St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-11-28
talk OF TALL PINE. y
Advocate Erwin, ST. Paul's
Noted Legal Giant, Scores
a Triumph.
His Plea to the Jury for Syl-
vester Critchlow a Mas
terly Effort.
Plaudits Of the Bar and the
Public Bestowed on the
Westernep.
Suspicion That an Earlier
Modest Attempt Had a
Deep Design.

William W. Erwin, MInnesota's ''Tall
Pine" who was at first fuftlyely
"guyed' by the lawyers and newspaper
men of the Smoky city, is at present the
subject of admiring comment by all
who heard his plea before the jury In
| behalf of Sylvester CritchlOw, who was
promptly acquitted of the crime OF muir
der. In it's account Of the speech and
the scene in the court room the PIttS-
| burg Dispatch said in scare headlines:
"a Great Speech for CritchloW;" III
win, the st. Paul Lawyer, RedeemS
Himself and Surprises the Natives"
The Dispatch then continues: The
sensation in the CritchlOW. murder case
yesterday was the eloquent speech OF
w. w. Erwin TO the jury in behalf OF
the prisoner. 1t was surprise to every
body except those who knew him, and
they were few in PIttsburg. The st.
Paul advocate learned his business some
years ago in the trial OF the Chicago
anarchists, and he no doubt gained
considerable experience in his frequent
wrestling matches with Ignatlus Don
nelly for the leadership of the Peoples
party in the Northwest.
The address of the St Paul lawyer
was a revelation and produced Il pro-
found sensation. He made most
| adroit and mastery argument. His
| command of English is remarkable, and
| his wit and sarcasm alike were Keen
| and scathing. He dealt the opposing
counsel several stiff body blows that
j old
| Marshall leaned back in his chair spell
bound, and Judge Kennedy, who was
writing when the attorney commenced,
| soon stopped and became an attentive
| listener. The speech was the principal
subject discussed on the streets last
evening.
The part of the court room reserved
| for the audience was damned, but as the
| fame of the speaker spread through the
building the people crowded in around
the lawyers and judges stand. The tip
slaves became so Interested that at
| times when there was an attempt at ap-
| pIause they forgot to call order. The
| speech was so far superior to his open
ing address made to the jury the day be-
| fore that everybody was surprised, and
the impression was formed that it was
| done by design.
L
| livered in the court house," remarked
Thomas NJ. Marshall at its conclusion.
81 want to retire from the bar now, for
| have been snuffed out"
Elk. Senator Lee said Mr.. Erwin was
very adroit, and master Of all the ora
torical arts. Maj. MontOoth, w. j.
Bremen and John f. Cox were greatly
tickled. sit was great speech" said
the major.
At times during the address Mr..
Erwin waved his long arm toward Mr..
Robb as he paid his respects to the local
criminal lawyer. He had a modest way
with the jury. and took them into his
confidence. Following is curtailed
synopsis of Mr.. Erwin's effort:
A Quiet Opening.
Lawyers consider the trial of cases as
great battles. Instead of treating them
with calm adjudication they often use
the arts permitted by the latitude of the
courts to aequit or convict, and so you
have Just witnessed an attempt to carry
your cOnscienceS by storm. L don't
think the address has had much effect.
In the quiet of the jury room you won't
be swayed by plausible eloquence. You
must try the case according to the law
and the facts. If the true causes that
before you, except such as rise from
presumption, | hold it extremely un-
fortunate for the republic, this state
and city. When the news of the Home
stead riot was flashed all over the world,
after the applause of enthusiastic adj
miration had passed away, the world
paused for the judicial inquiry, and the
world today waits at the other end of
the wires to see how it has been done.
You are now put into
Narrow Place.
ironbound by the testimony. You can
presume nothing except what is legal
and permissible III courts of justice.
We of the defense are not responsible
! for this contraction. A man i'll these
courts is only permitted to defend him
| self against the testimony adduced.
That rule is so strong that if evidence
were put IN to show that one of you
| fired the fatal shot, the courts would not
permit you to prove that somebody else
| did it. Courts haven't time to try any
thing except the issues presented. We
would like to open the case wider, but
we are not permitted.
am not here to befog your minds, to
storm down your consclences. l am
| here to help you honestly. | would not
| one~Would force me into that jury
box TO try man for his life. There
must not be a shadow of a doubt
| in your minds that CritchlOW is
guilty. Some one has said that the law
| stands around man like great pro-
| tecting shield of innocence, and the
prosecution must pile up its evidence on
| it until its very weight bends him back
ward 10 the ground. 1t is better for the
country that ninety-nine guilty persons
should go free than that one innocent
man should be punished. When your
| intuitiOnS are so aroused that you
DO Not Feel the Guilt
| there is reasonable doubt. So sacred is
| life and liberty that we require of him
who accuses that the evidence shall be
such that every juror feels he is right
when he gives his opinion.
Last July there rang out on the shores
| of Homestead the sOund of a battle. You
| can't presume that there was discon-
| tent or strike in the town. That is
not evidence. Here we were limited by
! the prosecution. We were not permitted
to show that this man Prick purchased
arms and sent a foreign force to invade
| the town. 1t was read from the books
! this morning that every man who had a
| gun that day was responsible. / point
you TO the constitution of your state
| and country to show that the people al
ways have the right to bear arms in self
defense.
You know there were crowds of men,
women and children On the shore of the
river. but you don't know it from the
evidence. That you can only infer.
You know that the men i'll the boats did
not live in the state. You do not know,
and there is not particle of evidence
to show, that they were watchmen. In
narrowing the scope of the Investigation
the prosecution forgot to bring out the
commonest things necessary for your
| information. l challenge you to show
me in the evidence where it appears
that the PinkertOns were guardians.
Nothing was said about the bank
| around Homestead or whose shore it
was, but you do know that on the bank
| of that river were gathered the common
people. You know, too, that the cloven
foot that provoked this Instruction was
| carefully hidden from Won The tacti