Mr. Burchmore says, to the best of his belief, it was the evening of the murder.  Afterwards he attempts to speak positively, from recollecting that he mentioned the circumstance to William Peirce, as he went to the Mineral Spring on Fast-day.  Last Monday morning he told Colonel Putnam he could not fix the time.  This witness stands in a much worse plight than either of the others.  It is difficult to reconcile all he has said with any belief in the accuracy of his recollections.

Mr. Forrester does not speak with any certainty as to the night; and it is very certain that he told Mr. Loring and others, that he did not know what night it was.

Now, what does the testimony of these four young men amount to?  The only circumstance by which they approximate to an identifying of the night is, that three of them say it was cloudy; they think their walk was either on Monday or Tuesday evening, and it is admitted that Monday evening was clear, whence they draw the inference that it must have been Tuesday.

But, fortunately, there is one fact disclosed in their testimony that settles the question.  Balch says, that on the evening, whenever it was, he saw the prisoner; the prisoner told him he was going out of town on horseback, for a distance of about twenty minutes’ drive, and that he was going to get a horse at Osborn’s.  This was about seven o’clock.  At about nine, Balch says he saw the prisoner again, and was then told by him that he had had his ride, and had returned.  Now it appears by Osborn’s books, that the prisoner had a saddle-horse from his stable, not on Tuesday evening, the night of the murder, but on the Saturday evening previous.  This fixes the time about which these young men testify, and is a complete answer and refutation of the attempted alibi on Tuesday evening.

I come now to speak of the testimony adduced by the defendant to explain where he was after ten o’clock on the night of the murder.  This comes chiefly from members of the family; from his father and brothers.

It is agreed that the affidavit of the prisoner should be received as evidence of what his brother, Samuel H. Knapp, would testify if present.  Samuel H. Knapp says, that, about ten minutes past ten o’clock, his brother, Frank Knapp, on his way to bed, opened his chamber door, made some remarks, closed the door, and went to his chamber; and that he did not hear him leave it afterwards.  How is this witness able to fix the time at ten minutes past ten?  There is no circumstance mentioned by which he fixes it.  He had been in bed, probably asleep, and was aroused from his sleep by the opening of the door.  Was he in a situation to speak of time with precision?  Could he know, under such circumstances, whether it was ten minutes past ten, or ten minutes before eleven, when his brother spoke to him?  What would be the natural result in such a case?  But we are not left to conjecture this result.  We have positive