Evening star., 1901-12-11
Basis of Instruction to Jury in Bonine
Case.
ATTORNEY FhGGARF'S ARGUMENT
Opening Address on the Part of
Governments Counsel.
REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE

The summIng-up arguments of counsel to
the jury in the Bonine case were begun at
1:2O o'clock this afternoon, Immediately fol-
lowing a recess of Criminal Court No. 1.
The entire morning session Of the court,
from shortly after 10 o'clock until 1915
o'clock, was devoted to the consideration of
the prayers offered by the defense and the
government TO be included in the courts
charge to the jury to the law governing
the case.
Assistant United States Attorney Taggart
was the first to face the jury. The expecta-
tion then was that Attorney Fulton. for the
defendant, would follow late this afternoon.
Attorney Douglass, for the defense, and
United States Attorney Gould will deliver
their addresses tomorrow. To Star re-
porter Mr.. Douglass stated that he expects
to speak for about two hours. Mr.. Gould
says he will occupy about hour in sum-
ming up. Counsel are now sanguine that
the case will be submitted TO the jury in
time for a verdict to be reported by tomor-
row night.
The announcement that the addresses of
counsel would be in order had the effect of
materially increasing the attendance today.
AS usual. fully 30 per cent of the spectators
were of the weaker sex, and they paid the
closest possible attention to every word
spoken.
Mrs Bonine looked somewhat worn today.
tiouably told upon her strength. She was
nos visibly affected by the plain language
used by Mr.. Taggart in addressing the jury.
Her husband. her two sisters and her
brother were also the closest of listeners
Mrs. BOnine's younger boy, Chesleigh oc-
cCpied himself for some time in reading
from the typewriter report of the tesu-
mony given during the trial.
Rush for Seats.
Just prior to the opening of the session
this afternoon there was quite rush on
the part of the spectators to secure front
seats. \ feature of the afternoon was the
large number of members of the bar pres
ent to hear the addresses.
The only enlivening colloquy OF the day
occurred during the discussion of the pray
ers suggested by the government. Attorney
Douglass remarked:
Mr. Gould began with fondness for ex-
pert testimony and ends with nauseation
for it
IF Mr. Douglass repeats that remark
many times more retorted Mr.. Gould
'.he will very likely believe it himself in
the end
I'VE have a high opinion Of expert testI-
mCny." Attorney Douglass declared
mo wonder" commented the United
States attorney. dryly; 'its all you have"
You may change your mind on that
score" then declared Attorney Douglass.
although the effort to that end seems to
BE- a hopeless task
Consideration of Prayers.
Immediately after the opening of court
this morning the consideration of the pray
ers for instructions counsel desired the
court to give the jury was begun. The
prayers suggested by the defense were first
discussed. They were as follows:
l. The jury are instructed that in law
murder is committed when a person un-
lawfully, feloniously and with malice afore-
thought, either expressed or implied kills
human being in the peace of the United
States.
2. The jury instructed that by their
oaths and by law they are bound to base
their verdict upon the law and the evidence
adduCed in this case, and to the exclusion
of any preconceived opinion upon the case
inconsistent or In conflict with the law and
the evidence developed and adduced in
this trial.
3. The jury are instructed that before
they are at liberty TO find the defendant
guilty of murder on circumstantial evi-
dence alone such evidence adduced at the
trial must be inconsistent with every rea-
sOnable hypothesis of the defendants in
nOcence.
Presumption OF Innocence.
4 The jury are instructed that the de-
fendant Is presumed to be innocent until
proved guilty of the charge for which in
dicted beyond any reasonable doubt; and
before they can find defendant guilty Of
murder the government must prove to their
minds beyond all reasonable doubt that de-
fendant did. unlawfully, feloniously and
with malice afOrethought, either expressed
or implied. kill the deceased, James Sey-
mOur AyreS. while he was in the peace of
the United States.
D. In order to render a verdict of man
slaughter the jury must be satisfied from
the evidence, beyond all reasonable doubt
that defendant Intentionally shot and killed
deceased in sudden heat and passion and
upon sufficient legal provocation.
Intent of Defendant.
D. The jury are instructed that If they
should find from the evidence that defend
ant went to the room of the deceased on
the morning of May Is last. with no intent
to do him bodily harm or injury, and that
the deceased, while defendant was in his
room. as aforesaid, committed or attempted
10 commit an assault upon her. and that in
consequence OF said assault a struggle en-
sued between deceased and defendant and
that II, while defendant was engaged with
deceased in such struggle. in resisting said
assault or attempted assault, the deceased
was shot and killed, their verdict should
be not guilty.
I. That the jury are instructed that. I'M
der the law, the defendant may or NAV NOT
become witness in her own behalf at the
triai: but IL the defendant does NOT avail
herself OF that right she is standing on har
plain legal right in so doing and her cleo
tion not to testify is not to be construed as
cNHuehCe VI sunl or as furnishing anv
PROOF IN support OF the charge for which
sne Is on trial This rule of law prohibits
any comment upon the same, either in the
argument or the case or during the nroe
ress OF the trial; and IL anything that has
been said during the course of the trial
might be construed as Commenting rnon
her course OF conduct in that partic,lar n
Is the duty of the jury to wholly disreea rd
the same. oo'N
burden of Presenting Proof.
g. That the jury are instructed that IL WAS
not incumbent upon the defendant 10 intro
duce any evidence in her behalf. but under
the law the burden is upon the government
to establish the guilt of the defendant he
yond all reasonable doubt. But In the event
OF evidence being introduced by the defend
ant, tending to establish innocence this
iact In no sense shifts the burden of proof
nor does 1t relieve the government of the
pcsltiFe duty OF establishing affirmatiyeIv
ana upon the whole case the guilt Of The
defendant beyond anv reasonable Doubt
wnether in the opinion OF the Jury the evi.
oehce adduced by the defendant is conclu-
nr ,n4