Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-09-09
STAR-ROUTE TRIAL.
The Case Given to the Jury Last Even
ing, but No Verdict Yet
Agreed TO.
Judge Wylie's Charge-A Fair and I'm.
partial Statement OF the
Case.

gan his charge. de said: BY the act of
March 8, 1879, Congress appropriated S.
800 900 for the maintenance of the Stsr-route
service; that the appropriation was for the
fiscal year 1880. The appropriation was all
asked by the department. the records of
the treasury and postoface departments
showed that Tor the three previous years
| there was an unexpended balance OF nearly
| 81 100000 to the credit of the postofhce de-
partment. There was in the evidence a state
ment showing that the postmaster general on
| December S, 1879, had asked for an reappro-
| pristion of 100000 to meet deficiencies in
| the appropriation for the Stsr-route service.
| This was statement calculated TO arrest the
attention OF Congress, for it showed that in
| FIVE months after the beginning of the fiscal
| year there was a deficiency of 100000.
| That was fact to alarm the country. An
investigation followed, and an additional APP
preparation was made with provisions limit
| ing the expedition and increase of the ser
| vice upon the routes. That was as far az the
act of Congress ought to have gone; the other
circumstances were fit subjects for Judicial
1 investigation. This investigation fol-
lowed, and an Indictment was found
| against these alleged conspirators. This
indictment might be said to have five
| features: First, historical; second describing
| the conspiracy; third, the means; fourth, the
| overt acts, and fifth, the partition OF money.
| The historical part was well known. As TO
| the means used TO carry on the conspiracy,
| the jury need not trouble themselves about
| that. Whether not they were sufficiently
| described in the indictment was not for them
| to consider. The division OF money de-
| pended on the question OF the existence OF
| conspiracy, and that was really the only con-
| sIderation for the jury, whether there was a
| conspiracy followed by the commission OF
overt acts The false papers and petitions
| were the means used, and 1t had never been
| held that the government was required to
| accurately describe the means, whether the
| parties were mutually interested in the sew
| ersl contracts was of no consequence. Their
interest in the conspiracy must be considered.
| The parties were, according to the indlct-
| ment, individual owners OF contracts, mutu
ally interested only in the conspiracy. An
/ overt act during any one OF the contracts WAS
an overt act under all of them.
Referring to the prayers, Judge Wylie
| said the conspirators were jointly united for
| some purposes, and several for others. Each
| man stood on his own defense. The Jury
| could not convict one man of conspiracy,
| but they could convict two of the defend
ants. If there had been only one overt act
| committed, and the jury acquitted the party
| committing it, then the defendants must all
| be acquitted. For instance, if the jury ac-
quilted Brady, who had been called The key.
| the master key, to the whole conspiracy, aud
no overt acts were shown TO ha been COM
| mitted by any other defendant, then they
must all be acquitted. The position taken
| by the defense, that all the defendants must
be shown TO have been Interested in all the
| contracts, was false. If it had been shown
| that they were crimlnally interested in only
| one that was sufficient, and conspiracy was
established. Surplusage in the Indictment
could not vitiate it. This indictment charged
| but one offense, one conspiracy; it could not
| comprise two conspiracies. Part of the de-
l T.hf ha ufanIi a,,1
convicted, but if the jury found two conspira-
cIes, three of the parties guilty of one and the
remaining four guilty of another, then the
Indictment failed.
So much for The frame of the Indictment
| Now as to the proof: A conspiracy is seldom
reduced to writing; they are generally en-
tered into in very informal way. The par
| ties might reside in different parts of the
| country, but If by any means, even by a
dumb show, they entered into an agreement
| TO defraud the government, followed by an
overt act, that was conspiracy. The law re-
l quired verdict OF guilty only when the jury
| entertained reasonable doubt of the guilt
| Of the defendants. The doubt, to be reasoa-
| able mus. be based on evidence, not on mere
conjecture. He would now take up one OF
| the routes, and see If 1t could be connected
with any rational theory of innocence. Ii it
could, the defendants were entitled 10 the
| benefit OF that theory. He would select a
| small route, the route from Vermillion to
| Sioux Falls, OAK. The date OF contract was
| March Is, 1878, to run four years, John w.
Dorsey the contractor; the trips were once a
| week, the distance fifty miles, to which two
miles had been added; the time was fourteen
hours; there were nine postofhces, but 70
| towns on the ronte. Soon after the service
| was put on 1t was discovered that
| the actual distance was about sew
enty miles, and that information bad
4 L., Il. [.
| the second-sssiatant postmaster general. On
| December %, 1875 the number of trips was
doubled; on May 8, 1879, the route was
practically assigned by eub-contract TO
| Vsile; on July 10, 1879, the number of trips
was increased TO six, and the time reduced to
ten hours, increasing the compensation 10
| S6133. DeductiDg an hour for delays at
postofhces, the carrier was required 10 travel
| the seventy miles i'll nine hours. Petitions
| and letters had been sent in, and it did not
| absolutely follow that this expedition was
| fraudulent. If the jury could reconcile il
with any theory OF innocence they muet do
| it. A congressman of influence, Mr.. Bennett,
had asked for it, and that must be consid-
| cred. Soon after every postmaster on the
route united in a protest TO the department,
saving the time Improbable, and
asked 10 have the old fourteen-hour sche-
dule restored, and Bennett Endorsed this pro-
test and Il was sent to Brady. Just at this
point this member OF Congress seemed to
have lost his influence, for he Was informed
that it could not be done.
Alter reading the law relative to produc-
livenesa, Judge Wylie inquired what pro-
ductiveness had been in this instance. Read
ing from the record he said that for one year
il had been S261. He had called attention
TO this route because il had been asserted
that members of Congress were responsible
for the expedition, yet, in this case, when it
had been expedited at the request of MEM
Der of Congress, its reduction had been re-
fused TO that same member.
General Henkle interrupted at this point
to remind the court that French had N AIDE
the order in question, but Judge Wylie
said positively that French had made the
order by Brady's direction. Here, he con-
Iinued, was an increase made, when it was
shown that the revenues were actually de-
creasipg If the jury could reconcile that
with the proper exercise OF discretion, let
them do it. 1t could not have been through
ignorance. MaEifestly it was purposely.
The thing to be decided was whether it had
been done through a mistaken exercise of
discretion, or purposely through wrong mo-
tives. The history Of the other routes was
10 be considered.
Concerning the false papers, said he: II
had been argued that if they resulted in
good to the public, then no criminal act had
been done IN uldklIS me OIueTs upon tHem |
This was no correct view OF the law. He |
had before referred 10 the case of Lord Ba-
con- and wished now to read to the jury his |
letter TO the lords while he was in prison.
Judge Wylie then read the letter, and |
commented upon its fallacies.
The proof of conspiracy might be made
out from the proof of consequences following
conspiracy, said Judge Wylie, taking up an
other branch OF the subject, and he read
from English authority in support of his
proposition. RecitiAg the circumstances of
The operations of what are known as three
card-monte men in this city, he said that the
only way in which their conspiracy could be
made out was by the circumstances following
the actual swindling operation.
There was one further topic he wished to
refer 10. Among the prayers was one to the
effect that if it appeared that the genuine
papers appeared among the fraudulent pa
pers fled in connection with a route, then
the order for expedition or increase must be
attributed TO the influence Of the genuine
with the bad. Such doctrine could not
be tolerated The bad could not be saved
by the good, and nice rersd. Parties
committing frauds often found it to their
advantage to use some truth IN their opera
tions. Lies were of SO impish nature that
they warred among themselves, as well as
being inconsistent with truth. Fraud was not
always falsehood, for he had seen fraud of
the most abominable character with line
OF truth marshaled at it's feet. The more truth
that could be worked in the better chance of
success. II you find man employing both
truth and falsehood in the commission OF
fraud, his offense is even more heinous. This
was about all that beshould say at this time
He wished, finally, to remind the jury of the
difference between their position and his
own. Ii they believed The charge against
the defendants was not made out without
reasonable doubt, then they shoild acquit
them without regard 10 any clamor or any
opinion of the world. He should refuse to
believe that any juror was 80 base a coward
as to refuse to follow his conscience. On the
other hand, their duty 10 their country re-
quired them to bring In a verdict of guilty
# thew so believed Yesterdays occurrences
passing remark. If his informa-
ton was true, then there were men engaged
l., ss6rino the i1rvn IL Was. natural thai |