The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1877-05-18

F"iN'Ni'fN' ~ " fi'b'N' " i''''''I y ''.''
murder. Upon fun consideration we
are satisfied that no evidence vas al
mitted upol this subject which ought
to have been excluded.
The evidence. If believed, established
that although in the regular meetings
of the Order to which the defendants
belonged, crime was not concocted, yet,
it was understood and 50 practiced, the
members were bound to obey the com.
mand of the superior officer of divis'
ion when required to commit crime:
and that the signs and passwords of
the order, called "the goods" were but
aids in the work of iniquity. So that,
while the society In its declared pur-
pose, may be innocent of wrong, there
has been engrafted upon it IA system of
crime. 1t may therefore be likened
to a tree which left to itself would
bring forth good fruit, but which en-
grated with scions of bitter fruit be.
comes different tree; the functions of
the original stock being now only to
give life and productive power to the
wild branches, the whole tree is con-
cemned because of the fruit which it
bears.
The evidence on this subject comes
within the decision of the Supreme
Court in the case Of the Common wealth
vs. Carroll and others decided at Har-
rsburg OH Monday last, since this
opinion vas written
The first. second, third and fourth
reasons, all relate to the remg rks made
by Mr.. Hughes of Counsel for the Com
monwealth in his closing add ess to the
jury.
At the close of the address the COun-
sci for the prisoners by writing filed,
requested the Court to discharge the
jury because of remarks which 1t WAS
alleged msrepresented the- evidence,
aud were calculated to prejudice the
jnry against the defendants. We de-.
ciined to comply with this request; a
discharge of the jury at this stage of
the case would have been tantamount
to an acquittal. Having been once in
jeopardy they could not again be placed
on trial. Such proceeding would bs
without precedent, aud the motion
was properly refused.
The subject Of granting new trial
on tccount of remarks by the District
Attorney whose closing speech to the
jury in capital case was fully consid-
cred in the case of Com 'th VS.. Twitchell
l Brew. 592 and Com'th vs.. Harlon 3
Brew. 496. In the former Judge Brew
ster, and in the latter Judge Ludlow
says that no case can be found in the
books where new trial has been granted
for such cause in capital case. Judge
Ludlow inquire: "How could it be
possible ever to try and successfully
convict prisoner charged with murder
if during the trial the CommOnwealth's
Counsel or even the prisoners, should
in the heat Of an argument say some
thing which indirectly or by some pos
oioihUy miSnsaAoSe euo ~ ioouoAo Cnoc'
If evidence is misstated or counsel
assumes az proved that which can not
fairly be- inferred from the evidence,
aud attention is called to it at the time,
the Court will always correct the Coun-
sci. If he persists in going outside of a
legitimate line of argument, and in
misstating facts he may be stopped by
the Court, and his conduct of the case
in the face Of objections may be 80 fla
grant as to justify new trial. But it
can never become the practice to review
a speech of several hours duration in
order to ascertain if the line Of argu-
ment was warranted by the evidence, or
if some foreign matter had been intro.
duced into tie case p the prejudice of
the defendant.
1t was in evidence that the murder
in question was committed by band
of ccnsii1ators, all of whom we're men,
bers Of society usually known by the
name Of "Mollie Maguire"-that MEM
bers of that society were known to each
other by signs, pass words and test,
called "tbe goods, that members
recognized power in the chief officer Of
a division called "the body master" to
order the commission Of crime-that
members were bound to secrecy and
obedience at the peril Of evil conse-
quences to themselves II they disregard
ed these obligations.
In his address Mr.. Hughes strongly
urged upon the jury the necessity Of
protecting the community against the
perpetrators of crimes by men thus
banded together; and to illustrate his
argument he referred to the history of
Ribbonism in Ireland and to several in
stances of bands of assassins in this
country, and to the terrorism produced
by their lawlessness and likened the
practices Of "the Mollie Maguires" to
those OF Ribbonmen in Ireland and the
lawless bands mentioned as having ex-
listed here. He expI essly stated to the
jury that he did not desire the convic-
tion of the defendants on any other
ground than that of guilt of the offence
here charged as shown by the evidence
| in the case.
| The counsel for the defendants haG
read from books, instances in which
innocent persons had been convicted OF
murder upon circumstantial evidenct
and also upon express but false testimo
ny, for the purpose of causing the jur!
to be cautious in their conclusions. Or
the other hand the counsel for IT,,
Commonwealth mentioned cases o
crimes and convictions similar to tina
alleged against the defendants for tn,
purpose as we presume of counter act
ing the effect upon the minds Of th
| jury of the cases read upon the othsl
side, and for the purpose of holiin
them up to the performance of duty.
Wa cannot saw nnnn confederation n