In defending the unpopular cause of the British soldiers who were
engaged in the Boston Massacre, John Adams said:--
"May it please your honor and you, gentlemen of the jury, I am for
the prisoner at the bar, and shall apologize for it only in the
words of the Marquis of Beccaria: 'If I can but be the instrument of
preserving one life, his blessings and tears of transport shall be a
sufficient compensation to me for the contempt of all mankind.'"
Something of the same idea inspires the fine opening of Aiken's
defense of Mrs. Surratt. It lacks the sinewy assertiveness of
Adams's terse and almost defiant apology for doing his duty as a
lawyer in spite of public opinion, but it justifies itself and the
plea it introduces.
Until within the recent past, political antagonisms have been too
strong to allow fair consideration for such orations as that of
Aiken at the Surratt trial. But this is no longer the case. It can
now be considered on its merits as an oration, without the
assumption that it is necessary in connection with it to pass on the
evidence behind it.
The assassins of President Lincoln were tried by military commission
under the War Department's order of May 6th, 1865. The prosecution
was conducted by Brigadier-General Joseph Holt, as judge
advocate-general, with Brevet-Colonel H. L. Burnett, of Indiana, and
Hon. John A. Bingham, of Ohio, assisting him. The attorneys for the
defense were Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland; Thomas Ewing, of Kansas;
W. E. Doster, of Pennsylvania; Frederick A. Aiken, of the District
of Columbia; Walter S. Cox, John W. Clampit, and F. Stone, of
Maryland. The fault of the Adams oration in the case of the Boston
Massacre is one of excessive severity of logic. Aiken errs in the
direction of excessive ornament, but, considering the importance of
the occasion and the great stress on all engaged in the trial as
well as on the public, the florid style may have served better than
the force of severe logic could have done.