The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-03-27
PATRICK IS GUILTY
LAWYER CONVICTED OF MURDERING
MILLIONAIRE w. VI. RICE.
Jury of Opinion He Conspired with
Valet Jones to Get Possession of
the Texans Seven Millions.
DEATH IN ELECTRIC CHAIR
TO BE PUNISHMENT IL HIGHER
COURTS DO NOT INTERFERE.
Patrick Unmoved when the Jury An
nounced Its Finding, but Os-
borne Flushed with Triumph.
RECORDER GOFF'S CHARGE
TESTIMONY REVIEWED AT LENGTH
AND SUMMED UP.
Prisoners Sisters HystericaI when
News of the Verdict Reached the
Corridors of the Courtroom.
Patrick Unmoved when the Jury An
nounced Its Finding, but Os-
borne Flushed with Triumph.
RECORDER G0FF'S CHARGE
TESTIMONY REVIEWED AT LENGTH
AND SUMMED UP.
Prisoners Sisters Hysterical When
News of the Verdict Reached the
Corridors of the Courtroom.

NEW YORK, March 26.-Albert T. Pat
rick. lawyer. was this evening convicted of
the muder. on Sept. %, 1900. of the aged
millionaire recluse, William Marsh Rice.
The penalty under the statute is death in
the electric chair.
A scant three hours of deliberatiOn at the
close of trial prolonged for nine weeks
and repIete with sensational interest suf-
feed 10 enable the jury TO reach their YER
dict. The issue of the trial establishes the
charge that Patrick with Mr.. Rice's valet,
Chares F. Jones. to oVtain possession of the
aged Texans estate. estimated at $7OO0.OOO.
and that Jones killed mis- employer by the
administration of chlOroform at the direct
instigation of Patrick.
At the close of Recorder Goff's charge,
which occupied the morning session of the
court the jurors retired This was at 80
D. m. At $50 they notified the officer in
charge that they were ready TO return TO
court. rather more than an hour of the in
tervening time having been devoted to
luncheon.
In anticipation of a scene of excitement
I'm the event of verdict of guilty the un-
usual step was taken of ordering all women
10 leave the courtroom. Among them were
the prisoners two sisters and Mrs Francis
with whom he boarded. With grave faces
the members of the jury filed into their
places and some minutes of painful tension
elapsed while messengers were endeavoring
20 Ind the counsel. who had departed, not
expecting verdict for many hours.
Calm as ever and with confidence SEEM
ingly mistaken. the prisoner was escorted
into the courtroom. He walked rapidly and
took his stand facing the jury, with head
erect and hands loosely clasped behind his
back
PATRICK UNMOVED.
At the word guilty" pronounced by
Foreman MacheH in a tone low but distinct
enough TO be heard throughout the court,
not the slightest Change passed over Pat
rick's face. and he remained standing in an
almost listless attitude while the customary
poll OF the jury was being taken. His aged
father. Captain Patrick. sitting near him
and straining TO catch the statement Of the
foreman. started for an instant as its i'm
po-t reached him. and then sat calmly
awaiting the further proceedings.
smile of triumph lit up the faSe of
Assistant District Attorney Osborne, who
FASTENED from the court Immediately after
Recorder Goff had. at the request Of the
prisoners counsel. fixed on a week from
Monday as the day on which TO pronounce
sentence.
The verdict was known almost immedi-
ately in the corridor, where the women
relatives and friends OF the prisoner were
waiting, and a scene OF excitement ensued.
Screaming Historically the prisoners eld-
est sister ran about the corridors. begging
10 be allowed 70 see her brother. Mrs.
Francis tainted. and recovering broke
from the attendants and rushed into the
court o)m. from which Patrick had Just
been removed. There she again swooned.
Both -Jmen were removed 70 an ante-room
and were sent home in a carriage.
Captain Patrick. after taking leave OF his
son. who was then led back 10 the Tombs
would only say: 1T is hard; we'll have TO
try again.
None of the jurors could be induced to
reveal how the verdict had been reached.
an agreement having been made to tell
nothing n motion will be made for a new
trial when the prisoner is arraigned for
sentence.
THE RECORDERS CHARGE.
In his charge TO the jury Recorder Gof
said the defendant was not obliged To prove
his innocence; IL was for the prosecution to
prove his guilt and he entitled TO the
benefit OF every reasonable doubt The
Jury he said. was TO Judge for itself of the
credibility Of any witness. The only thing
for them 20 decide was the guilt or inno-
cence of the defendant of the charge of
murder. they should not concern them
selves With any other charge made against
him.
The recorder instructed the jurors TO dis
regard all evidence stricken from the rec
a.
made an impression upon them. He ex-
plained the degrees Of homicide and said
premeditation must be shown to Justify
There are three main propositions i'm this
case" the recorder said. "and If they fail
OF satisfactory proof the whole fabric of
the prosecution fails. The propositions are:
First. did Charles r Jones. on Sept. % 100
with the intent TO kill. place a towel-cone
with a sponge saturated with chIOrofOrm
over the face OF William NJ. Rice: second.
william NJ he eff
of chlOroform and from no other cause.
third. did the defendant. with the intent 10
procure the death OF William NJ Rice coun-
form over his face.
IF you find" he continued. that Patrick
did counsel Jones. and that Jones did Kill
Mr.. Rice, the guilt Of the defendant is not
lessened because Patrick was not nresent
Neither shall YOU deem IL lessened if you
find that Jones was easily Induced 10 do the
murder. The TACT that Jones Is a self-cOn-
fessed murderer" the court said does moi
make him an Incompetent witness But the
evidence OF such an accOmplice should be
received with great caution The law saws
IL shall not be accepted unless IL is corrobo-
rated. This does not mean that there must
have been an eyewitness 10 the crime IL
means that either direct or circurnstantfaI
evidence pointing 10 the same end shall
convince you OF the truth OF the Testimony.
You must take into consideration Jones's
manner on the stand. his apparent ca apacitv
10 remember details, his admission that he
made previous statements that were nm
true and his apparent frankness in telling
OF his own part in a treacherOus murder
Then you VIII ask yourselves was ne act
uated by a motive TO sacrifice Patrick To
save himself III 80. why did he select Pat
FoPGED DOCUMENTS.
ssThe prosecution claims" the recorder
went on. Ito have traced to the possession
OF the defendant the general assignment
and other alleged forged documents. If
-, heffs,,a thar has haar rro,.oa -,