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.

31
saltpetre; but if so, then it would have differed from the description given, which did not
require saltpetre. Again, if the cotton in that match was saturated with saltpette, the
ealtpetre is in it still. They give up, that there is no saltpetre in it, as they must, because it
would burn now, if it ci:ntained saltpetre now. But they say that the witness Clark,testified
that it was laid in the river at Niles,after having fired the depot. Unfortunately,however,
it is too plainly to be seen, on examination, 1st. That it never was fired in the trains at
all. 2d. Clark's testimony, about its having been put into the river, is expressed in vague
terms, and probably rests on mere hearsay. 3d. The paper tubes in the Niles match are
solid and firm,whereas they would have collapsed by reason of the expansion of the cotton
when put in the water. 4th. The whole instrument is composed of such light materials,
that it would have floated away,like a bottle or a cork, if it had been thrown into the river.
Again, it is quite certain that the match prepared for burning the new depot at De.
troit was never immersed in the river. I applied flame to it, with precisely the same result, in attempting to burn, as the other. Neither contains saltpetre-neither will burn.
But still, it will be insisted that saltpetre might have been included in the description.
This cannot be, because Phelps, who alone gives us a description, has been upon the stand
and has not amended it. The reason was, that, in inventing the description, he had made
camphene the essential ingredient. He took care to insist upon camphene as an ingredient to be used whenever he spoke of the match, thus, "That he lent Gay two dollars
to buy camphene with," implying that it was to be used in charging this very match now
here, which he was to use in burning the new depot at Detroit. With equal care, he
makes Fitch say, when he delivered the Niles match, "You will get camphene out there,
(at Niles,) becaus- it will be inconvenient to carry." When Phelps arrived at Niles, and
p:oceeded to set the depot on fire, he actually procured camphene at the railroad offier,,
and charged the instrument with it, by pouring it into the trains, not into the central
tube. The thought of saltpetre never occurred to him, nor to any other person, until it
was suggested by Dr. Desnoyer, after the humbug had been exposed here in Court.
Besides how should Ami Filley and Fitch and these illiterate men at Leoni learn a secret
in chemistry that Dr. Desnoyer has taken a fortnight to find out in his laboratory
Gentlemen, you are now at liberty to trace out the results of this exposure. They are
That the pretended burning of the depot at Niles is a fraudulent fact; that the concealment of the fraudulent character of this fact until it is discovered here, is also fraudulent; that the pretence that the Niles match was immersed in the river all night is a fraud
that the pretended employment of Gay to burn the new depot at Detroit is a fraud; that
the pretended confessions of the defendants, and even of Gay, that he burned the depot
at Detroit are fraudulent; that the pretended admissions of the defendant Smith, that he
was a party to that crime are fraudulent; that the pretended admission of the deceased
defendant Gunn, that he was going to burn the Depot at Marshall, is fraudulent; that the
pretended consriracy of the defendanis to burn these depots, is false and fraudulent. If
you are surprised, as I am, that the prosecution, after the exposure of all these frauds,
still endeavors to convict these defendants, by imposing upon your belief that the Detr(it
depot was burned with a match, furnished by the defendants, differing from that which
the prosecution first proved, I can only say, that it is a new illustration of an old maxim,
that " he "hat stands on slippery places mnakes nice of no vile hold to stay him up." This,
gentlemen, concludes the first defence raised against this prosecution. If there were not
mountains of prejudice to overcome, I should leave the case here.
But there is a second defence no less clearly established and no less conclusive. This
defence is also an independent one; and stands or falls by itself. The matches produend
,here by the prosecution, and which Ihave called duplicates, were fraudulently fabricated by
Phelps and Lake, the Peoples witnesses.
Before I prove this point, you will permit me to explain its effect upon the case,
if established, If these matches were fraudulently fabricated by the witnesses for
the prosecntion, then their testimony showing that Gay and the defendants admitted the
burning of the Depot by a similar match made by them and given to him, must be false,
l3cause the case stands upon those admissions. It is essential now to recall only this
part of the testimony, to wit: that Phelps, Lake, Yan Arman and Clark, say that on
the eighth or ninth of April they saw this Detroit match in the possession of Gay, in
his house in this city, and that Titus and Phelps say they found this same match now in
my right hand under the sidewalk, near Gay's house two days after his arrest, and that the
prosecution produced it as the match before seen in Gay's house by the other witnessos
2. That Phelps and Lake testified that they received the match, which I hold in my
left hand, fom Fitch and Oortwin at Filly's house in Michigan (entre, on the night of the