, 1882-09-15

WASHINGTON, Sept. SIN the criminal
court this morning Judge Wylie, after
some explanatory remarks to the jury,
began his charge. He said:
BY the act of March B, 1879, Congress
appropriated $5,9OO0O0 for maintenance
of the Star Route service. That appro-
priation was for the fiscal year 1880. The
appropriation was all that was asked by
the department. The records of the
Treasury and Post Office departments
showed that for three previous years
there was an unexpended balance of
nearly S4,OOO,00O to the credit of the de-
partment. There was in evidence II
statement showing that the postmaster
general, on December s, 1879, had asked
for re-appropriation of S2,UOO,U.W, to
meet DEFICIENCIES i'll the appropriation for
the Star Route service. This wasa state
ment calculated to arrest the attention
of Congress, for il showed in five months
after the beginning Of the fiscal year
there was deficiency of S2,OOOUUO. That
was fact to alarm the country. Inves-
tigation followed, and an additional APP
preparation was made, with provision
for limited expedition and increase of
service upon routes. That was as far as
the action of Congress ought to have
gone. Other circumstances were tit sub
Jects for judicial investigation. This in
vestigation followed, and an indictment
was found against those alleged conspir-
ators. This Indictment might be said to
have five features:
First, historical; second, describing
conspiracy third, the means; fourth,
overt acts; fifth, 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 or not
they were sufficiently described in the
indictment was not theirs to consider.
The division Of money depended upon
the question of the existence Of con-
spiracy. That was really the only con-
slderation for the jury Whether there
was conspiracy followed by the com
mission OF an overt act. The false pa
pers and petitions were the means used,
and it never has been held that the gov
ernment was required to accurately de-
scribe the means. Whether parties were
mutually interested in the several CON
tracts was Of course no consequence.
Their interest in the conspiracy must be
considered. The parties we're, according
to the indictment, individual owners Of
contracts, and mutually interested only
in the conspiracy. Any overt act under
any one of the contracts was an overt act
under ell of them.
Referring to the prayers, Judge Wylie
said: The conspirators were jointly united
for one purpose and several for Others.
Each man stood on his own defence.
The jury could not convict one man Of a
conspiracy, but they could convict two of
them. Ii there had been only one overt
act committed, and the jury acquitted
the party committing it, then the defend
ants must all be acquitted. Brady, who
had been called the key-the master
! keyLto whom conspiracy and no overt
acts were shown to have been committed
by any other of the defendants, then
they must all be acquitted The posi-
ton taken by the defense, that all the de-
PENDANTS must be shown to have been
interested in all the contracts, was false.
IT it had been shown that they were
criminally interested in only one, that
was sufficient, and the commission was
established. Surplustage in the indict-
ment could not vitiate it. This indict-
ment charged but one ofiense and one
conspiracy. It could not comprise two
conspiracies. Part OF the defendants
might be wholly acquitted and part con-
victed. but if the jury found two conspir-
accs, three of the parties guilty of one
and the remaining four guilty of another,
then indictment failed.