Charles Burleigh's commentary on the First Trial
Charles C. Burleigh
The Unionist 1833-09-05
Unionist content
Transcription
We are told in the last Advertiser, that the counsel for Miss Crandall in the recent trial, “spoke like men who were paid for it,” but that Messrs. Judson and Welch “spoke “con amore.” If Messrs. Ellsworth and Strong argue so powerfully and conclusively merely for pay, what, we may well ask, would they do if they should speak “con amore. ” We have no wish to underrate the merits of the counsel for the prosecution; we doubt not they did their best. The gentleman who closed we would allude to in particular as having displayed ability and ingenuity worthy of a better cause. True we could not but think he in some instances approached nearer to coarsness [sic] and vulgarity than was altogether seemly under existing circumstances, but considering he was “trammeled by a bad cause,” he certainly acquitted himself very creditably. But were we desirous of eulogizing him and his colleague, we would not accuse them of arguing such a cause “con amore” or represent them as having on that occasion exhibited “logical precision, and elegance of language unusual even to themselves.”
Item Details
See Full Metadata Hide Full MetadataPortrait of William Wolcott Ellsworth (1791-1868), head of legal team for Prudence Crandall
