Argument of William H. Seward, in defence of Abel F. Fitch and others, under an indictment for arson, delivered at Detroit, on the 12th, 13th and 15th days of September, 1851.: Phonographically reported by T. C. Leland.

22
ed said," if shey didn't pay her value, it would be a dear cow to them;" also, his declar tie, if serious accidents do occur on the road, on your head, and yours alone, must
rest the responsibility. Yours, &c. ABEL F. FITCHI."
And here is the answer, which we have proved was given to this letter: [Here
Mr. Seward read the answer.]
A perusal of these documents shows that Fitch's communication was a friendly
though earnest remonstrance against proceedings of the Company, and that it was
xeceived and regarded as such. Had it been heeded all would have been well.
Five hundred dollars would have paid all the damages claimed by complaining par ties for the destruction of their cattle; and the payment would have prevented all
danger and all tumult.
Henry Brown testifies that Fitch, Freeland and Filley said, not when together,
but separately, and on different occasions, "we will let them know there is a God
in Israel; that they could have no sympathy for the Company; that the way the
Company acted, the dry marsh would be a good place to let them down." Brown
was a poor, illiterate negro, doubtless honest, but incapable of correctly reporting a
declaration or admission, as is seen in the fact that he attributes precisely the same
remark to three different persons. The threats which he proves, if his testimony
is reliable, were nothing more than outbreaks of popular passion, in a private con versation.
I shall waste little time upon the declarations proved by Woliver. He says that "all
the defendants," (although they were never together,) "seemed to coincide in tearing up
the track, and in saying that they had had their property killed, and if they could not re venge it one way, they would in another. They would nevergive up until the place was
satisfied for damages; that they would carry out their objects in some shape, and that
Fitch said they would hang together." This is testifying upon a new principle of swear ing made easy-that is, Woliver gives us the effect of what forty different men said on
different occasions, individually, under the general caption, known in the law books by
the term il semble-it seems. - Woliver was,a vagabond, and, as has been already
shown, a false one. The testimony convicts him of having consumed a whole barrel of
whiskey in a single summer. The evidence he gives of the depredations, which were ac tually committed, shows that they were individual, casual, unpremeditated crimes, and
disproves what he gives for the purpose of showing a confederacy among the defendants.
Joshua Wells says that "Fitch said, that they could not convict any one of the offencs
that had been committed; that when Filly said they could prove they were at Bear
Oreek, Fitch replied they could get what witnesses they wanted there; that on one occa sion Fitch showed how a car could be thrown off by a wedge, and how a rail could ba
placed so as to strike thle lamp of a locomotive." It is easy to see that these are mere
speculations of Fitch, arising out of the transactions of the times, produced here with
some little perversion, to sustain the charge of conspiracy. A prudent man-a prudent
iury-wilI require evidence of the whole conversations or reject such fragments.
The counsel herve dwelt upon the reply of Fitch to Spaulding, when he declared himself
ready to take arms in defence of the Railroad, to wit: that "he had two double barreled
guns, and he could get as many men as he wanted, and he was prepared'for the whole
damned Company."' The witness Burr shows that Fitch was a sportsman. His guns were
kept for exercise. The remark was made in reply to an insulting threat made by Spaulding.
You will take the same view of the reply which one of the wi.tnesses says was given by
Filly, and another says was given hy Fitch, to Stone, when extinguishing the fire of the
wood pile, that they ought to be burned np with the wood, and then the Company would
pay their owners half price for them-mere idle and unmeaning, passionate words. uN
the same category are Fitch's reply to Holden, at Gardner's Grocery, when asked what
they meant by stoning the cars, "that the Company would get worse than that if they
didn't pay for the cattle killed, and that every animal killed had cost them a hundred
dollars, a similar remark made to Wm. J. Welling, "that the cows cost the Company
one hundred and fifty dollars each;" a saying of Corwin's to the witness Henry, "d-n
'em, let them pay for cattle, if they don't want to be shot;" Corwin's comments upon the
Railroad Dream, when upon reading" how a rich corporation killed a poor man's cow,
and the poor man prosecuted and yet had to withdraw his suit," Corwin commented,'By G-d, the people of this town won't stand such operations;"' the threat of
O. D. Williams that "he had stoned the cars, and would as long as he staid in Michigan,
C entre;" and another proved by Henry, to wit: that Williams, when he had a cow kill