New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-03-14

the ninety eight included in the indictment,
1 yet it is necessary for you to decide upon
| the evidence whether these nine prisoners
| at the bar, OF any of them, are guilty. Did
they take part in the banding and
conspiring charged in the indictments
recommend to you to take the case OF
each and consider it separately and decide
upon it.
The defense claims that even conced-
! ing that others are guilty, yet the per
| sons on trial had no art or part In the
| offense charged, and to prove this much
testimony has been introduced to show that
they were not present on the thirteenth OF
April. or on other occasions when armed
bands of the conspiratorS are charged to
} have assembled.
1t is only necessary forthe prosecution to
show banding or conspiring with the in
| tent laid in the Indictment. When that is
done the Offense is complete, without any
| acts done in furtherance of the conspiracy
Acts in furtherance of the common design
are generally shown to prove the con-
spiracy, and they are legitimate for that
! purpose. and may be sufficient to establish
| the conspiracy. and often, in fact usually.
} are with direct proof of the conspiracy.
The defense claims that Clement Penn ia
| not guilty, because he never banded or con-
| spired with the intent laid in the indictment.
| Evidence has been adduced to show
! that during part Of the thirteenth of
April he was on the opposite side OF tho
! Red river from Colfax; that he only
crossed the river after the fight was over,
| and then not 10 take any part in the unlaw-
full acts Of the conspirators, but for q lawful
! purpose. On tho other hand, it is claimed
| by the United States that ne was an actor
| in the dread scenes of that day, both during
! and after the conflict. There is much and
conflicting testimony on this point, and you
| must decide what yOS will believe. II you
4 find ne waH one of those who banded or
I conspired with the intent laid in the indlct-
! ment, you should find him guilty.
! COnceding that he remained on the oppo-
! site side of The river until the fight was
! over, get if he then crossed aud found
| what had been done and approved of it,
I and assented to it, and, with q gun in his
hands, guarded for a while the prisoners
which were afterward shot, then he ID
! guilty, even though he returned across the
| river before any further acts Of violence
were done. But if no had no hand in the
conspiracy previous to April l3 in any way;
| if he remained on that day on the opposite
I eide OF the river, and then, suppOsing the
| affaif TO be over, crossed without the pur-
pose Of joining in or aiding it, and returned
! without so doing. then you should find him
/ not guilty.
! The same defense, substantially, is set up
L
| that he was in Colfax on the thirteenth of
1 April, but it is claimed that he reached
| there only after the fight and for the pur-
! pose of recovering some stolen property, and
I that he did not at that time or at any other
time take any part in the conspiracy. 1t is
claimed on the other hand by the prosecu
ton that ne was early in the conspiracy, as
| early as the seventh of April, when Calhoun
I was arrested, and that he was an active
! participant in the scenes in Colfax on April
i3. These disputed facts you must settle
I from the testimony. If, however, you tind
! that Cruikshank did 90 to Colfax on
| the thirteenth Of April. even though he
! went to recover his lost property, and
l after he reached there, eomprehending
| the purpose OF tho consplfators. renamed
there, giving Them the encouragement by
! his active participation or by his words of
approval, even though he committed no act
of violence himself, lie is guilty. and you
| should SO find him.
Two others Of the prisoners, it is not de-
! MED. were present at Colfax during the
| whole or the greater part OF Easter Sun
day. These are William b. Irwin and John
F. Nadnot. The prosecution claims to have
shown that they joined the conspiracy early
in April, and that on Easter Sunday they
formed part Of the company Of white
! men who attacked the courth Duse, killed
and wounded the negroes who had taken
refuge there, and afterwar1 puc to death
the prisoners. II you find this to be true,
! you will not hesitate 10 return a verdict OF
| guilty against both 1t matters not whether
| personally they fired gun or struck q
| blow If they were present, cOmprshended
| the common design, and gave 1t their ap
! probation and encouragement, that is suth
cient to fix upon them the guilt OF con
epirators.
! This rule applies 70 the cases 81 all of the
! prisoners on trial who are admitted TO have
been present in Colfax on April l3--sl
Penn. Cruikshank. Irwin and Hadnot.
/ Iti specially claimed for Irwin that he
| was in attendance In COlfax IN pursuance
| OF q demand upon him by Nash to accom-
pany him as part of his posse comitatus
It is not claimed that Nash held any war
l rant to arrest any person in COlfax. IL II
1 admitted that his purpose was to retake thu
courthouse, and that this was what lr
| win was called upon to assist in doing.
l say to you, gentlemen, that under the ad
| mitted facts ia the case this demand o
Nash upon Irwin is no defense to this in
I dictment or any count of it. II the inten
charged in the indictment is proved, NJ
summons or demand from Nash could ex
cuse the acts of the alleged co1spirators OF
any of them.
iIere is dispute between certain person
touching the possession of the parish offices
There is peaceable way of settling such dis
putes. They can not lawfully be decides
by wager OF battle. And he who appeals t, t
: violence to settle such a question, and al
who aid and assist IN such appeal. ar
. y1Olators of the law.
For four other of the prisoners on trial
namely, Oscar Giyens, Dennis Eemoine
Prudhomme LemOine and William Hick
man, the defense is set up that they neve
at any time banded or cOnspired as charge'
, | in the Indictment, and that they were no
present in Colfax on the thirteenth of April
] The prosecution claims that they were earl
in the conspiracy, and that they were al
l more or less prominent actors in the scene
r | OF Easter Sunday. 1t is not necessary, i
order to establish the guilt of these partie
: | to show that they were actually pref
3 ent in Colfax on the thirteenth 9
: | April. IF the prosecution has satisfe
! you that at any time during tn
]. | with the intent laid in the indictment G
any of its counts, they are as much guilt
4 | as if they were prominent and cOnspicuOu
8 | actors to the end. If they joined the col
4 | spracy at any time before it's alleged Ol
9 iect had been accomplished, they are 6
: much guilty as if they had been its origins
: instigatOrs.
+ There is conflict in the testimony in r
g gard to the presence OF these prisoners
: Colfax on Easter Sunday. You must e
= deavor to reconcile this testimony, if poss
| BILE, without inputng perjury to eith'
/ side If this can not be done, then it is f,
Q YOU &c. determine which side Of this CO
t troversy you will believe.
;, Consider the proof offered in the case
l. each one of these last named prisoners
It connect him with the conspiracy. and Il
d proof offered to exculpate him. If you a.
n satisfied by the proof that they or either
|, | them at any time banded or conspired wi
t, the intent laid in the indictment, or in ar
l. of it's counts. you should return q verdict
l. ] yuiItv unon those com, "a which YOU sha