The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-06-16
THE SENTENCE.
THE NDEMNED.

The interest felt in the trial Of the OIL
legged conspirators to defraud the United
States Government of the tax on whiskey
was manifested by the large crowd in at
tendance yesterday. At 10 a. NJ. District
Attorney Chandler resumed his argument,
interrupted on Saturday afternoon. He
spoke in his usual fluent style, and at con-
siderable length, controyerting the PROPOSE
tons advanced by the counsel for the &C
cused, and earnestly urging the conviction
of all the prisoners except McCreery.
After Mr.. Chandler concluded, Chief
Justice Chase delivered the following
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY.
Gentlemen Of the Jury;-You are sworn to
try the issue between the accused and the
United States. The parties who are upon
their defence are ]. Il. Anderson, who
was collector of the fourth district J. 81,
Patterson, who was assessor for that district
A. I, Gouldman, who was inspector, and
afterwards assistant assessor; r. W. Ell
som, who was general inspector under the
law of March 2, 1857; Richard Anderson.
who was inspector and afterwards store
keeper Horatio Anderson, who was lnspec-
tor and afterwards storekeeper; Vernon
Shepherd, who was a storekeeper; and U
S. Manson, who appears to have been
clerk. YouSwill see that the parties &C.
cused are officers Of the Government charged
with the collection Of taxes under the in
ternal revenue acts. The prosecutor is the
Government of the United States, represent
ing all the people, whose duty it is to see
that the laws are faithfully executed in the
interest Of all the people. These are the
parties, and the issue is before you, gen
tlemen, who are taken from the body
of the Distributions sworn to try
this issue. The duty which you have taker
upon yourselves is o solemn one. 1t is NJ
less important than it is solemn; for whilst
it is of great Importance that the reye
nues of the Government be faithfully
collected, and that the officers of the
Government discharge the duties cast
upon them by the laws faithfully and ex'
actly, it is no less important that no citizen
accused of q misdemeanor before jury Of
the country shall be convicted of that mis-
demeanor except upon sufficient evidence.
The defendants are charged with a con-
spiracy to defraud the Government.
This charge is set forth in three of the
counts of this Indictment, which you will
have in your room. In the judgment of the
court, it is not important to consider this
Indictment at length. If it had been much
shorter, it would have been equally effect
i've. All that is essential is the general
charge Of conspiracy and the fact OF
the removal of fifty-eight barrels of
whiskey without payment of duty. The
law is very plain: !" 1.-TWO or more persons
conspire to commit any offence against the
laws of the United States, or to defraud the
United States in any manner whatever, and
one or more parties to said conspiracy shall
do any act to affect the object thereof, the
parties to said conspiracy shah be deem ed
guilty of misdemeanor, and on conVic-
ton shall be liable to penalty of not less
than 81, 200 and not more than $4,000,
and to Imprisonment not exceeding two
years." The degree of punishment, you
will see, under certain limitations, is left
to the court. 1t is not O matter for your
consideration. If you convict these par
ties, they will be liable to fine Of not less
than 81 900 nor exceeding $4,000, and to
Imprisonment not exceeding two years.
That is matter for the court, and not for
you. The question upon which you are to
pass is the issue which these parties have
placed upon the record. They have pleaded
" not guilty." Are they guilty or not guilty ?
THAT is the question for you. A conspiracy
exists wherever two or more persons act IN
concert, with common intent, to effect an
unlawful object. That is O plain defni-
ton of conspiracy but, in the Judgment
of the court, it is sufficient one. Wherever
two or more persons act together in con-
cert for the purpose Of efecting an
unlawful object, that is q conspiracy.
In this case, something has been said by
counsel upon the subject of the proof of o
conspiracy; and that is matter upon
which the court is bound to instruct you.
We think there is but one conspiracy in
this case. In July, 1866, two Of the de-
PENDANTS, Gouldman and Anderson, are al
legged to have combined with some other
parties, dealers in whiskey, for the purpose
of arranging plan by which these dealers
should be permitted to ship whiskey without
paying the tax. If you believe that charge,
then and there this conspiracy was formed !;
and so long as the intent existed between
these parties and any other parties who
afterward joined with them to permit
the shipment of whiskey without the
payment of the tax, just 80 long the
conspiracy existed. 1t is not mat
ter Of the smallest importance what were
the rates of payment for this so-called pri-
vilege of defrauding the Government. That
was in the first instance $500 month,
making Sc, 900 year. Afterwards it would
appear to have been raised to $4,000,
and afterwards to 100000 q year; but
that is matter Of no consequence to you.
The conspiracy, if it existed, was du-
ring the whole time one conspiracy
viz, To defraud the Government. This
brings us to the question Of the credit
of the witnesses: for the counsel for the
accused, with frankness which does them
honor, admitted that number of these par
ties, if / am correct in my recollection
all, with the exception Of Shepperd, Man
son, and McCreary-were guilty Of con-
spiracy, if you believe the evidence of the
four principal witnesses. These witnesses
were, all of them, connected with the con-
spiracy, and, in the legal sense Of the word,
accomplices in it. Mr.. Clarkson, MIR.
Clendening, Mr.. Parrish, and Mr.. Jones,
the four principal witnesses, were all either
dealers in: whiskey directly, or employees of
those who dealt in it, and were coginzant OF
the whole transaction, and were within the
definition of g accompl The question
is, What credit is to be given to them,
There is rule Of law, applicable to cases
Of felony, that the testimony Of an accom-
plice viii not warrant conyictio except when
It Is corroborated. That rule does not fully
applyto the case of aEmisdemeanor, and
this is case of misdemeanor. 1t is the duty
of the jury to receive the testimony Of ac-
complies in every case -in a case Of muir
der or robbery-no matter what the degree
of crime is. In piracy, and every case