St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-11-24
CRITCHLON CLEARED.
First of the Homestead Cases
Results in a Verdict Of
Aequittal.
He Was Not Released, How
ever, Being Held on An
other Charge.
District Attorney Burleigh
Closed the Case for the
Prosecution.
Judge Kennedy's Charge q
Long and Impartial
One.

PITrsBURG, Nov. 23.-The trial of
Sylvester CrltchoW, charged with mur-
der in connection with the Homestead
riot. was brought to a close this evening
by the Jury bringing in a verdict OF
acquIttal. Owing TO the hour at Whlcp
court convened there were not many
persons present when the jury filed IN.
The prisoner was not released, he haV-
Ing vet to answer the charge OF rlot.
When court convened today Attorney
Thomas NJ. Marshall delivered his ad-
dress for the defense. He was followed
bv District Attorney Burlelgh, who
closed the case for the prosecution.
During his speech he said:
"You must take the law as the court
will give it to you. The defense IS an
alibi-that he was not on the mill prop
erty that day. If this is true, why In
the name of common sense don't thev
stand on that line? If this is true, why
was all the time wasted in talking about
an armed invasion of the sacred SOIL;
why waste time to argue the rights OF
labor? If CritchlOw was not there that
day. why need he care in his defense to
show who fires the shots or anything
else? The fact that they went
Outside of the Alibi
and attempted to justify these murders
show that they have no faith IN their
plea of an alibi. If he was not there
That day, why need he care who com
menced the trouble, or who owned the
property? If he was not there he clearly
is not guilty, and were this plea OF an
alibi honest, they would stand on lt,and
it alone.
II say Critchlow was in the mill yard
when Connor was shot. Six dlSlnter-
ested Witnesses swear the defendant
was in the mill yard that day with
gun. If it was Harrison CritchloW who
was in the mill yard that day aud who
the defense say was mistaken Tor the
defendant, why did not they produce
him? Why did not they put him on
the stand and let him swear he was the
man who was mistaken for the de-
fendant? Had they done this we
could not gotten over it. 1t would have
ended our case"
Mr.. Burlegh devoted over half an
hour to The question OF alibi and
claimed the witnesses for the defense
who attempted to prove the aibi had
not told the truth. At The close of the
district attorneys address Mr. Erwin
asked that the defense be allowed an
exception to the truthfulness OF the fol-
loving: THAT the Pinkertons went
under sheriff or officer: that LOveJOy
Or Potter had
Amy Right to Enter
upon said property; that the peO-
pie opposing the landing were ill-ad-
Vised; tnat they expected TO meet
the sheriff by appointment, ana we ask
the court to so charge"
Judge Kennedy began his charge to
the jury at 2:35.
In answer to thereQuest of the coun-
sci for the defense just as we closed
before recess, say you must not take
the statements of counsel unless these
statements be warranted by the evil
dence."
The court then defined murder and its
various degrees and what constituted
each of the grades. Referring to riot,
the judge said:
"lhe rot and tumultuouS aSsemblage
of three or ulOre persons for an unlaW-
full purpose and all persons who are
present and not attempting to suppress
il, is prima faCie participant and
principal, and any one VINO joins the
rioters after they are assembled are
equally guilty. There are 40 aiders or
abettors; all are principals and ali
guilty of the acts Of such riots. When
killing is done III pursuance Of COM
mon design, all are guilty Of the murder.
If there is evidence that the rioters had
determined to take life in order to carry
out their object and purpose, all are
guilty of murder in
The First Degree.
''If the jury is satisfied the defendant
took part III the riot of July 6 which re-
suited in the death of i. j. O'COnnOr,
and that it was the common intent of
such rioters to resist the landing OF
these men Oh the barges to the extent OF
taking life, then he is guilty of murder
in the first degree, as are all who took
part in such riot. If you believe there
was no malice, that the killing was done
in the heat of combat, then you can
convict him of manSlaughter. If you
believe these rioters met for common
purpose TO resist this landing, but not TO
the extent Of taking life, then verdict
of murder in the second degree could
be rendered"
Ihe court then read the definition of
Rlibi and the close scrutiny which
should be given to it.
"The defendant is entitled to all rea-
BOnable doubt-a reasonable fair doubt
arising out of the evidence submitted
not from anything outside the case"
He closed at 1926 and the jury retired.
At D. III. they brought in a verdict of
Rcquittal. Mr.. Critchlow, however, was
held on the charge of riot. He will
probably be granted bail tomorrow
Erwin Congratulated.
The jury's decision was received
without surprise. Ever since the wit
nesseS for the defense sWOre to an alibi
for Critcnlow. the public has expected
his acquitCal and there are not many who
express diSapprOVal of it. Indeed, in
Pittsburg more comment is heard on
the mastery management of the de-
fendant's case by his attorneys than on
the verdict itself.
w. w. Erwin, of st. Paul, especially,
has received many congratulations on
his splendid oratorical effort yesterday
in behalf, not only of Critchlow, but Of
all the Homestead men now under ar
rest. His opening address was made
the subject of great deal Of quiet rid
icule Dv the members of the bar. on
account of his wild West'spread eagle
style of oratory. He redeemed himself,
however, in his closing address to the
jury last evening, which was a polished
and most formidable effort. The i'm
partial rulings of Judge Kennedy are
also the subject of much favorable com
ment.
There are 1S0 Homestead strikers who
are indicted for the crimes of murder,
treason, aggravated riot and conspiracy,
to be tried at the present and December
terms of court. Little more than two