Tippit, in reply, expressed great surprise at the conduct of his
brother, Ketchum; "but," said he, "I do not wonder at the anxiety
of the gentleman to keep out testimony of so vast importance for my
client. Here is a discrepancy. Some witnesses state the language
said to have been used by my client in one way, some in another. Now,
although a man of good character might use the words 'soul damning and
abominable,' which we are constantly hearing in sermons and prayers,
and if they are proper there, one might suppose them proper in common
discourse, he would be less likely to use the other phrase; though, if
he did, I hope I shall be able to convince the court there's no great
harm in that."

Here Ketchum's face expressed unutterable astonishment, and the
Justice, as if scandalized at the proposition, interrupted the
counsel, and told him he hoped he did not mean to justify profane
language.

"Far from it, please your honor," answered Tippit, "but I say we have
been guilty of no profanity which, at the proper time, I expect to
satisfy the court of. We offer the testimony now for two purposes:
first, to assist the judgment of the court in coming to a conclusion,
whether the words were spoken or not, because if we prove the
prisoner's good character, it is less likely they were uttered by him;
and secondly, if your honor should be of opinion that the words were
used, in mitigation of punishment, if, indeed, the court should be
disposed to take notice at all of the trifle of which the prisoner
stands accused."

Ketchum reiterated his objections, denying that the testimony was