Phoenix weekly herald. [volume] (Phoenix, Maricopa County, Ariz. Territory) 1896-1899, 1896-07-23

or at some time within three years prior
to the 18th day of January, 1896.
5. That the muniments of title to
the said Peralte Grant, certified copies
Of which have been offeEed in evidence
and are before you now, were at the
time of the alleged fling Of the alleged
petition by this defendants, spurious, fio-
titious and frauduleub; and that this
defendant then and there knew that the
originals from which said certified
copies were made and taken, were then
and there spurious, fictitious Dad fraud
ulent.
6. You are instructed that you must
keep constantly in your minds, thst the
offenss here charged is conspiracy, and
you are further instructed, as matter
of law, thassefle crime of conspiracy,
cannot be committed by one person act
ing alone, bu5 one or more other per-
sons must act in concert with him with.
intent 10 effscs common design; that
is to effect the object OF the conspiracy,
and common design, or purpose by
two or more persons, is the essence of
she chsrge of conspiracy, and this com
mon dssigne must be proved TO have
existed between this defendant, and
said Jose Miguel Noe, or some one Or
more persons, so your satisfaction TO
the exclusion of euyreasonebled doubt, in
order to warrant conviction of this
defendants, either by direct evidence
Or by the proof of such circumstances
as naturally tend to prove it, and suffi
Gent In themselves, to satisfy you of
| the existence Of such common design,
between this defendant, and the seid
Jose Miguel Noe, beyond any reason
able doubt.
| 7. The rnsre fact that two or more
persons came together or otherwise
agree to enter into conspiracy or com
| biu8tion to do some lawful act by un-
| lawful means, or some unlawful act by
lawful means is not sufficient to estab-
liah the crime of conspiracy but at least
one of the parties, 80 She com binasion
or conspiracy must do some overt act
| in furtherance of the common design,
that is al ao5 or thing to effect or ao-
complish the object or purpose of the
conspiracy, and when one of the parties
to conspiracy doea or performs an
| overt ecG, that overt Get then becomes
| in law she act OF all the parties to the
conspiracy. Tho overt act is the acb of
disclosing the common design of the
conspirgtors to accomplish the object of
| the conspiracy. Ard as I said 30 you
before in these instructions, the N $40
contemplation or intention to commit
crime, although sin in the light of
| heaven, is not an Rcs amenable to
humane laws. The mere speculative
| wantouress of licentious imagination,
however dangerous or even ssneuinary
| in it's obisct, can in no case amount to q
crime; but the moment that any overt
act is manifest The conspiracy becomes
complete and ell the parties to the con-
| spiracy becoms amsnebls so the laws as
conepirators, and the overt acts relate
| TO, and tend to show the intention of
the party OF parties performing overt
acts.
s. You are instructed, that the tss-
timony of co-conspirators is looked
upon with suspicion, and shat testimo-
ny of consprators is not sufficient
alone and unsupported by other facts
and circumstances coTroborated to war
rant conviction. Aud you are
further instructed that what is
meant by oircumstantial evidence
IN criminal cases, is the proof of
suca facts and circamstances connect
3Mi with or surrounding the commission
the crime charged, or tend to show
guilt or Innocence OF the accused
Outraged; aud if those facts are suffi-
ent to satisfy you of the guilt of the
endent, beyond all reasonable doubt,
Zen such evidence is sufficient TO
thorize the fading of verdicb OF
guilty.
9. While you are permitted to take the
indictment TO your jury room in this
case, you ara instructed, that the in
| dictmsnt is. nc part of the evidence in
I this csss. and you cannot consider it as
in evidene or in shy manner tending to
show eishsr the guilt or innocence of
this defendant.
10. You are instructed, that the law
presumss the defendant innocent in
this ones, and not guilty as charged in
the indictmsns, and the presumption
should continue end prev sill in your
minds until you are satisfied by the evil
denee, beyond all reasonable doubt, of
she guilt of tho defendants, and acting
on this presumption, you should fiud
him not guilty unless constrained 10
dud him guilty by the evidence, con
vincing you of such guilt beyond all
reasonable doubt and you are further
instructed, that thu presumption of
iuuooencs is not mere foRmto be disre-
gsrdad by you at pleasure, bnt it is fan
essential, subs tantial Of the Law of the
land. and bidding on you in this csse,
and it is your duty to give tbs defen-
dant in this case, the full benefit OF this |
presnmp ion, and 30 acquit him, unless |
you feel compelled to fad him guilty rs |
charged, by She Law of the land and the |
evidence IN this case before you, convins
cling you OF his guilt beyoud all reason
able doubt. But the rule which clothes |
every person charged with crime with |
the presum ption of innocence aud im-
7roor Tho