The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-06-13
Judge Wylie's Statement of the Legal Points
InvoIved-A Charge Containing Small
Consolation for the Defense.
The Indictment Found To Be Faulty,
But Not to a Serious Extent.
Every Effort To Be Used to Secure Verdict
"A Record of More than Four
Million Words.
JUDGE wYLIE's CHARGE.
Statement of the Legal Points Involved in
the Star-R0ute Case.


the Star-R0ute Case.
WASHINGTON, June 12.-Judge Wylie began
his charge to the star-route jury this after
noon. After thanking the jurymen for their
patient attention during the many months
OF the trial and reminding them that they
had nothing to do with public demand,
newspaper articles or appeals to sympathy,
but must decide the case upon the evidence,
he at once commenced to state the legal
points involved, and said, in part:
The policy of the law must be found in
ITSELF No public officer had any right to set
up his own policy against the policy of the
law. He held great trust; it was his duty
to obey the law. To allow him to set up his
policy against the law would lead to great
and innumerable abuses. But the mere vio-
lation of law by public officer was not
necessarily a crime. He might mis-
understand his duty; he might
be guided by an intention to do public good
These remarks were intended to apply to
General Brady, to whom the law said that in
making increases in service he must pay due
regard to productiveness and other circum-
stances. 1t hardly seemed reasonable or fair
for Brady to say that he disregarded produc-
tiveness. That was the policy of present
Cabinet otticer-a witness in this case-but
the court could not sanction that policy
The law prohibited any public officer from
expending public money or making con-
tracts for expenditures beyond the appropria-
ton. In this case there was evidence that
all mo fod hyy for
the fiscal year ending June 80, $780,
had been expended by December, 1879, and
an appeal had been made to Congress to sup
ply the deficiency. All that might have been
done from a mistaken sense of duty or an
exaggerated idea of public good. Men in
such positions occasionally become enthu-
siastic on that subject, and if there was no
corrupt motive it was no criminal act.
The Judge next took up the question of
conspiracy. A conspiracy, he said, was
charged to be a combination of intelligent
beings to defraud the United States by fraud
in atfidavits petitions and orders. The stat
ute of limitations covered with its protection
all crimes committed more than three years
prior to the finding of the Indictment, which
was delivered in court on May 20, 1892
The jury could not dnd a verdict of guilty
against the defendants for anything done
prior to May 20, 1879 If convicted, it must
oe for what they had done since that date.
lNote.-Some of the most important evil
dence in the case related to occurrences pre-
vious to May 90 1879. In establishing a
conspiracy all the facts in the case tending
to a different conclusion from the ma
jority of the evidence must be considered,
but due regard must be given to the weight
of evidence. The jury must infer from all
the facts whether or not there was a con-
spiTacy.
sUFFICIENoY OF THE INDICTMENT.
Judge Wylie then commented upon the
attacks made upon the sufficiency OF the i'll
dictment He reviewed the evidence touching
the beginning OF the combination. Senator
Dorsey, he said, seemed to exert the controll-
ing influence over everybody in that busi-
ness. He corrected their estimates and
changed their bids. Being in the Senate, he
could not become a contractor SO Miner was
brought here, and with Peck and John Dor
sew secured 130 routes Bidding separately
they were mutually interested in the bids.
Here was community of interest. Although
not bidder, Senator Dorsey seemed to be
the most active man. not only in preparing
bids, but i'll carrying out the contracts If
he had sinister and unlawful purpose he
was as guilty as if he had a contract. 1t was
matter of no consequence why he did
these things-whether from love for his
brother and brother-in-law or from self-in-
terest, There was evidence of
Dorsey did during the succeeding
period. 1t was for the jury to say whether
they had corrupt purpose. If they were
satisfied it was a fraudulent combination,
then that made out it's character anterior to
the period fixed by the statute of limitation.
Immediately upon s. w. Dorsey's retiring
from the Senate he took an active interest in
the business, and an entirely new organiza-
ton was effected. The jury must determine
whether Peck and John w. Dorsey who
then stepped out, were men of straw, and
s. W. Dorsey the substance. The govern
ment claimed that Peck and John Dorsey
still remained in the combination, because
they continued to make affidavits-they held
contracts in their own names S. w.
Dorsey and Vaile, who held no con
tracts in their names, were unable to
make affidavits, and the old parties
remained in for the purpose of carrying on
the business. If it was lawful business then
it was all right. If Peck and John Dorsey
knew it to be an unlawful combination, with
criminal purposes, yet agreed to further its
objects, then their going out did not relieve
them from the conspiracy. That conspiracy
did not depend upon the contracts. A per-
son might remain in a conspiracy although
he had parted with his interest in the con-
tracts The indictments so alleged, but that
was dangerous and was regarded a surplus
age.
If, in fact the evidence was to the con-
trary, then everything depended upon the
character of the combination at that day, be-
fore the Goth of May, 1879, whether unlawful
or not. If the combination ceased
after the 20th of May, 1879.
there was no evidence of it, and
in absence of any proof of its dissolution
the jury would have the right to presume