The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1893-11-17

might not think the testimony presented in the case sui
fcent to convict Neebe but that in their province
to pass upon it.
Now, if the statement OF Messrs Harrison and Win
ston is true then should not have allowed Neebs
to be sent to the penitentiary and if assume
that both Mr. Harrison and Mr. Winston are mistaken
and that Mr. Grnnell simply used the language he now
says he used then the must have seemed very weak
to him. IT. with jury pref udiced to start WITH Judge
pressing for conviction and amid the almost irresistible
fury with which the trial conducted, he still was
afraid the jury might not think the testimony the
case was sufficient to convict Neebe matter what he
may now protest about it,
When the motion to dismiss the case as to Neebe
was made defendants counsel asked that the Jury
might be ermitted to retire while the motion being
argued but the refused to permit this and kent
the present where could hear all that the court
had to say then when the argument the motion was
begun by defendants counsel the court did wait to
near from the attorneys for the state but pro-
to argue the points itself with the attorneys for
DEFENDANTS that while the attorneys for the state
made no argument the motion, twenty five pages of
1ne record are filled with the cOoquy sparing that
place between the court and the counsel the de-
iendants the court in the presence of the Jury making
lnslnuatons as to what inference might be drawn by
the Jury from the fact that Neebe little stock in
paper called the Arbeter Zetung and had been seen
there although be took part in the management
I'll after the Haymarket troubles it appearing that the
aroeter zeltung had published very seditous
tcles with which. however, Neebe had nothing to do
Finally one OF the counsel for the DEFENDANTS said II
expected that the of the state might SAY
something but your honor them that trouble
you will excuse me if reply briefly to the suggestions
you nave made" Some other remarks made by
ne courI seriously affecting the whole case and preu
dicla to the deendans and then referring Neebe the
court said:
whether he had anything to do with the dissent
natlon OF ADVICE to commit murder is think debata-
BILE question which the jury ought to pass on Finally
the motion was overruled. Now with all of the eager
ness shown by the to convict Neebe it must have
regarded the evidence against him very weak other
wise 1T would not have made this admission for it
was oeDdtaoe question whether the evidence tended
liz. Co.
rom Deng conc usve upon the question to whether
he was actually guilty this being So the verdict should
nave been allowed to stand because the law equres
that man shall be proven to be guilty beyond rea
sonabe doubt before he be convicted of criminal
ohense ! have examined all of the evidence against
Neebe with care and it utterly fails prove even the
snaoow OF case against him. Some of the other de-
PENDANTS were guilty of using sedtous language, but
even this cannot be said of Neebe
PREJUDICE OR SUBSERVIENCY OFJIJDGE
1t further charged with much bitterness by those
VINO speak or the prisoners that the record of case
SHOWS that the Judge conducted the trial with malicious
erocty and forced eight to be tried together that
In crOssexamlnng the states witnesses he confined
counsel for the defense to specific points touched on
ny 1ne "nhe IN the cross examination OF the de-
enda'ts w1tness he permitted the states ATTORNEY to
|go into all manner of subjects entirely foreign to the
matters on which the witnesses were examined in chief
also that every ruling throughout the long trial on any
contested point was in favor of the state and further
that page after page of the record contains Dsnuating
remarks o. the !dge made in the hearing of the Jury
and with the evident intent of bringing the iury to hs
way OF th'nking that these speeches. coming from the
court, were much more damaging than an7 speeches
from the states attorney could possibly have been
that the states attorney often took his cue from the
Judges remarks; that the Judges magazine article re
Gently published, although written nea ly six wars af
ter the trial is yet full of nom; that pretending 20
SIMPLY review the case he had drag into his article
letter written by an excited woman to newspaper after
the trial was over and which therefore had nothing
Whatever TO 90 with the was put into the ar.
tcles SIMPLY to create prejudice against the woman
as we'll as against the dead and the living and that
not content with this be in the same article makes an
attack of the lawyers for the defense
noJ 1or done at the trial but because more
IMAM year ter the trial when some of the defendants
had been hung he ventured to express few kind if er
roneous sentiments the graves of his dead clients
whom he at least believed to be innocent It urged
mat such ferocty or subservency without parallel
IN all nstory that Jeries in ENGLAND contented
himself with hanging his Victims and did not ston to
Derate them after they were dead
1nese charges are OF personal character and while
tney seem to be by the record of the and
the papers b+ore and tend to show that the rial
was not fair do not to discuss this feature o tho
case any farther, because it is necessary am con-
vnced that is clearly duty in this case for
the reasons already given, therefore, grant an AL
solnte pardon to Samuel Fielden Oscar Neeha and
Michael Schwab this Goth day of June 1898.
JOHN P. ALTGELD
Governor OF Illinois
For the GREAT WEST:
Tho Nov,