and Cynthia Ash-
field. There may have been other occu
pants. But if there were, it is the same
as if there had not been. For none but
Sturdivant went to the fire, or, as we are
aware of, took any interest in the matter,
whatever. Nor was there any necessity,
in my opinion, they should, as I shall pre
sently try to show. But, first, let me say
that this accused might have been up, and
the witness not have seen him ; for imme
diately upon getting up, he “ went to see
his sick negro, came back to the house,
aud went immediately to the burning.”
Now mark it': the witness went immedi
ately out of the house, probably from his
bed-room, to see his sick-negro; came
back to the house,probably to his bed-room,
and then went immediately, probably from
his bed-room, to the burning. Now what
was his opportunity to know whether the
accused was up, or not? He m&( have
gotten up, after the witness went away.
But, gentlemen, there was no necessity
for him, or any one else to get up. I have
shown you, conclusively, that it was im
possible there should any alarm of fire
have been givon, at the house of the wit
ness, when the house of the prosecutor
first began to burn. It must have been
over an hour—from an hour, to an hour
and a half—before the mis-called alarm
was given at the house of witness. In
that time, the hcTuses were entirely, or al
most consumed. The witness found them
entirely consumed, when he reached the
scene of the burning. No doubt they
were burned down when he received what
he mis-calls an “ alarm.” No doubt this
“ alarm ” was a simple announcement, by
some passer-by, some night-walker—prob
ably a negro—not that Dr. Adams’s hous
es were on fire, but that they had been
burned down. And, upon this announce
ment, Sturdivant, as a neighbor,and friend,
rode over to see if be could be of auy ser
vice, as I did myself, and as many others
did, when we found our neighbor’s house
was burned down. If I am not right in
this supposition, why did not Sturdivant
raise the hue-and-cry of fire?—why did
he not rush to the room of the accused,
and wake him? Why did he not rouse
all on the plantation, negroes, and white
folks, and all repair, in a body, to the
burning? This he would have done, had
he heard Dr. Adams’s house was on fire,
instead of burned down. The conclusion
is irresistible, gentlemen, that there was no
“ alarm of fire,” properly so-called, at the
house, where the accused, and Sturdivant i
staid. I should think if there had been,
and my client had been the incendiary, in
order to avoid suspicion, he would have
been certain to get up, go to the fire, be
the loudest in crying fire, and pretendedly
the most active in suppressing the flames.
But, gentlemen, it is not certain, after
all, that the accused was in his room, on
the night the burning took place. If he
was there, and did not get up, I have
shown you how ho probably was not awa
kened, when the mis-called “ alarm ” of
fire was given. I have shown you, also,
how ho may have been up, and Sturdivant
not have seen him. And I now say he
may not have been in his room at all, on
the night of the burning. You know
something of his habits—of his character
for night-walking—of his disposition to go
after negro girls. He might have been on
one of these wild hunts,” on the night of
the burning. And if so, it is very certain
he was after some other girl than -Jane.
For you will recollect Dr. Adams tells you
that, at the time he u gave him the stick,”
he told the acccused that he “ would pre
vent him from coming among his negroes.”
Doubtless he carried his intention into ex
ecution, for ho is not the man to say a
a thing, and back out from it.
Then what does the testimony of Stur
divant amount to ? The prosecution en
deavor to show, by it, that, if the accused
was in his room, he did not get up, when
all the other members of the family did,
at what is mis-called the “ alarm ” of fire,
and that, therefore, this is a badge of sus
picion against him. I have shown you
that they have failed to show, positively,
that all the other members of the family,
but the accused, were up : and that even
if it was so, he failed to get up, because be
was asleep. The prosecution also endeav
or to show you, by Sturdivant’s tes
timony, that if the accused was absent
from his room, ho must have been at Dr.
Adams’s house, to set it on fire. I show
you, on the contrary, that if he was ab
sent from home, it was on an expedition
of illicit love, and it could not have been
with Dr. Adams’s negroes, hut with those
of some one else; because the doctor had
adqpted means to prevent the accused from
coming among his negroes. Hence Stur
divant’s testimony avails the prosecution
nothing.
The prosecution find a badge of suspi
cion against my client, because when
“ there was something said by a negro, at
a burial of a negro belonging to witness,
about the burning, witness (Sturdivant)
then heard accused say, he never slept
sounder in all his life, than he did the
night of the fire.” And because accused
said he never slept sounder in all his life,
than he did on the night of the fire, there
fore he burned up Ur. Adams’s house !
Gentlemen, be very cautious, for the fu
ture, how you speak of sleeping soundly,
since, according to the prosecution’s logic,
words spoken in this regard, may be seiz
ed upon, to convict you of crime.
What I said about garbled extracts,
from conversation, while commenting up
on old Mrs. Ashlield’s and Walsh’s testi
mony, is applicable here. I want you to
notice, also, that, in this case, as well as
in the conversations reported by these two
witnesses, the conversation is introduced
by some one else than the accused. And,'
according to the prosecution, he can’t
open his mouth without committing him
self. It matters not what he says, his
words are seized upon to convict him of
arson. After the burning takes place, and
it is universally a topic of conversation,
everybody else may talk about it, but the
accused. He shall not utter a syllable
about it: if so, what he says, it matters
not what, is sufficient to send him to the
penitentiary. If he talks, he is guilty,
and if he dont talk, he is guilty still. His
words condemn him, and, if he is silent,
his silence does the same thing for him.
Suppose, now, when Sturdivant, and the
negro, at the burial, began to talk about
this burning, the accused had kept sileut,
and said nothing. No doubt this fact
would have been brought in here, as strong
evidence against him ; and the prosecution
would have said something like this:
“ Gentlemen of the jury, the fact that Jo
seph Ashficld keeps -silent, when every
body else is talking about the burning, is
proof conclusive that ho did commit tho
arson. The curiosity of everybody is
excited, to know how the houses caught
on fire, or, if they were set on fire,
who was the incendiary. The burning is
on the tongue of every man, except that
of the accused; and he, having a con
sciousness of his own guilt, does not utter
one word on the subject. Others may
say what they please about the arson—
they may talk to the prisoner—of him—
around him—and about him—and yet you
never get one word out of him, on tho
subject. This, to my mind, is conclusive
evidence that he is guil.ty of the charge
alleged against him. Why should he
alone, of every man, woman, and child,
in Putnam county, refuse to talk about
the burning of Dr. Adams’s house, unless
he plied the torch, and is afraid to say
anything, lest he may utter words that
would lead to his conviction.”
(to be continued.)
Toe Independent Press.—A new pa
per, under the above title, published at
Eatonton, Ga., has reached us. It is a
large, and beautiful sheet, edited by J. A.
Turner, Esq. It is Democratic in politics,
although open to both parties, and is also
devoted to literature. The first number
impresses us most favorably. The ability
of the editor is a sufficient guarantee that
its columns will always be interesting
and instructive. Our best wishes greet
the enterprise. Wo gladly welcome the
Press to our exchange list, aud trust that
its career may be one of prosperity.
Terms, $2 per annum.—Home Gazette,
1854.
Tax in Kind.—‘Major Wm. Bacon,
controlling quartermaster, tax in kind,
lias, we learn, removed liis headquar™
levs from Augusta, to Greensboro,
Ga. His correspondents are request
ed to notice the fact.’