Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1891-12-17

closely following the argument, and at
the strong points his listlcssness gave
way to an appearance of animation. His
mother and sister still sat within the
bar, and listened TO the argument with
an intense interest that showed their
deep concern in the outcome Of the
trial.
The case of William J. Gibbons, on trial
for burning one of the du Pont Company's
barns, was given to the jury at Friday
ms rning's session of court.
Inc charge of the court was delivered by
Judge Cullen, He first defined the crime
OF arson, with which the prisoner is
charged. There must be an averment that
the barn was burned, and that it was the
barn of another person. The burning must
be shown to be wilful and malicious. The
indictment charges the burning of Ger
tam barn upon the prisoner, and the ques-
tions FOR the jury to determine are:
Was there burning?
Was the barn burned owned by the
du Pont Company?
Was the burning u malicious and wilful
act?
The testimony shows that the fire was
the result OF no accident. but that il was
the wilful and malicious act Of some one,
The question is, was the prisoner guilty of
wilfully and mallciously setting fire to the
barnY Every man is presumed in law to
a PC innocent until he is proved guilty.
Therefore, to cnnvict this prisoner the
jury must be satisfied by the proof that he
was guilty Of wilfully and maliciously
DESTROYING the barn. And this proof must
De sullclcnt to satisfy YOU beyond a
reasonable doubt that he is guilty.
The State contends that the prisoner has
been proved guilty by his confessions.
Confessions are held to be the strongest
kind of proof, if made in way that the
lawirecognizes as proper and timely. No
man would fasten upon himself Il crime IL
he was innocent. The law does not recog-
ilizc confessions made by the influence Of
promises or threats. But il party with
out being influenced by threats or
promises, makes confession. it is re-
gardcd as conclusive proof, equal to direct
andpositivc testimony.
Were the prisoners statements confess
sions freely and voluntarily made by him?
me testlmony IS before yon and you are to
determine it,
As to the threats made by the prisoner.
If it is claimed that they were the acts of a
mailman. It is necessary for the prisoner to
SHOW by proof that lie was insane at the
Time or not in condition of mind to
know what he was saying. It is for the
Jury to take. these points into consdera-
tion, and decide whether or not the
prisoner is guilty in manner and form as
indicted.
The States second ground is that the
prisoner is proved guilty not only by his
but by the circumstances
proved in the case. If these circumstances
are corroborative of each other, and have
direct bearing upon the case, they may be
accepted and taken the same us direct and
conclusive testimony. Therefore, any
circumstances bearing directly upon the
Facts OF the case at issue can be considered.
otherwise some crimes could never be
proved and punished. The question for
the jury to consider is were the circum-
stances as to the prisoners statements and
his whereabouts, sufficient to satisfy YOU
that he was guilty of burning the barn?
AS TO the prisoners contention Of alibi,
Judge Cullen said That alibi. If properly
proved, so as TO satisfy the jury that the
party charged did not commit the crime,
ltisa good defence. But the proof must
be such as to satisfy the jury that the ac-
cused was not present when the offence
was committed.
The court also alluded to the value of
detective testimony, and said that its ad-
had been laid down BY the law
Of England las far back as l7s0) and of
his country. Many crimes are of such Il
character that without the aid oi detectives
ihe. criminals never would he found out
and punished
In conclusion Judge Cullen told the iurv
hat If they believed, beyond n reasonable
iuubt, the prisoner was guilty, to render i.
verdict accordingly. But IT, after taking
~ the testimony into consideration, they
reasonable doubt of the
prisoners guilt, 4 doubt growing out of
he testimony, then their verdict should
80 for the prisoner
1t was l0.25 O'Clock when the jury re-
ired.
READY TO TRY THE CiARKs.
Encouragement Biggs stated that in the
'asc OF Edward, Joseph and Mary Clark
md William j. Gibbons, indicted Jointly
or conspiracy to burn the du Pont barns,
10Th sides were ready, but both sides pre-
erred to have full jury panel to draw
rom and would therefore wait until the
etilrn of the Gibbons Jury.
Judge Cullen said the court thought that |
vhcl the jury returned the other Jury
night be drawn.
Subsequently Messrs. Harrington and
iilles counsel for the Clarlis and Gibbons,
'roposed to the attornoy-gcneral to 20 on |
WITH the trial. MIR. l,iggs declined, how
ver, prefcrrng to wait until the Gibbons |
ury returned, so that he could have the
vi panel to select the trial jury from.
While the jury remained out the pris-
'ner was apparently the least concerned
nan in the court room. He did not show
my anxiety. and looked around with a
omplacency that occasionally broke into
road smiles as he met the glances of some
among the audience. AT
ines he leaned forward and conversed
nth his sister, who sat Immediately in
ront of the box. His mother did not ap-
ear in court Friday morning.
TUE BENNETT WILL CASE SETTLED,
After the retirement of the Gibbons i,lry
jury was drawn in the Bennett will ease
his case was tried last week, but resulted
= q hung jury, one juryman holding out
gainst his II colleagues for q verdict
gainst the will. Mr.. Nields, counsel for
he last will of Mrs. Bennett, by which all
er property was left to Mr.. Susanna
.theridge, her neice, proved the will by
he testimony of Harry Emmons, who
he attestng witnesses. w. s, IIillcs, who
/ the first trial represented the will by
,hich the property was devised to Mr.. and
lrs. William NJ. Pyle and William j,
isher, interposeG no objection. The Jury,
Y direction of the court, then rendered d
erdiet that the paper writing proved by
lr. Nieds was the last will and testament
Hannah Bennett, deceased
VERDICT OF GUILTY.
Meanwhile the court waited and the Jury
,mained ont. At 1905 o'clock a commo-
on in the corridor announced thoir re-
lrr, and an instant later thev filed into
le court room and took their seats. They
ld been out just one hour and 40 minutes.
Jerk Biggs called the roll and each man
lswered to his name.
The return. Of the jury at this time con-
need everybody that the verdict was in
vor Of the State, and there was no sur
Use, therefore. when Foreman John
ockerman, in response to the clerks
rmal inquiries, answered in low, al
ost inaudible voice.
"Guilty."
HARDENED PRISONER,
The prisoner, William J.. Gibbons, was
1t in the least affected by the verdict.