Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-10-19

fence alleged to have been previously committed.
The important point is 10 ascertain what the
sand and what confessions he made, if
any, in relation 10 his Darticipationin the outrage
which was perpetrsted al Sills house.
IL the defendant syDpathized with the perpe
traitors Of that outrage. or approved of their con
ducT-that, however Teprehensible is nav be,
would not Justify bis conviction as a conspirator
to commit that offeuse, without proof that be
knew il was 10 be perpetrated and agreed either
expressly or by implication to aid in its commits
sion.
A man cannot be punished for his opinions, no
matter how obnoxious they may be, unless some
overt act is committed to give effect to such
opinions.
The credibility of the detectives who have been
examined should be tested by the sane rules
which are applied 70 other witnesses. Detectives
are frequently employed TO ferret out and detect
violations OF the law. Their services are fire.
quently of great value and importance to the
Government. When they are offered as witness
es by the Government, il is proper to test the
truth OF accuracy of their statements by all the
means WEIGH are recognized as legal by courts of
justice. You have a right to consider how far
that professional pride which usually creates a
desire for the success of their efforts, nav influence
their statements. You have also a right TO con-
slider whether their constant practice OF resorting
to devices. tricks, subterfuges and falsehood to
accomplish their objects. is calculated 10 blunt
their moral sensbilities aud render them more
likely to prevaricate, to exaggerate, or even TO
misrepresent, than persons engaged in other em.
ploynents. All these are proper subjects for
your consideration, and your conclusions as to the
degree of credit, which should be given TO their
should be formed in view of all these
matters aud in view Of all the other testimony in
the case.
l. =. -. -l--t1 -
probability OF the defendant making such confes-
siOns as are attributed to him under the circum-
stances then existing. If it is in testimony from
any witness that the defendant stated that his
brother shot Fry, YOU should consider whether il
has been proved to your satisfaction that the
brother referred to. VIM. Ellis. stayed The whole
night OF the transaction at defendants house, and
that tie defendant knew that fact. II such fact
has been proved TO YOUR satisfaction the great i'm
probability OF the defendant making a statement
thus duplicating his brother, and which he knew
TO be false, should at least cause you to regard
with diStrust such evidence in regard to defend
ants statements.
The de eidaut has presented evidence of an
GLibi The meaning of this term is elsewhere. os
ia some other place. The object of such proof is
to show that a person charged with a crime war
at the time the crime was committed at some
other place so remOte from the scene Of the crime
tfhe ~ H~c ~ cAIdhN lBlDDc-tDlG q Dill 10 HaNe
been there when it was committed.
Ii is true as stated by the District Attorney
that this defense is often entertained with much
distrust. because it il easily cOncOcted and often
resOrted 10 falsely. still il is a defense which 10
entitled to the fullest credit when the evidence
IS sufficient to satisfy The jury of its truth. When
founded in truth il is conclusive of the case.
An eminent legal author says: "Of all kinds
of exculpatory defense, that of an abb, if clearly
o-fahttchaI hu rnuuoDoofod sa.....- =. IL.
most satisfactory and conclusive wills on
Circumstantial Evidence, 1872 The evidence of
an abb should be carefully considered in con-
nectiOn with all the evidence in the case, and IL
you believe IL to be true. you should not hesitate
TO act upon it and give it full effect. Five wit
nesses have testified that they were with the de-
PENDANT at his own house from shortly after dark
until about twelve o'clock of the night on which
the attack was made At Sill's house. The crowd
reached Sills house a lew minutes before half
past eleven.
The evidence as TO the time was given with
about the same degree of certainty in both cases.
Attention was called 10 the clock at defendants
house at half past eleven by some Of the party
who proposed TO leave. Sill testified that he ex-
amined his clock wnen he heard the party ap-
preaching. In the absence of any testimony to
the contrary. it may be presumed that the time
indicated by both clocks was correct.
The distance between the defendants house
and Silrs is about two miles. From these facts
il would appear that the evidence of those who
were at the defendants house can not be recon
ciled with the defendants presence at Sill's house
at the time the attack was made on it.
The witnesses who were at defendants house on
the night in question, testified that he spent the
evening in playing cards and drinking lager beer.
This was certainly not a very proper employ
ment for Il Sabbath evening, but YOU would not
no aufhnrizod tn diocradit fhoir foefimonv for that
reason alone
Many persons who disregard the Sabbath and
indulge in amusements which would be generally
regarded as immoral, sustain a high character for
integrity snj truth. A jury cannot arbitrarily
reject the testimony of witnesses when il is un-
cOntraoicied and the witnesses are unimpeached.
In determining how far the statements of these
witnesses are entitled to credit, you should COM
pare their statements with the other evidence in
the case. You have a right nlso TO consider the
manner of their testifying--the probability of the
facts stated by tbem-the interest or bias they
may have, if any, in the case--their standing in
the community in which they reside-and from
all these considerations YOU must determine to
what extent you will give credit to their evidence.
Ii is the duty of the prosecutor TO satisfy you
beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is
guilty before yOn can convict him. IL is not suf-
fcient that there may be strong grounds of sus-
picion. or that there is a prep0nderance of evil
dence of his guilt In civil cases a jury must
decide upon the prepOndersnce Of the testimony,
but in criminal cases the evidence must be sufi-
cient to create a clear aud decided belief of the
defendants guilt. Otherwise they must acQuit
him. Ii after a careful examination of all the
evidence you entertain doubts of the defendants
guilt YOU should acquit him.
As some reference has been made to the politi-
cal opinions of persons who have been referred to
in the evidence, il NAV not be improper for me
10 remark that no political opinions should be
suffered TO influence your decision.
Nothing will sooner destroy the influence and
moral power of courts of Justice than n belief in
the community that their decisions can be indu-
enced by political or party considerations.
This Court is the arbiter between the Govern
ment and the accused. Its duty is as much to
protect the citizen from a false accusation as to
vindicate the law and enforce obedience 10 its
commands In the administration OF the law, il
should know no party-no political opinions
but holding the scales of justice evenly poised, it
should administer the law with equal impair
tialitv to all who may be brought before it.
The case is now submitted for your verdict,
and it is FOR you to Determine whether the evil
dence proves that the defendant is guilty of the
offense with which he is charged.
As this AN ssAboIttion War!s
Some of our Republican friends get offended
when they are told that the war has degenerated
into an abolition crusade. Yet the whole policy
of the Administration points to abolition. Thus