ams by which he represented the positions of the vessels during the
engagement. Their views were in all respects opposed to the theory of
operations which he had assumed. After the taking of the oral testimony
was ended and certain legal questions had been argued, the summing up
was begun by William W. Campbell of Otsego, the leading lawyer for the
defense. His speech was exceedingly able and effective. Men who were
present at the proceedings asserted, when it was finished, that there
was no possible way in which its reasoning could be shaken, still less
overthrown. At eight o'clock on Thursday evening Cooper began summing up
for the prosecution, and continued until ten. On Friday he resumed his
argument at four in the afternoon, and six hours had passed before he
concluded. His conduct of the case from the beginning had excited
surprise and admiration. Friends and foes alike bore witness to the
signal ability he had displayed throughout; but his closing speech (p. 217)
made an especially profound impression. Its interest, its ingenuity, and
its effectiveness were conceded by the defendant himself. It was for a
long time after spoken of as one of the finest forensic displays that
had ever been witnessed at the New York bar. Among those present at the
trial was Henry T. Tuckerman, who has left us an account of the
circumstances and of the bearing of the man. "A more unpopular cause,"
he wrote, "never fell to the lot of a practiced advocate; for the hero
of Lake Erie was and had long been one of the most cherished of American
victors. We could not but admire the self-possession, coolness, and
vigor with which the author, on this occasion, played the lawyer. Almost
alone in his opinion,--the tide of public sentiment against his theory
of the battle, and the popular sympathy wholly with the received
traditions of that memorable day,--he stood collected, dignified,
uncompromising; examined witnesses, quoted authorities, argued nautical
and naval precedents with a force and a facility which would have done
credit to an experienced barrister. On the one hand, his speech was a
remarkable exhibition of self-esteem, and on the other, a most
interesting professional argument; for when he described the battle, and
illustrated his views by diagrams, it was like a chapter in one of his
own sea-stories, so minute, graphic, and spirited was the picture he
drew. The dogmatism was more than compensated for by the picturesqueness
of the sce
|