The New York herald., 1879-01-05
THE CHARTER OAK CONSPIRACY.

ll1E CHAHlEh UAA .CUNOflhAOl.
THE ARGUMENTS coMpLETED-AN ADDRESS IN
BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS AND SPECIAL
REQUEST TO THE JURY-THE CHARGE POST
PoNED UNTIL TUESDAY.
HARTFORD, Conn.,, Jan. 4, 1879.
Tho closing argument for the defence COM
pleted by Mr.. Hyde this morning, covering in
its entirety the operations of the consprators
from the time they into the company
down to the period of the FurberJewell settlement
Discussing the original Furber contract. under
which 100000 of assets were contributed Mr. Hyde
claimed that Furber received but s12l 900 under the
contract in the twenty months he with the conf
pany while the profits during that period aggregated
q round million. Commissioner Stedman right
in saying that the Charter Oak could pay
that contract and 100000. 1t was an honest
bargain and it was only fair that Furber should have
some compensation ito be decided by arbitration for
the risk assumed that the company might possibly
be forced into bankruptcy and he would lose heavily
HOW DOUBTFUL assists WERE MANIPULATED.
Various bad assets of the company considered
seriatim and it was pointed out that every one
investment before the accused had any connection
with it. The Allen Stevens Co. New York;
'blankct mortgage an affair of the former
management. Suit had been brought to
this. and the other interested creditors of Allen,
Stevens Co., Mr.. Hyde asserted. had been instru-
mental in organizing the attack on the Charter Oak
to cripple the company and prevent it from fighting
for what was Misunderstanding of the estate COW
cred by the mortgage. Furber, upon going into
the company, made vigorous push to realize
something this mortgage and the attack promptly
began. The Valley Railroad s1.250,OOo secured
mortgage bonds were invested in by the company
dar fhA old man and all hat urba had 10
do with them to convert them into New York
real estate paying six per cent The Higganum mort
gage handled in the same way, and the West
Virginia property Furber did nothing with it except
ing to have new mortgage executed to cover i'm
portant properties, which had not been properly
cred in the original mortgage. Every effort Of the
accused In short, to better the condition of the
company and to put the worst construction on their
motives, only for the purpose of insuring payments
under their contracts by making the company sol
vent again.
The New York downtown purchase by Furber in
behalf of the company reviewed at length, and
that it good bargain had been testified to by the
present managers of the Charter Oak. and another
point is that year after the sale the seller leased
the property at the rate of six per cent on the full
amount that was paid for it, Continuing, Mr..
Hyde remarked that an impression existed that the
accused were in some way responsible for the forty
per cent scaling of the policies that made by the
Jewell management. This is unfair; the fact is that
the scaling necessitated by the reduction of the
receipts-S3, 900 in two years--resulting from
the attacks upon the institution and the apprehen
sons of the policy holders due thereto. And these
attacks, Mr.. Hyde asserted, were continued by the
interests that attacked Furber, and they are con-
tnued to this day with the sole object of forcing the
company into the hands Of receiver and running it.
THE JEWELL SETTLEMENT.
Regarding the settlement made by Jewell with Fur
ber Mr. Hyde said that while this had been excluded
from the evidence it must be conclusive to every in
teligent man that there could be nothing wrong in
it when it was approved by such men as Governor
jewell, Senator Eaton. Colonel Bisse and other gen.
tlemen constituting the new Board of Directors. And
it should be remembered that this settlement
made pursuant to the terms of the original Furber
contract which the State had claimed was fraud
ulent.
With this Mr.. Hyde closed his remarks on the evil
dence and spoke OF general features of the
He sad:'lt has been represented by the State that
the defendants have endeavored by every legal means
to prevent trial and TO escape justice This is not
borne out by the facts. Only year ago yesterday
the Grand Jury found bill against them, and the
trumpets. The wires flashed the news to Furber in
New York and Wiggin in Boston, and they hurried to
Hartford as fast steam could bring them. without
waiting to be legally summoned Reaching here they
compelled to await until the following week
the form of being arrested and giving bonds. Since
then they have stood ready at all times to
the charges against them. The prosecution
complains that they insisted upon all their rights in
this trial. but it should be remembered that for full
year they had been bounded by the press and the
publc that they went into this trial under the dis
advantage of strong tide of public opinion against
them that their personal liberty and their reputa
tons alike at stake. and that, consequently, in
Justice to themselves, they bound to make the
strongest possible defence. Ihe state Attorney,
his closing argument, did a most unusual thing; he
urged that IL single juror had in his mind shadow
doubt to the innocence of the accused he should
stand out against the other eleven and secure dsa
greement. Is this right Is this just Can it mean
anything else except that the State. finding itself un
able TO secure conviction on the evidence. is not
satisfied with the expense and loss II has already
subjected these to- but wishes to ruin them
financially by putting them to the expense OF another
trial? II they innocent such q course would be
more than cruel All through the long months since
this Indictment was brought public belief in their
guilt has been matter or prejudice, basel, not
upon known facts, but upon rumor and misrepre-
sentation.
A QUESTION LAW.
The should have been tried in this court
at ALL Early in this trial the Judge admitted that it
not clear to him that the offences alleged const
tuted nythng more thaa simple misdemeanors. and
If only these the statute of limitations would have
az ganst many of the allegations. We asked that
might be saved the expense OF the trial by taking
this question to the supreme Court, but the
Judge decided to 90 on with the case pro
forma and what evidence could be produced.
And yet. after all the wrong the defence has been
subjected the State Attorney In a the close
this trial and asks that II the jury has any doubt
to the innocence OF the defendants that the state
receive the benefit of such doubts This Is reversing
the old common law principle. which accords to the
accused such benefit. and declares that every
shall be held TO be innocent until il is proven beyond
a reasonable doubt that he is guilty Give us Justice
under the law and the evidence and you cannot fail
to give us speedy acquittal.
The Court adjourned TO Tuesday next, when Judge
Hovey will deliver his charge.