St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-11-28

not know now he JuStlDeS us Conduct
His object must have been so black that
he did not dare to bring 1t out in the
evidence. Isn't that important?
The great question that you must ask
yourself is, was this battle at Home
stead riot, or an unauthorized inva-
sion. If you answer that it was an Ill
vaSion without excuse that is the end OF
it, for the people never delegated away
their right to resist armed invasion. 1t
needs no mandate of the court, no
sheriff to hoist the flag. | don't
see how you can escape from
this position, that whatever was
done at Homestead was in resisting
armed invaders. | would like to have
gone into the authority and character
of the PinkertonS, but that is denied us.
All you can see is that Prick armed
fOrelgn-born men, foreign to your state,
Steered them Stealthiiv by night past
your city, and they fired upon the men,
women and children of Homestead.
The learned gentleman who tried to
carry you by storm neglected to state
these prelimlnaries before the gale
began. He tried to blow the gale him
self, and became the personification of
a rlotouS person in voice and gesture
before YOU. He neglected to say to you
that if Frick hadn't sent armed men to
Homestead there never would have
been riot. He winks at you and eX
poets you 20 infer that. Great God!
Did our fathers at Lexington infer that
they were oppressed?
The presumption is that the people
always act right, and you are bound by
it. Unless there is some proof here
that the people were wrong you are
hnnnd bu II Hntxr r,,t,oh If &c RI
presume that your people were right
rather than the armed Invaders. Since
they have left that to presumption, you
should follow your patriotic feelings.
Riot or Invasion.
Now, under the evidence, was it Il
riot OF INVASION? The right of the peo-
pie to the shore of the river can't be
denied. They were justified in resist
ing. Frick may have had some reason,
but the state has not brought it forward.
What Frick may have thought at the
time was reason that might not wash
before jury now. Men often do things
for ACKNOWLEDGEMENT that they are
ashamed of afterward, and are
afraid to bring out in court-reasons
that would convict them of the crime
that they are trying to saddle upon
OGnGIS, anu L1dG Is
| don't think it is necessary for me to
whip up your patriotic feelings. You
must determine whether this invasion
was unauthorized Or not. The people
should not only have shot the Pinker-
tons down Oh the shore; they should
have followed them on the boats, to
their hearthstones, before the altar, and
if it were possible to cross the line that
divides the living from the dead, they
should have passed over and shot them
on the burning bosom OF the Prince of
He'll
Suppose now you differ from me.
Suppose you say that it was not for
eign Invasion and the people hadn't a
right to resist. Then was this riot of
such a character as to hold the armed
men Oh the shore responsible for their
acts? Is the evidence such as to make
every armed man on the shore guilty
of murder? Now notice.. The people
on the shore had the same right of self
defense as a single individual. There
were 300 invaders from the slumS of
Chicago, Philadelphia and New York,
the
Thugs of the Cities.
They were armed with $50 Winches-
ter rifles, the worst death-deafing
weapon that the genius of the republic
has invented. sixteen bullets in each
one. The others had clubs and re-
volverS. They were in charge of cap
tainS and Sub-captainS men who had
bartered away their honor and judg-
ment. The formation Of their army and
the firing upon the unauthorized word
of an officer show the utter abandon.
ment of citizenship. These marauders
conducted an organized and outrageous
war in defiance of all law. Who OPP
posed them? The people. Were the
people at the gang plank the ones who
fired the shots at the boat further down
the river? Is there any evidence to
hold those at the landing responsible
for what others had done before2 If
there was a common design, the public
prosecutor would have shown it. This
would have proved whether Prick or the
people are the murdererS.
We.can't defend except what they put
in issue. The people were not there to
resist organized Watchmen. Ghe point
has not been put in evidence whether
the places of the men who built this
magnificent city should be taken by
wisely avoided by the prosecution. The
wy wiz was oiiOt VII thO pam OOsoEOo
to go on the boat to see who was Oh it.
This is the position of the two parties.
Detectives Roasted.
Next let US look at the character of
the witnesses. On the side OF the state
are Capt Cooper, Burt, Corners and
Capt. Rodgers, the man who hired his
boat to this unlawful enterprise. The
first three are detectives. What is de-
tective? lie is man who can't make
a living at the ordinary avocations of
life. He hasn't wit enough to earn his
bread by the sweat of his face. He has
a burning for notoriety, and prefers to
hunt his fellow man rather than work
for living like honest people. In the
days OF tyrantS detectives and Inform
ers were hired to lie and do dirty work.
We have heard of men torn from their
homes and thrown into prison by their
testimony. You have an antipathy to
these hyenas. In this country you can't
find enough PinkertonS to carry that
jury with their slop testimony.
This is state founded by Quaker
conscience, and it stands around that
state today like great iron band. Re-
member that both Cooper and Burt now
stand indicted for what they did at the
landing Remember how much they
stretched the truth to prevent your peo-
pie from stretching their necks. If they
were not opposed. | wouldn't believe
them anyhow. But they are opposed by
people who live here and whose char
acter is known. We can't impeach the
reputation of Cooper and Burt, for they
come from other states, and we don't
know them. If our witnesses were dis
reputable your district attorney would
soon show them up. These men testify
that the first shot came from the boats,
and was fired at the people on the bank.
Remember that crowd has a right to
do the same thing in self-defense as the
individual. Dynamite and oil could be
rained on this uninan-fearing and I'M
considerable crowd of Pinkertons.
The Right to Shoot.
Now for the defendant. Is there any
evidence to show that Critchlow coun-
tenaneed the resistance? Is it known
who shot Connors? You do know that
your own people were shot down and
killed We are working under the most
stilted economy. The moment you know
who fired the shot and that there was
no conspiracy among the people at the