Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1891-12-24
court adjourned until 10 o'clock Friday

Judge Cullen announced that on Mon
gay morning the capital case of James
Carr, charged with the murder of Antonio
basso, will be commenced and that no
more of the barn-burning cases will be
taken up until the capital trial is disposed Of
Attorney general Biggs then resumed his
argument to the jury in the trial of the
Clarks and William J. Gibbons for con-
| spiracy to burn the old barn of the du Pont
Company. He argued that the date of the
conspiracy alleged in the indictment,
January 10th, 1911 WINS immateral. It
was enough for the jury to be satisfied that
the conspiracy existed prior to the time of
the finding of the indictment, November
10th last He said the questions for the
| jury to determine were: 1. Was there a
| conspiracy? 2. Were these defendants, or
any of them, concerned in that con-
spiracy?
These questions the encouragement
argued with great force and vigor. lie
analysed the testimony and drew from it
the inevitable conclusion thnt there was u
conspiracy and that the defendants were
the conspirators. And if there is one
person above all the others who can be
singled out as conceiving and inventing
| the plans to carry out the wicked purposes
| spoken of in that letter, that woman is the
one who sits here before you, Mary Clark
She is the worst woman, in my seven
'NhiS VI Sihnlhdl IlOscCutiOilt tldI tVtT
| came across"
Mrs. Clark never finched at this severe
excoriation. She gazed at the attorney
| general with look that seemed like a
mixture of hate, anger and contempt
Then she whispered a few words to her
husband, turned her head aside and
listened quietly to the remainder of the
argument.
Mr.. Biggs also particularly reviewed the
evidence against William J. Gibbons and
argued that il conclusively proved him to
be one of the conspirators.
Mrs. Clark retained her composire until
Nr. Biggs was concluding, when she wept
.opious.J.
THE CHARGE OF THE COURT.
Judge Cullen charged the jury. He said
conspiracy is combination of two or
more persons to do all Unlawful act In
order to sustain this indictment il is neces-
sary TO prove a conspiracy and 10 show
that the defendants unlawfully combined
together to burn the barn of the Messrs.
du Pont. The State must show this he
yond a reasonable doubt. In cases of this
character il is seldom that direct testimony
can be procured, and the law admits cir
cumsiantial evidence. The declarations
of the different conspirltors. after the CON
spiracy has been proved, can be admitted
us evidence against all of them. The letter
introduced by the State speaks for itself
The declarations of the parties have al
ready been admitted. Is this sufficient
TO convince the jury that the conspiracy
has been provenp
This is the question for the jury, and
then comes the question as to whether the
defendants are guilty or not. If the testi-
mony is sufficient to satisfy the jury, they
should undoubtedly render verdict Of
guilty.
None of the admissions ON the part of
the conspirators are not to be considered
as evidence against any of the parties who
We're not present at the time, unless the
jury are satisfied that all were concerned
in the conspiracy.
There is no principle of law that will
justify the contention of the defence that
where husband and wife are Jointly in
dicted the wife cannot be convicted be-
cause she is supposed TO be acting under
the orders of her husband. Husband and
wife, being one in law, could not form a
conspiracy, but If others Joined with them
they could he convicted OF the offence
As to Gibbons the court held that it
was matter for the jury to determine
from the evidence, whether or not he was
guilty of the conspiracy. If he was not in
the conspiracy at first, but came into it
afterwards, he is guilty. If the eyidenceis
not sufficient to satisfy the Jury, beyond
reasonable doubt that he is guilty, they
should convict him. They can convict
all, or acquit one and convict the rest.
If the jury are satisfied that these de-
PENDANTS entered into a conspiracy 10 burn
this barn, they should convict them. But
II they entertain reasonable doubt grow
ing out of the evidence, they should acquit
them, And this rule should apply toall
the defendants, or to any one of them.
II was fust IL o'clock when the jury re-
tired.
ALL FOUR GUILTY.
Twenty minutes later connection in
the corridor announced the return of the
jury. Everybody was surprised. 1t had
been surmised that the doubt as TO Glib
bons' connection with the conspiracy
would keep the jury deliberatiny for at
least an hour, and many expected YER
diet OF not guilty as far AS he was CON
ccrned, and guilty as to the Clarks.
But the jurys return after such short
elaboration convinced everybody present
that he verdict was guilty as to all four.
And so it was.
Amid stiffness unbroken save by the
tones Of the voices Clerk Biggs polled the
winding up with
How say you, Mr.. Foreman, do you
find Edward Clark, Mary Clark, Joseph
Clark and William J. Gibbons, the defend-
ants, guilty in manner and form US they
stand indicted, or not guilty ~
And Foreman Dennison answered, de-
liberately and impressively:
Guilty"
MRS. CLARK DEEPLY AFFECTED.
There was no doubt rs to the effect the
verdict had upon Mrs. Clark, although
there were skeptics as to the sincerity OF
her tears during the trial As her doom
was pronounced she leaned her head on
her husbands shoulder and wept conyul-
sively, sezng him by the left arm with
both her hands. Her emotion plainly left
her weak and helpless.
Edward Clark made no effort to comfort
his weeping wife. He stolidly gazed into
vacancy and gave no sign of his feelings.
Joseph Clark's face colored slightly, but |
he made no other sign.
William j. Gibbons sat calm, indifferent
and unmoved.
Mr.. Harrington gave notice of his intcn-
ton To move for Il new trial and to file |
reasons in support thereof. The prisoners
were then taken to the cells downstairs,
and subsequently to New Castle Jail.
HOW THE JURY STOOD.
The jurymen were then discharged until |
10 O'Clock, Monday morning. During their |
brief elaboration they took but one ballot, |
and that was unanimous for the conyic |
ton Of all four of the defendants. There
was not doubt i'll the minds of any mem |
her of the jury that the three Carks and |
Gibbons were guilty of conspiracy to
burn the old barn.
And having ascertained the state of each |
others feelings they returned and an |
nounced their verdict
AS 10 THE PUNISHMENT.
The punishment of the prisoners is en- |
tirely within the discretion of the court.
They can with the exception of the
woman, corporal punishment of females |
having long since been abandoned in this |
State) be given an hour in the pillory or
more if the court sees fit They can be SEN
tarcnl 70 I'm f..t.