Evening journal., 1898-03-05
POINTS BY DEFENSE.
How the Judge Is Asked to
Charge Martin Jury,
NO PROOF SHOWN OF DEPUTIES GUILT
Counsel For Accused Also Argue That
the Evidence Does Not Convict Any
Particular Man Of killing Nike
CesIaIs, as Indictment Charged.

WILKESBARRE, Pa, March 5.-The
evidence IN the Lattimer case is now
all In. The concluding testimony was
that Of certain witnesses called by the
commonwealth Ia rebuttal. Il. T. Ry
der l. H. Strauss and c. *. Keck, who
met the sheriff a few minutes after he
reached this city from the scene Of the
shooting. said they saw no mark. dis
eoloration or bruises on the sherims
face.
Joseph Costello was then recalled by
the commonwealth for the purpose of
showing additional facts in regard to
threats Of violence made by Deputy A.
h. Hess against Costello, who was help
ing a wounded striker. Counsel for The
defense objected to this evidence, but
the objection was overruled by Judge
Woodward.
The commonwealth closed it's case
after hearing a few more witnesses in
rebuttal on unimportant points for
most of the testimony they hoped to
thus get before the jury was ruled out
by the court. Judge Woodward, before
adjournment said that owing to the
number OF ladies attending the trial he
had ordered the first two rows Of seats
and the extra jury boxes reserved for
them.
The defense submitted. among others
the following points for the considera-
tion Of the court in charging the jury:
There is no evidence in this case
which would warrant q finding that the
defendants were an unlawful assem-
blage. The question OF whether it was
necessary TO resort 10 the extreme means
l..f.. Il
perse them was one of judgment which
cannot be questioned, even though il
shall appear that the firing was not
necessary II the Judgment was honestly
formed and executed.
"If the jury find that the prisoners
had reason to believe that the strikers
were about to assault them and that
they were in danger of loss Of life or of
grlevous bodily harm. or OF being over
powered. then they had the right to
defend themselves by the use of force
sufficient to repel the assault.
IF any deputy wlllfully, knowingly
and maliclously continued firing after
the necessity for firing had ceased. and
did by such firing kill Mike Ceslak hC
may be found guilty under the indiet.
ment but TO convict any one the jury
doubt that some person did so fire ant
be able to Identify the person; that h,
did it willfully and maliciously, intend
ing t0 kill; that Mike Ceslak was killed
| hy such person.
"Aa the testimony does not disclose
the identity Of gny person who fired
In a. manner d7-"ribed. a conviction
Of any of the v-'scners would ret b,
vner~ ntcd. Pc re any one Of th'
! prisoners cnn be convicted the jury
must be>satisfed beyond a reasonabl,
| dol'ht that sa~le enc of them had spacia
ualioe toward the deceased or genera
malice .townrd the " hole body OF stril5
/ ers and intended unlawfully to xii
4 some one Of them without caring whicl
one; that such maliciously dlspose
person did in fact fire and kill Mix
| Ceslak.
There was no conspiracy to d
an unlawful act or to do a Lawful
act In an unlawful way Therefore tn
act of one cannot be imputed to tn
others Each one is to be held account
able only for what he himself did. TIL
evidence failing to Identify the perso
( who shot Mike Ceslak. there can be n
\ conviction under the indictment"
Judge Woodward took the points an
win pass upon them later.