Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-08-20
GIVEN TO THE JURY.
JUDGE GARYs CHARGE IN THE CHI.
cAGo ANARCHISTS TRIALS.
a Lengthy Document Read to the Jury
Defining and Explaining Points OF
Law Relative to the Case.
lBy telegraph to the Dispatch

lBy telegraph to the Dispatch.l
CHICAGO, August l9.-The case OF
the Anarchists on trial for participation
in the Haymarket outrage was given to
the jury to-day after long and careful
charge by Judge Gary. In his charge
Judge Gary, after giving the usual
definitions Of what was murder aud
what it's punishment is under the
statutes, said
The Court instructs the jury that, as
matter of law in considering the case
the jury are not to go beyond the evil
dence to hunt up doubts, nor must they
entertain such doubts as are merely
chimericsl or conjectural. A doubt
TO justify an scquittal must be reason
able, and it must arise from candid and
impartial investigation Of oil the evil
deDce In the case; and unless 1t is
such that, were the same kind
Of doubt interposed in the grave
transactions of life, it would cause
q reasonable and prudent man to hesi-
tate and pause, it is insufficient to sn-
thorize q verdict OF not guilty. II, after
considering all the evidence, you can
say you have an abiding conviction OF
the truth of the charge, you are salts
fed beyond . reasonable doubt. The
Court instructs the jury, as matter oil
law, That an accessory is he who
stands by and aids, abets, or
assists, or who, not being present,
aiding, abetting, or assisting, has adj
vised, encouraged, aided, OF abetted the
perpetration of crime he who thus aids,
abets, assists, advises, or encourages
shall be considered as a principal and
be punished accordingly. Every such
accessory, when the crime is committed
within or without this State by his aid
or procurement in this State, may be
indicted and convicted al the same time
as the principal, or before or after his
conviction, and whether the principal
is convicted or amenable to justice
or not, and punished as 8 principal.
If the defendants attempted to over
throw the law by force and threw the
bomb, then the defendants who were
in the conspiracy were guilty of muir
der. IL there WAS An Ansrchlstic con-
spiracy and the defendants we're parties
to 1t, they were guilty Of murder,
though the date Of the elimination of
the conspiracy was not fixed. If any
Of the defendants conspired to ex-
cite by advice the people to riot
and murder, such defendants ars
guilty il such murder was done
IN pursuance Of said conspiracy.
The imprscticability Of the aims Of the
defendants is immaterial. Circumstan-
titl evidence is competent to prove
quilt. and if the defendants conspired
to overthrow the law and began was
killed in consequence, the parties are
guilty, and it is no. necessary that any
of the defendants we're present ut the
killing. Al the parties to conspiracy
are equally guilty. Circumstantial EVIL
dence must satisfy the jury beyond
reasonable doubt. In such case the
jury may find the defendants guilty.
When tho defsn,snts testified in the
case they stood on the same ground as
other witnesses. The jury can take
into account the interest Of the witness.
II any one Of such defendants has lied
as a witness, the jury should not believe
such part of hiI testimony as has been
corroborsted. Tho jury were not to so
beyond the evidence to hunt up
doubts. Doubts must arise naturally
from the evidence, and jurors
must act as they would in the
ordinary affairs Of life. \ doubt
must be a reasonable one. SYM
pathy does no. constitute reasonable
doubt. The jurors must believe as
mon where there was no oath to the
witnesses. The jurors were judges Of
law and act, but should not 90 against
the Court without full consideration.
The jury might find any or all the de-
PENDANTS guilty or not guilty,
and could fix the penalty for all.
II guilty Of murder or of anything else,
the sentence should be fixed in accord
ance with the statute. Forms Of YER
diets were given to the jury providing
for all sentences, and also acquittsls.
For the defendants the instructions
were that if the jury understood the Law
better than the judge, they should 80
act. Before the jury can convict the
defendants they must find them guilty
beyond reasonable doubt. Mere
probabilities do not constitute guilt.
Personal opinions Of facts not
proved are incompetent. The jury are
the sole judges and can consider the in
terests Of the witnesses which might
color their testimony. Waller and
Seligcr were accomplices, and their tes-
timony should be viewed with great
care. II Waller and SeliEer testified
from the promise Of reward, such fact
should determine the weight Of their
testimony. II any Of the States wit
nessG testified from the hope Of re
ward the same rule should APP
ply. The jury should act with
great caution upon the testimony
If the accompllces, and should
ne kaNSned OF us trutn before HhulnS
the defendants guilty.
The jury should endeayor to give full
credence TO the testimony Of the defend.
ants, if possible. The jury cannot dis
regard the testimony of defendants on
the ground alone that they are defend
ants. The statements Of the States
attorneys no. based on evidence
should not be regarded. Cir
cums!antial facts should not be
incompatible with innocence and if the
facts can be reconciled with innocence
the defendants should be acquitted. If
the crime may have been committed by
some outside party, acquistsl should
follow. The allusion aud references to
the supposed danger Of anarchy, ETC.,
should not be regarded by the jury.
Individuals and communities have
right to arm for protection, aud an in
yiIation to arm for such a purpose is
not guilt.
The Judge finished his instructions at
$50 P. Nj, and the jury immediately
retired. The defendants listened with
..oar at+aDt,n, Inr;,, tho raadinO Of