National Republican., 1883-06-13

nstiC on that subject, and II there was no cor
rupt motive it was not q criminal act.
"This is a charge of conspiracy said
Judge Wylio; and he thereupon read section
$40 OF the revised statutes defining conspir"
acy. He said that there must be two or
more persons to Conspire. They must have
a unison of mind; n common purpose. A
man might do something TO furt er tho OBJ
iccts of o conspiracy without being in it, lie
may not have been taken into tho confidence
of the others may not have entered into an
intelligent combination with them. This
case afforded an example in tho person OF
Peck. lie may have been an active member
of the combination, but the court was willing
TO believe he was not. lie seemed TO have
donenothing beyond the making of afiidavits,
and It. was possible that he was not an active
member of the conspiracy, If there was con-
spiracy. But Peck was out of the way he
was dead, and his name had been used only
as an illustration Of the point. The'cou-
spiracy was charged to be combination of
intelligent beings to dofraud the United States
by fraudulent ailidavits, petitions. and orders
The statute of limitations covered with its
protection all crimes committed more than
three years prior to the finding of the indict-
mcnt, which was delivered in court on May
20, 1852. The jury could not find verdict of
guilty against tho defendants for anything
done prior TO May 90, 1879. If convicted IL
must be for what they had done since that
date They might wonder why the court had
bpenU 81 nuCn llllb III lnb lllNtSllkdbluh VI
events occurring before that time, con.
spiracy was hardly over (the exception being
some political conspiraCies) made in the
dark. A conspiracy might be formed
through correspondence. Its formation
might occupy some timo That made it
difficult to learn and combine the
facts. After learning all the facts, the jury
must infcr from them whether or not there
was q conspiracy. Ono side had maintained
the necessity for presenting the entire chain
of evidence Whero there was multitude
of facts, all pointing in one direction, they
were like the vancs in great public city.
When you saw all the vanes you knew whore
the wind was. If there was a disabled, rusty
yane, that did not impair the indications of
the others. So with the evidence. If
there wero other facts in the case tending
to different conclusion from the majority of
facts, thoy must be considered, of course, but
due regard must be had TO the weight of evil
dence.
Judge Wylie then commented upon the
attacks made upon the sulliciency of the in
dictment. lie reviewed the evidence touch
ing the beginning of the combination. SEN
ator Dorsey, said ho, seemed to exert con-
trolling influence over everybody in that
business. He corrected their estimates and
changed their bids. Being in the senate he
could not become contractor. So Minor
was brought here, and with Peck and
John Dorsey, secured 100 routes. Bid
ulnH separately, luby NGIC HuJu-
ally interested in the bids. Here
was a community of interest. Although not a
bidder Senator Dorsey seemed TO be the most
active man, not only in preparing tho bids,
but in carrying out the contracts. If he had
sinister and unlawful view he was as guilty
as if he had % contract. 1t was q matter of no
consequence why he did these things, whether
from love for his brother aud brother-in-law or
from self interest. There was evidence of
what Miner, Vailc, and John Dorsey did
during the succeeding period. 1t was for the
jury to say whether they had o corrupt pur-
pose. If they were satisfied that it was a
fraudulent combination, then that made out
its character anterior to the period fixed by
the statute of limitations. Immediately upon
5. w. DOrseys retirement from the senate he
took an active interest in the business. An
entirely new organization was effected. The
jury must determine whether Peck and John
w. Dorsey, who then stepped out, were men
of straw, and 5. w. Dorsey the substance. The
government claimed that Peck and John
Dorsey still remained in the combination, be-
cause they continued to make atiidavits. They
held contracts in their own names S. w.
Dorsey and Vale, who held no contracts in
their names, were unable to make aiiidavits,
aud the old parties remained in for the pur-
pose of carrying on the business. If 1t
was IA lawful business then, 1t was
all right. If Peck and John Dorsey
knew it to be an unlawful combination, with
IL CIlIlllWl puEpOSc, ycb hSItcu W luIluSI It's
objects, then their going out did not retire
them from the conspiracy. That conspiracy
did not depend upon the contracts Il person
might remain in the conspiracy, although he
had parted with his interest in the contracts
Tho indictment so alleged, but that was q
dangerous averment, and was regarded as
surplusage. In fact, the evidence was to the
contrary. Then everything depended upon
the character of the combination at that day
before the twentieth of May, 1S79-whethcl
unlawful or not. If the combination ceased
after the twentieth of May, 1879, there wa
no evidence of it, and in the absence of any
proof of its dissolution tho jury would hav,
u right to presume that the organization
formed in April, 1879, continued after thl
statute Of limitations ceased to protect.
Tho jury must judge of the character of tht
association after that time by its anteceden
history. But 1t was not enough to find the
existence of the conspiracy. They must find
an overt act committed by some one of the
defendants after the twentieth of May, 1879
Difficulty arose at that point most of the al
legged fraudulent petitions land they Dor,
that appearance upon their faces, were flleC
before the date spoken of. On route No. "a,
1l9 n false petition was charged TO have beer
filed on July 10, 1879; but the evidence wal
that IL was filed ON April 3, 1879, and Il
seemed that il was barred by the statute. But
kero another question arose; whether th'
parties interested in procuring an order
to secure an order ON July 10, 1879, had no
committed an act in pursuance of the conspi
racy. There was statute bearing on tina
subject, and he should hold to the proposition
that party avaling of q false paper to sccur,
an order on a certain day would not be pro
tected by the fact that it had been filed before
that day.
Tho jury must consider the facts in tina
case.
Judge Wylie then enumerated other paper
corresponding in character to that alread.
commented upon. lie believed that ther
was not single instance where the paper
were filed within the statute Of limitations
Mr.. Bliss interrupted to say that the aili
davt on route No. Al ,ll9 was clearly within
the period, but Mr.. lngeTsOll declared tina
the description of the paper was fatally dc
fective.
Judge Wylie then turned to the indictment
He said that he was not disposed to attac
any weight to the ayerment that there wer
fraudulent subcontracts, for they amounte
to nothing. He could not see how they rt
suited in loss TO the government An indci
ment should set out any overt act rs hayin
been done in pursuance of the conspiracy
and perhaps this indictment was defective /
that respect, which was not to be wonders
at when regard was had of the labor involve
in its preparation. But that fault was cure
by section 1925 of the statutes. For NOR
than a year the indictment had been undC
constant fire, exposed to demurrers, and
every species of attack which tho ingenuit
of able counsel could devise, but that faul
had never been mentioned.