The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-02-27
4 VERDICT or GyHU.
The Wickersham Jury Deliher-
ates Seven Hours.
ysd<e Bsrke's charxe-xeu Trial
WIN BE Disposal Of
ofher EusIaess.

The Wiekershana trial, which had
occupied the entire time Of the district
eourt for oTer q week. ended at ej
minutes before 3 o'clock yesterday
afternoon, VIXEN the jury returned 3
verdict OF guilty as charged IN the
indictment"
At o'clock yesterday morning the
iury fled into the box. the defendant
took the seat he had occupied through
out the trial. the counsel in the case
found good positions. and large
number of Other attorneys were seated
inside the bar TO hear the charge To
the jury. The proeecntrix and the
ladies Of the Woman's Christian Ten
perznce Union were rot present; bus
the eoart room xas filed with the
same crowd that had been present
erery day Of the trial.
Hardly had the nsinute-hand on the
big court clock passed the meridian
when Judge Bnrke turned his chair
towards tE.e jary aud commenced de-
livering tfe charge. the main points OF
which are given below
CHARGE 10 THE guEY.
The court instructed the Jury that
the defendant was on trial for the
crime charged in the indictment. and
sor no other crime or otfense whatever.
That to constitute the crime with
which the defendant is charged. ii Il
necessary under our statute that
tks woman should he unmarried and
o. previously ctaste character. A
marriesi man may be guilty ri this
ofIense AZ wei - al unmarried mHa.
No general rule can he laid down for
determining what acts and what rep
resentations. arts. articles. batteries
or promises will amount 10 q c8snulis-
sion Of the crime. That the eireufsa-
ssances OF each cae~. the copditiOn in
life. The age and intelligeneeand other
circumstances 81 the parties must be
consisIered By the jssrg. That IL was
incumbent upon the prosecution to
SHOW that the crime was cons uaitteA
BIZ the defendant, that she was pre-
yicuxly an unmarried eosnasi Of eflasfe
character. That i'm determining what
the character Of ffais prosecufrix was.
the jury should consider her life
and conduct "a shown by the
evidence: what was her conduct.
who were her assaeiasas. what places
she freqaentesi. shat books she used
in what devotional or other exercises
she engaged, and what was the nature
Of bsr conversation All fhese thing,
a. well as everything else in her eoa-
duct and manner OF living, are The
external marks aud must constitute
the proof of her character. ard from
all evidence ia the case the jury must
determine what were the personal
qualities OF mind and heart If this
girl, as 10 whether she was cifaafc
beiure the defendant began his alleged
seductive acts. II he did begin them.
end would have remained ehaste
IN the absence OF hts influence
That there is testimony in this case
tending 20 show that Sadie Brantner,
prior 90 October. 1887. was modest,
pure ard ehasse In her conduct.
Der reading and her a.socia-
Citations. There III aiss, evidence tend
ing 70 show that during the same
time this girl was guilty OF acts of the
gFossest lewdDess aud inssnoraIits.
Upon this subject. the jifv inslsf judge
of the eredi3iiitg Of All the witnesses
and determine whom % believe: and
they should consider whether IL IL
probable thns Sadie BFautner. In view
OF ler neneTai conduct. character and
associations. ~ shoxn bg the evidence.
would be gnilty of these acts ~ gross
iewtneSs and immortality With the
persons and vi che places related %
yau by the witnesses Cor the defense.
That il l. nat every act OF improprietv
nor even tnsseeeteT that aEoala af4fx
the stain OF aaehaxsikv mon tic se-
male and deprive her nf the protection
Of the law. Persons differ in their
manners assd tone OF conversation. in
their cssacstson and in saanife sfations
OF character. So1se are much more
FREE ard anrestrainesi thar others,
whilst We hsye no more doffst az their
purity ia one ease than In the other.
e baennes. therefore. one at the high
Ell ard Most solemn. a. well "a most
delicate duties at Jury Ia iudee 81
the proofs Of snfh acts str words. with
the ufmost intelligence. care and free.
dom from lsias. that . female innocent
and Ds actual purity Of mind. may rot
sniier IN her g0ad name from iirhs and
siscnrsIsierate warls or acts which
may he consistent with purity and in
tegrlfY Questions of this character
should be examined with extreme ran.
sson. and the jury should not iadge
hastily or lightly concerning them.
That the defendant was not on trial
Tor niiy crime hsst that named in the
indictment and that all evidence relat-
Ing 10 the alleged crifui-
aai operation performed on the
prosecutrix or false swearing
in the United States land office. as
well as AL facts Occurring since the
commission of the alleged crime.
were admitted for the purpose of
showing The defendants conduct and
his relations with the psoseeu-
Irix ~ throwing light upnn
the question Of whether or not h..
i guilty OF the crime CHARGED
Thai The iurv hanid Ike into eansid.
Grafton the whole Of The evidence, and
al Iaets and circumstance proved on
the trial and these facts ara s.ircnuA-
stances include not oniy the statements
that FELL from the Tins If the witnesses
but also the cnnduct ~ shss~4. witness
e. and their manDer ri tasiifving. That
what naeaSarc III cscslente or isslief
shonld he given 20 the IA espents IT
Witnesses i assexf'on s.,ielv s,sr the
1arv to determine. hui IN sissine @ thew
we're 10 consider the interests ~ such
witnesses i'm the event ~ the suit.
their eaRanet and aenesnor Shiic
iestssiag, their apparent fairness ar
hia.; whether the >tory ,n',i hv them
y REASONABLE ar prsbasrle in the light
~ the geuersl saurse of experience ia
human affairs ef fisr Sauat' character
and whether such story = consistent
with the other testimony and
al the circumstances IN evidence
That Sasue witnesses hal testified r.
The ALLEGED fsss az seeing Sassie Rrsnt-
nsf at times and plaees anil engaged
N etniflet tlaiaRcsa ~ he tsas,re ar less
INCONSISTENT with her eha>sifv. la
reirrt nvs ~ these tstsstsrS the Jury
shoRll determine the crsslllsi Is ~ tise
wttffSseS under the F,llsss already
Risea. ani they shaald fsfsher eun-
shier whether nF not saFh witnesses.
ar So'1e ef them. naY not hs.nessly
nave mistaken same other perSan for
oassie RrantneT Il j. mstser
81 very freasens occurrence In
s'ally If, "a wesl ~ IN the testimony
10 courts Of ia tice. for persons 81
nistase the Identity ~ others. and
especially when n Witness - fff,seS IN