The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1898-03-05

The Evidence Shows That the Prison
ers Were Lawfully Aiding the sher
lift. and 1t Has = OF Been shown Tha
Ceslak Was Killed After the Neces
sity For Firing Ceased.
Willtesbarre, March 5.-The defens
in the case of Sheriff Martin and hi
deputies closed finally yesterday afte
recalling some of the commonwealth
witnesses TO ascertain whether, at tn
preliminary hearing last September
they testified that at the meeting O
the strikers at Harwood on the nigh
before the shooting they all agreed no
to carry clubs or weapons of any kind
Andrew Sivar, No. l, did not thinl
he said anything about this feature
Andrew Sivar. No. 2, said he had sworr
| that they agreed not to carry clubs
| John Laughran did not remember any.
| thing he said last September anG
| neither did Frank Kupa.
| Ario Pardee Plat. the last witness
| was asked if Chief of the Coal and Iron
Police Hampton was at Lattimer at
| the time of the shooting He said he
was not. This was for the purpose of
| contradicting some Of the common
wealth's witnesses.
The commonwealth then introduced
evidence in rebuttal. T. F. Ryder, l. III.
Strauss and c. e. Keck, who met the
sheriff few mmnuties after he
reached this city from the scene of the
shooting, said they saw no mark, dis
coloration or bruise on the sheriff's face
Joseph Costello was recalled for the
purpose of showing additional facts in
regard to threats of violence made by
Deputy A. E. Hess against Costello,
Counsel for the defense objected to this
evidence, but the objection was over
ruled by Judge Woodward.
Il was helping wounded striker"
said the witness, when Hess came UP.
l said: IT'S a d. shame to treat these
poor fellows this way Shut up cried
Hess, or I'll treat you the same way
and he leveled his gun at me-"
Did you write me letter during
this trial?" asked Judge Woodward.
mo, sir" replied the witness.
The commonwealth closed it's case at
o'clock yesterday afternoon, after
hearing a few witnesses in rebuttal on
unlmportant points, for most of the
testimony they hoped to thus get be-
fore the jury was ruled out by the
court.
The defense submitted the following
points for the consideration of the
court in his charge to the jury:
THE sheriff is the chief conservator
of the public peace within his baili-
-ifl. i,. Tioin a., 80
performance of this duty. For this pur-
pose he may command the power of
the county, and every male over the
age of Is years is bound to obey this
call under pain of fine and imprison-
ment.
IF it is made to appear to him that
tumu!t OF riot is threatened he may
make the call. In the determination
of this fact he exercises a judicial
power, and his judgment canot be ex-
amined into and reviewed in Interior
proceedings against him, in the light
OF subsequent events.
evidence that each one, or par
ticular ones, acted Illegally or ma
liciuusly is not proof of u conspiracy.
There is no evidence in this case
which would warrant a finding that
the defendants were an unlawful as
semblage.
THE question of whether 1t was
necessary to resort to the extreme
means of firing on the strikers in order
to dispense them was one of Judgment,
which cannot be questioned, even
though it shall appear that the firing
was not necessary, II the judgment
was honestly formed and executed
IF any deputy wilfully, knowingly
and maliciOusly continued firing after
the necessity for firing had ceased and
did by such firing kill Mike Ceslak, he
may be found guilty under the in
dictment, but to convict any one the
jury must be satisfied beyond a reason
able doubt that some person did so |
fire. and be able to identify the person. |
that he did 1t wilfully and maliciously,
to kill; that Mike Ceslak was
killed by such person.
'As the testimony does not dis
close the identity of any person who |
fired in the manner described, con- |
viction of any of the prisoners would
not be warranted.
Before any one of the prisoners can
be convicted, the jury must be salts
fled beyond a reasonable doubt that
some one of them had special malice
toward the deceased, or general malice
toward the whole body of strikers, and
Intended unlawfully to kill some one of
hem, without caring which one.
1T appears from the evidence, sub
without dispute, that the
prisoners were lawfully aiding the