New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-11-26
THE SAFE BURGLARY TRIAL.
CHARGE OF JUDGE HUMPHREYS TO THE
Jury.

THE CHARGE AGAINST THEM-THE TESTIMONY
| OF ACCoMPLICEs-MR. ALExANDER's CONNECTION
WITH THE CAsE-THE BURGLARY-HAYEs AND
BENTON, AND THEIR PARTS IN THE CONSPIRACY.
After defining the nature of a conspiracy,
| the Judge said:
These defendants entitled and each one Is enti-
tied 10 have the law and the whole law In their case
applicable all and 20 each gwen in charge 10 this
Jury. SO is the Government thus entitled. Although
they charged IN the indictment as having acted In
concert performing one part and another perform
ing another part in the drama. you must find from the
evidence that the combination existed aud you must
find 1t from evidence outside and independent OF the
declarations of either of the charged before
you take the declarations OF either cooperate against
tho other The declaration confession OF either one Is
the best evidence against himself 1t does not become
evidence against any else until the facts and ercum
stances OF the have shown to the Jury that com
bination has been formed between the conessng and
the other or others implicated by the confession Let us
endeavor to make this proposition SO plain that you can
not fail to understand 1t fully.
Because one OF the persons accused has said that
another concerned in the matter this no evidence
OF the fact unless the testimony has first established IN
your minds beyond reasonable doubt, that apart from
that confession, there is proof enough to snow that
those implicated in the confession did join together for
the purpose OF perpetratng the wrong When you are
thus satisfied beyOnd reasonable doubt, II you should
DO so satisfied then each becomes responsible for the
acts OF the other to accomplish the common purpose,
and for the declarations Of each other going to establish
| the main fact OF guilty or not guilty.
| Thus the acts OF Harrington A. d. Williams. Nettle-
ship, HAYES, and Zrruth here in Washington, and inc
declaration OF each against himselfthat is If any
two OF them or more than made such declarations
as satisfy you beyond reasonable doubt that they we're
confedeTated togcther-and the acts or Whitley ana
Cunz and Hayes and Nettesbip in New-York taken IN
connection with the acts OF the partners named here IN
Washington shall satisfy mind beyond reasonable
doubt that all any two OF them or more tDah TWO
were gulty-and you must ascertain how many IL any,
and who Of them 1t was-of combining to impicate
falsely Columbus Alexander in plot to rob the safe III
question then will be authorized to take the dccara-
tons and acts against each one whom you thus Ina 10
DO Connected not, however taking the declarations or
Of the OF either by the other as evil
dence the combination till you have ascertaned that
confederation by their acts and all the circumstances
| attending the affair arising out Of the evidence.
THE CHARGES AGAINST TIE DEFENDANTS.
Here gentlemen it is regular and proper TO charge
that il you believe beyond reasonable doubt that
either one OF the defendants merely knew that
the things charged in the indictment were to be DONE
and did not lend any assistance to accomplish the sane
or if you find from the evidence that there is reason
able doubt mind whether either OF the dcfend-
ants dd any act 10 aid in toe preparation or the OnenSo
charged-that OF procuring or attempting 10 procure
something be done with the view Of bringing charge
against Alexander which would be defamation OF MS
! character--but that such defendant or detehuahts
simply knew that the things would be done without
doing anything to aid therein or 10 urthcr me OBJECT
say, il there reasonable doubt on your NINA IN ms
relation the law demands that you give the Defendant
| or defendants tho benefit OF that DOUBT.
The charge that these defendants with others not
trial coDspred to have false accusation Ha n
against Columbus Alexander, that ne was one VI VIZ
persons who were concerned III breaking tDt siIe Ol
| Harrington in order TO get books OF John o Evans,
books deemed necessary to make PLAIN ana Gear Tue
charge that the books which had been produced before
! the Committee or CoBgress-~Alch Committee was
| investigating the AFFAIRS ot the DStrNt-"ctJI
not the genuine belonging TO the Oihce or sald
Evans. IL is cOntcn led by the Government tnat inc
defendants and others laid their plans TO entiap AeX
By getting him mixed with the matters 50 that tey
HAYES Zrrdta and BenOn were used instruments to
enirap Alexander ana that they lent Themselves to that
purpose II you find from The facts that they or any
two Of them did these things OF course they dld mat
which the law dcnounces as high misdemeAnor all oil
two more things connected herewith
investigation was gong on before the Congressional
| Committee. Another Is that the Office entered On
the night OF The 2Ji Of April ISL Another that Ben,
ton ono OF the men WAC went into the safe, ana
who followed the winding way 10 Alcxandcrs
house and after be had been mere was arrested anu
charged win burglary. II these defendants are guilty
charged III the indictment. then there was no BUR
0ary In law. II also coutrUyertcd that Benton
was bailcd out OF jail by the consent Of Harrington
after he had turned over the sale matter to special
counsel engaged by the Government to look into ana
inqure whom to bring to tal ana for what Oensc hey
should be tried Ii Is also uGcontrOyerted That "hitey,
Nculcsip Cunz were attached TO the secret Ser
vice Department OF the Government ana That me head
quarters OF that service wasln New1ork CITY the 0ce
being at No. &c Bleeckcrst II Is also uncOntrOycred
that Harrington acted the principal assistant OF the
]
prosecurous before the Criminal Court of the District.
Also 1t Is unc0ntroverted that Richards is and was the
head OF the police, including detectives Tor TINS place
You thus have gwen asccrtaincd defined points, aud
you are TO ma something n YET ieSay, JaIiiiai i
| are guilty or not guilty.
| RELATIONS OF THE PARTIES TO THE DRAMA
If GU tind the evidence taking each fact which
you may lind to have been proved aud connecting all
together, that Whitley played one part, Nettleship
another. Harrington and Cunz another, Zurruth
fpsP med
another and A. b. Williams another each knowing that
he was doing something to cause false accusation 10
be made against Alexander that he was concerned IN
burglary aud You ihd from the evidence tht the part
performed perforated with view TO arrive at the
end which 1t l. charged they seeking. the false
cussatOn OF Alexander then the law would pronounce
them guilty and you wall, II you so ind return verdict
of guilty.. II you nd the fact that whitley gave his
sent to Netlcshp to make up the means by which the
end should be accomplished, ths would make him re-
spOnsiDe ioT Neteships acts II You hnd the fact 10
De that Netc ship sent Hay e. ana ZruthtO WashhHtQh
to work out The end this would make lm responsible
to Io be thar Netesp sent HAYES TO use the means 10
reach Alexander order enrap him aud YOU find that
escaped Williams to pcrpetratc the decd then Nct.lc-
ship would be accountable for their acts III arriving
the dne n c os IN U s nGcmcnt Xad hS SS
If you have previously found the facts to be
have stated then he too would be responsible Tor the
OF these men In ehcctlng the end II You hnd that
| end to be a false accusation against Alexander
| You Will take the evidence OF Hayes and Zrrnth and
silt IT, IT, dssect it and reunite IT, and compare It
as whole aud III parts and parcels with the testimony
| OF Alexander and Demanc with the kilograms which
have been proved together VIII the testimony or the liz
tie girl, the testimony of the officers OF the line Of
steamers and II you find the ties imOny Of Hayes and
Zrrub either OF them supported and sustained by the
testimony OF the uuimpeached witnesses and the clrcuu-
stances proved and further find their evidence to be-
and In accordance with human Transactions
rs by the evidence, these gentlemen, the law re-
quires that you shall give credencc to So much OF their
evidence Dc brought WITHIN the rules OF reason
able belief. You would be doing violence to require
to bring conviction to your minds OF faith IN their
| testimony than these rules OF law require.
II according u la stated.
Hayes Zrruh have been brought within the bounds
of belief by yOu then you Will take the testimony
| as % conduct and