The evening herald. [volume] (Shenandoah, Pa.) 1891-1966, 1898-03-05

THEDEFENSE
In the Trial For the Shooting Of Strik-
erS at Lattime~.
WHY THEY DEMAND ACQUITTAL !!
The Evidence Shows That the Prisoners
Were Lawfully Aiding the Sheriff,
And it Has Not Been Shown That
Ceslak was Killed After
the Necessity For Pir-
ing Ceased

deputies closed finally Yesterday after
recalling some of the commemorative
witnesses to ascertain whether, at the
preliminary hearing last September.
they testified that at the meeting of
the strikers at Harwood on the night
before the shooting they all agreed not
to carry clubs or weapons of any kind
Andrew Sivar, No. /, did not think
he said anything about this feature.
Andrew Sivar, No. 2, said he had sworn
that they agreed not to carry clubs.
John Laughran did not remember any
thing he said last September and
neither did Frank Kupa.
Ario Pardee Platt, 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 r. p. Ryder l. H.
Strauss and G. e. 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
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,
who was helping a wounded striker.
Counsel for the defense objected to this
evidence, but the objection was over
ruled by Judge Woodward.
q was helping a wounded striker" q"
said the witness, 'when Hess came up.
1 said: It's a d shame to treat these
4gFn.
Hess, or I'll treat you the same way
and he leveled his gun at me-"
Did you write me a letter during
this trial?" asked Judge Woodward.
"No, sir" replied the witness.
The commonwealth closed its case at
o'clock yesterday afternoon, after
hearing a few witnesses in rebuttal on
unimportant 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-
wick, and is bound ex-ohicio to the
performance of this duty. For this pur-
pose he may command the power of
the county, and every male over the
age of 10 years is bound to obey this
call under pain of fine and imprison-
ment.
"If it is made to appear to him that
tumult or riot is threatened he may
make the call. In the determination
| Of this fact he exercises a judicial
| power, and his judgment cauot be ex-
| amned 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
! liciously Is not proof of a conspiracy.
There is no evidence in this case
which would warrant a finding that
the defendants We're an unlawful as
semblage.
"The question of whether it was
necessary to resort to the extreme
means of firing on the strikers in order
! to disperse them was one of judgment,
which cannot be questioned, even
! though it shall appear that the firing
was not necessary, if 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 nv such firing kill Mike Ceslalx. he
NAV he found guilty under the in
dictment but to convict anv one tn,
iurv must be satisfied beyond a reason.
able doubt that some person did 8,
fire. and be able to identifv the parson
that ne did il wiIfullv and maliciousIv
intending to XIII: that Mike CesIalx wa,
killed by such person.
"As the testimony does not dis