The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1882-10-11
THE HARRIS CASE.
THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD
DAY.
verdict Returned of Guilty as to Harris
Not Guilty as to Bragg.


Verolct Returned of Guilty as to Harris
Not Guilty as to Bragg.
Inc Harris-Bragg case was continued in the
United States Circuit Court, before Judge
Webb yesterday
Mr.. A A. Strout made the closing argument
In the case for the respondent. He spoke for
about two hours making strong and able ad-
dress. He claimed that the whole course of
the testimony was to show that tho scheme
was devised by William E. Harris aud Arthur
w. Eooper.
AT the close of the argument Of Mr.. Strout
the court then took a recess
The Hon. w. f. Lunt then made the closing
argument for the government, reviewing the
evidence offered in the case, and arguing that
the guilt of the respondents James w. Har-
ris and Henry NJ. Bragg had been made ont
beyond reasonable doubt. The court ad-
Journed while Mr.. Lunt was speaking, and he
finished his argument at the session in the af-
ternoon.
THE CHARGE.
His Honor Judge Webb then charged the
jury in his usual logical and: able manner.
The jury are not to consider the wishes either
of the counsel or of any outside parties except
it be the wish to arrive at a just and fair con-
clusion. The trial has been honestly and fair
ly conducted, and there is no occasion to cen
sure counsel on either side; If in the course of
the trial it has seemed necessary to check eth
er that power was exercised in manner that
seemed proper TO the court
You are to pass on the guilt or innocence of
each of the respondents as individuals, and
the decision in each case must be arrived at
by the fair and proper consideration of all the
evidence offered IN the case.
You are to convict only upon evidence going
to show the guilt Of the respondents beyond a
reasonable doubt, but it is not necessary that
this be done by aid of direct evidence, crcum-
stantial evidence being lawful method of
rendering conclusion; you must not take
anything for granted, all circumstances must
be proven, and this evidence must sbe such as
to lead the mind as it were by compulsion to
the result reached
The Indictment charges conspiracy against
the provision Of the law of the United States
(The court read section $40 r. S. U. ST. and to
that at least two persons must have consented
No matter of what crime the defendant Har-
ris may have been guilty; if he acted Falone he
is not guilty as charged in this Indictment If
you find either OF these parties guilty it must
be with at least one of the other persons NAM
ed in the indictment. You must find that the
scheme was against the laws of the United
States, and that at least one OF them did ac
complish some overt act to further the conspi-
racy. All are to be held liable for the act of
one.
fp6t nfr ant fo nf hx.k
certain specific acts are charged in the indict-
ment The Court read from Section
$3.50, aud instructed the jury in sub
stance as follows: The devising of the scheme
or the placing of parties in COM
muncaton with the devisor must be proven.
In this case the overt act may be the putting
in or the taking ont of letter. 1t is not neceS-
Sary that the jury should know the names of
the parties from whom letters were received.
The gst of the offence is the conspiracy. It is
net necessary that the respondents should
have been the original devsors of the scheme,
it is enough that they consented to it, and that
their acts tended to further the common OBJ
ject. If the guilt is arrived at by circum-
stantial evidence, it must be such evidence as
to exclude all other theories, except the one
accented as true. The flight of William E.
Harris is no evidence of the guilt of the others
The question OF Hooper's connection with the
is TO be inquired into, only SO far as affect
ing his credit The overt acts must have
been ysAaty 80 -UITfess James W. Harris had
knowledge of the conspiracy his opening the
box, and taking out the letters were not
criminal acts All the evidence will be con-
sidered in connection with the question "Did
a conspiracy exist?" 1t is possible that one of
the parties might have been alone in the
fraud, in which case there was no conspiracy.
There must have been an agreement between
thu parties as to the common object. The
question as to 0 lch must be, "Is he one of the
conspirators?" The opinions of tire witness as
to the relations of the parties is not to weigh
with you. No statements made by either j.
w. or w. E. Harris as to the guilt of Bragg are
to be given any weight if made subsequently
to the arrest of Harris unless made in the
presence of Bragg.
The jury must also be satisfied by the evi-
dence that some one at least OF these three par
ties did do, in the words of the statute, ''some
act to effect the object of the conspiracy" and
still further. the act must be one of the specific
overt acts named in the indictment, ~ the
hiring of the box in the post office; (2) taking
letters from the box. All consideration of the
evidence as to the former life of either of the
respondents must only go to effect his credibil-
ity as witness, if witness.
Mr. Strout withdrew several of his prayers
for instructions to the jury, as the charge Of
Judge Webb had 50 fully covered all the
points in the case.
GENERAL BUTLER.
Just before Judge Webb finished his charge
to the jury, General B. f Butler entered and
took a seat within the bar, where he was, of
course, the observed OF all observers. After
the jury retired the General addressed the
Court in regard to the famous "Ice Case,'
which is to be again tried.
THE VERDICT.
After being out about an hour and half,
the jury returned verdict Of mot guilty. in
the case of Henry M. Bragg, and guilty in
the case of James w. Harris. A motion in ar
rest of judgment in the case of Mr.. Harris will
be at once filed by Messrs. Barry and Strout,
his attorneys.