The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-02-26

partial consideration of all the evidence
you can truthfulIy say that you have
an abiding conviction of the defend
ants guilt you have no reasonable
turn a verdict of guilty
After quoting from the statutes bear
ing on conspiracy Justice Pritchard said
that the statutory offense of conspiracy
under the laws of the United States is
not complete until an act is done by
some of the parties to carry into execu-
ton the fraud alleged to have been COM
mitted in the Indictment The cOmblna-
ton or crime is the ofrense, but the al
legged fact to effectuate it IS necessary to
make it indictable.
AS a general rule" he continued,
concerted action on the part of the in
dividuals to violate a law or commit
fraud is secret hence the rule which
permits the introduction Of evidence Of
separate individual acts tending to show
a common design in cases ike the one
which you are now called upon to con-
slider. The common design is the essence
Of the charge and to prove it, it is not
necessary to prove that the parties
actually came together and actually
agreed in terms to have that design
and to pursue it by common means
Therefore, If you find from the evidence
that the parties charged in the indict-
ment knew of the object to be accom-
pIished and all Intentionally partIci-
pated in the transaction in furtherance
of the common design and purpose to
defraud the United States, then you
may find that there was tacit under
standing and so far as the conspiracy
is concerned, that is sufficient to con-
stitute the offense. There need be no
specific agreement"
He said that such an offense rarely.
If ever, is proven by direct testimony.
Evidence in proof of conspiracy may be
and from the nature of the case gen
orally must be circumstantiaI
THE defendants" he said, have gone
on the witness stand and testified in
their own behalf. It, therefore. becomes
my duty to say to you that you ought
to scrutinize their testimony, in view Of
the fact that they are interested in the
outcome of this trial But in doing so,
I do not wish to be understood as say
ing that you should not believe the
testimony Of the defendants because of
the fact that they are interested, and If,
after considering their testimony and
the circumstances under which It was
given, you are of the opinion that they
have told the truth about the transac-
ton, it is as much your duty to give
credit to what they may have stated as
it is to believe any other witnesses who
may have testified during the progress
of this trial"
He instructed the jury that if they
were satisfied beyond a reasonable
doubt that Machen and the other de-
PENDANTS. or any two or more Of them.
cOnSD1red to sell me fastener 10 tue
government at q price in excess Of
that at which thew otherwise would
have sold the same and divided the
proceeds among themselves, they were
guilty as indicted. The jury. he said.
could find the defendants guilty as to
each count in the Indictment or acduit
them as to some and find them guilty
as to others, and a verdict of not
guilty could be found as TO one or
more o. them
But" he added, before you can re-
turn a verdict of guilty. you must find
/ that at least two of the defendants are
guilty of the conspiracy as charged IN
the indictment. that is to say. you can
not find one defendant guilty and re-
turn a verdict of not guilty as to all the
others He urged the jury not to be
Influenced by prejudice or be moved
I by sympathy.
You should give these defendants
a fair and impartial trial. he said
/ according 70 the evidence as testified