Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-02-12

mony regarding the alihi, whether it is suffi-
Gent TO satisfy you, according to the law of
evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that
those persons who claim TO have seen the defend
ant elsewhere at the time, are TO be believed All
the testimony given before the jury, his honor
said, is 10 he considered and decided upon by
Them according to their best Judgment, and
more responsibility was now placed upon them
than formerly, when it was the duty of the
court TO exclude all evidence seemingly unduly
influenced by feelings of interest or relation
ship, when, by law, neither the defendants nor
those related to them by tics of interest or atfec.
ton were allowed to testify. The government
were required TO prove their case beyond rea-
sonablc doubt, 1t must be shown that The
defendants were present at the bank or in the
immediate vicinity, at the time of the robbery,
50, as if not actively engaged to be near
enough to render immediate assistance,
if necessary, in the robbery. All ques-
tons Of law arising in the progress
Of the case having been disposed of
it only remained for the jury to consider the
testimony fairly and impartiallv They were
complimented for having sat patiently through
four entire days listening to the long chain of
statements and arguments presented by
the counsel on both sides, and they
were told that the bearing of the WHOLE
pro and con, in their relation to the
guilt Of the accused, should be carefully and
thoroughly investigated and weighed. His
honor remarked that in all his experience in
criminal trials, which had not been slight he
had known no case conducted with greater
skill, ability fairness and courtesy, on both
sides, than this had been, and the respective
counsel were highly compIimented for the re-
markablc degree of talent aud eloqucnce which
had been brought to bear in the management of
the case. His honor closed by urging upon
the jury the importance of earnest care
and conscientious Investigation in their
deliberations 10 the end that Just YER
diet might he returned founded on the princi-
pics OF law, and in strict accordance with the
evidence.
In answer to prayers from the counsel for the
defence, his honor further charged the jury, in
reference TO the testimony of WEIGH, that when
the government seeks to convict on the teSti-
mony OF an accomplish, that testimony must be
received with great caution, and must be cor
roOIrated by other testimony; that in the case
of circumstantial evidence, there is presume
tive theory of innocence till guilt is proved:
IJstb TIT cNluClCc VI uuN party as regards ma
tcrlal facts is to be affected in reference to its
weight with the jury by Il belief that any por-
tion of it is false; that if Welchs testimony was
found TO be Ease in any of its parts, that fact
must be taken into consideration in reference to
its general credbility; and that the jury must
decide upon the guilt or innocence Of each de-
| lendant separately.
At quarter past three o'clock p NJ, after
having been out over five houls and a half, the
jury came in for instructions, asking if they
must be satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt
thai defendant must be actually present al the
time and place Of Ethe robbery in order to Justly
convict. In answer to this, the court ruled in
the affirmative, that the presence and participa-
ton OF each must DC proved, in 50 far as to show
beyond reasonable doubt that they were either
present or in the immediate vicinity of the place
OF the robbery, at tine time it was DONE and if
not actually engaged in it, that they were in the
immediate vicinity, ready TO give immediate
assistance in the work. if necessary. The Jury
then returned to their room.
At about qua ter past four, after having been
out about three quarters of an hour, .he jury
came III again, having agreed upon a verdict as
stated above, of guilty in the case of D 1cherty
and Gleason, and OF their inability to agree as TO
Pelrs. When asked if there was any pros pect
OF their agreement us TO Perris if they had
| opportunity Tor further deliberation, the fore
man said not upon the last ruling, as
| they understood it, but he thought
they could with the ruling as they understood
it before, that actual presence in Grafton was
necC ssary.
1t Is understood that when the jury first went
out, the cases of DOcherty and Gleason were
Immediately disposed of without a dissenting
voice, there being no disagreement whatever as
to them. On the case of PERKS, the vote stood
ten for conviction, and two for acquttal, and
there arising. some misunderstanding as TO the
import of the judges ruling on one point, the
matter was settled by coming out for further
instructions, which prevented an agreement as
to PERKS, making the vote as to him stand six
TO six, but in n } way affecting the unanimitv as
to the other two. 1t is understood that there
was equal unanimity as TO the guilt of Perris
as participation or accomplish, but not sufficient
to convict under the rulings as explained.
The announcement OF the verdict was received
with no visible sign of emotion on the part OF
Docheity and Gleason, as if they expected moth
ing different; but Perris manifested some signs
Of disappointment, evidently trusting upon his
aliOi to clear him. The wives of all the prison.
erS were present during the trial. near their nus
bands, holding frequent intercourse. The faith
cr mother and sister of PcrriS were also pres
ent. The coIrt room was crowded during the
whole five days as it seldom if ever has been
before, and more public interest was manifested
in this trial, probably, than in any which has
ever before taken place in this county, with the
exception, perhaps, OF thar of the Jameses.
And there has seldom been a case which has
arraycd so large an amount of talent on both
sides as this. 1t is understood to he the inten.
ton Of the council for DOckerty and Gleason to
move for exceptions, though the acknowledged
fairness and impartiality Of the rulings Of the
Judge would seem TO leave Slight foothold upon
which to base them.