St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-12-14
CIVENTO TWELVE MEN
At Last the CrOnin Case Is
Relegated to the
Jury.
Officers Unable to Control
the Crowd in the Court
Room.
It Simply Swarmed With
Moving, Kicking and Fight
ing Human Beings.
Fate Of the Five Suspects
Now Trembling in the
Balance.


after p. IN. to-day, and at IL o'clock.
having reported that. verdict had not
been arrived at, Judge Mcconnell adj
joHrned court until tomorrow. If all
the crowds that have heretofore
thrOnged the entrance OF Judge McCOn-
nell's branch of the criminal court.
making it almost impossible to gain ad-
mittanee to the trial, were added to-
gether, it would hardly equal the rush
of humanity which clamored and fought
for even a place near the doors of the
court room this morning. Everybody
expected to hear MIR. Mills to-day. but
even when told that great orator would
not speak, the throng refused to
turn away. At least 2.OOO people
gath cred on the street around
the criminal court building, and be it
remembered the court room holds at
most 200 persons. By O'clock this
morning line had been formed reach
ing from the entrance of the Dearborn
street corridors toward the river. as far
as Michigan street. This line was
formed OF men, women and children,
standing
THREE AND FoUE ABREAST.
Half an hour later the line had turned
the corner and ran half block down
Michigan street. the little crowd about
the door, who would not take their turn
in the line. had swollen into a mob. and
the main entrance to the criminal
court building was completely block
AIDED. so that many of the
clerks had TO climb Into
their Offices through the windows. By
and by the time court usually opens the
building was simply swarming with
moving. kicking and fighting human
beings. There were probably fifty bail
ifs, police officers and deputies on the
scene, and an effort was made tp pre-
serve order. But even this corps of
officials was not sufficient to control the
people. Judge Mcdonnell. in trying to
get tn bis court, tried to pass bv the
bailiffs. but was unable to do so. Finally
he went behind the building and en-
tered the Jail yard. got the assistance
of the jailer, and passed into his
court rOom by way of the Jail.
States Attorney Longenecker made the
closing argument on behalf of the state.
owing to the illness of Mr.. Mills, to
states attorney took up the question of
the relation which the various circum-
stances testified to have to each other,
the whole, in combination,
MAKING A STRONG CASE,
as he claimed. At the close of Judge
Lungenecker's address Judge McCon-
nell read his charge to the jury. Aside
from the merely legal definitions and
technicalities, it was as follows:
The jury are judges of the law. as we'll as
the facts in this case, and if they can put
upon their oaths that they know the law bet
ter than the court itself. they have the right
to do so, but before assuming so solemn re-
sponsibility. they should be sure that they
are not acting from caprice or prejudice, that
they are not controlled by their will or
wishes. but from deep and confident con-
viction that the court is wrong and they. are
right The manner or cause of death. which
is alleged in the indictment is an essential
element Of the charge against the
prosecution to establish that aver
ment to your satisfaction beyond
reasonable doubt, as it is laid in the indict-
ment. before a conviction of the defendants.
or either of them. can be lawfully had. But
whether or not the manner or cause Of death
was as laid In the indictment may De es
tablished by circumstantial evidence just as
any other fact essential TO conviction may be
circumstantial evidence in criminal cases is
connected with or surrounding the
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
charged as tends to show the guilt or inno-
cence of the party charged. and If these
facts aud circumstances are sufficient to
satisfy the jury of the guilt of the defendants
beyond reasonable doubt, then such evil
dence is sufficient to authorize the jury in
finding the defendants guilty. 1t Is the duty
of the jury to enter upon the consideration
of each circumstance proven. having in their
minds the presumption that the defendants.
and each of them, are innocent. And II such
fact or circumstances: when considered in
case, can be explained consistent
ly with the innocence of the accused,
it is their duty so to explain it. In order to
Justify the inference of legal guilt from cir
inculpatory facts must be absolutely incom::
patible with the innocence Of the accused
and incapable OF explanation upon any
otner reasonable hypothesis than that of
their guilt. If you can reconcile the facts in
this case upon any reasonable theory con-
sisteut with the innocence of the defendant.
John Kunze. IL is your duty SO TO do and TO
ind the said defendant, John kunze. not
guilty" tThe same charge was maoe as TO
each of the other defendants separately. ex-
cept Beggs concerning whom this special
instruction was given.l It is not sufficient
for the jury to ind that resolution was
adopted for the appointment Of
4 SECRET COMMITTEE
in Camp 20 on Feb. 8, 1889, but Il must fur
ther appear to your satisfaction beyond all
reasonable doubt, that such committee was
I'm fact appointed by the defendant Beggs.
and that such appointment was in pur-
suauce. or in furIherAnce of conspiracy to
commit the crime set ont in the indictment,
and YOU must further be satisfied beyond all
reasonable doubt that the defendant Beggs
had knowledge Of the purpose for which
said committee was asked, or if appointed.
assented to its purposes subsequently,, or you
will not be justified in finding participation
In such conspiracy on the part OF the defend
ant Beggs, By reason of the facts herein stated.
That the defendant, Beggs. was member OF
the United Brotherhood. and vas the presid-
ing officer of Camp 2,I are not the c1rcum-
stances standing alone tending TO establish
his guilt of the crime charged in the fndIct-
ment In this case. And as there is no evil
dence in that case that any overt act was
committed by defendant Beggs, in the COM
mission Of the alleged murder in the indiet-
established that q conspiracy was entered
into to commit murder charged in said in
dictment, to which conspiracy the said Beggs
was party, he should be acquitted. Testi-
mony of verbal admissions, statements and
con versations ought 20 be taken by you with
great caution, because that sort OF testimony
is subject TO
MUCH uTPERFECTION AND MISTAKE.
and when the verbal admission OF person
charged with crime is offered in evidence,
the whole of the admission must be taken
together as well as that part which make for
the accused as that which makes against
him: and IL part OF the statement which Is i'll
favor of the defendant IS not dtsproved ana
is not apparently improbable or untrue when
consistent with all the other evidence in the
ease then such part of the statement is en- |