Arizona republican., 1904-03-27
The Senator's Case in the
 Hands of the Jury
COURTS INSTRUCTIONS
The Greater Influence of a U. 5. Sen- ator One of the Things to Be Con- sidered-A Question of Jurisdiction Is Left to the Jury.

St. Louis, March 26.-The ease 1r United States Senator J. R. Burton as Kansas. who has been on trial iu th- United States court here since Tu-s- day on a charge of having Illegally accepted fees from the RiaIt5 Gain x Securities company of St Louis. was given tc the jury tonight. Iufs- Elmer B. Adams immediately drtlls,-f an indefinite recess and auuouut.-I that the court would be i1 session Co., twenty -four hours. The entire day had been occupied with arguments ou hutl sides
 Following the close ' U-nit-I Stata- Attorney Dyer's arguments th.- ,.u-. delivered ifs charge to the jury Judr Adams referred to the impOrtIu,-- s.l the case owing to the fact that the d,.- fendant was d United States s.ultar and that it involved laws teatiu. . secure the public welfare. Tn s-,- ton of the statutes under which tE. !. indictment against Burton Was return ed was read by the court JuJ-- Adams commented upon th- s-,tI,n. pointing out to the jury the iufu-l.- Of a senator Cf the United SIatse. which is necessarily eNerted b- hs presence in an executive departmra. of the government and he explained in detail the functions Of the p0stofIi,- department.
 In reference to the counts in Che indictment. Judge Adams said that the first five counts relate practically to the same charg=- The first col--. alleges, declared the court thlt ol | March 26, 1903. Senator Burton. who was at that time a senator or tke United States, accepted $500 from th- Rialto company for his services Ten dered in favor of that concern before the department in a matter iu which the government was directly interesle I The question, explained the court. uus whether the postmaster general sras warranted in issuing a fraud order against the Rialto company.
 If you should fni that the cvl- dence in this case, " said Judge AL- ans, "substantiates the government 's l contention, then you will return a ! verdict of guilty; otherwise you win acquit the defendant. The second count is practically the same. excep- that it is alleged that th,- governmeu- was interested in gthe matter AS th- third count makes identicIliy the sane 1 allegations. you need not consider thlt ! Cne"
 The fourth and fifth counts had be "a quashcd.
 Judge Adams then explained th. sixth count in detail. in which it .s alleged that Burton accepted a ghetk for $500 from the RialtO Grain sS Se- curities company or its officers for his influence in a matter il which th government was directly CT indir,,. tIy , interested
 | He called attention to the point rIls- { ed by the defense during the trial. Iu ' which it was asserted that. as ths. check was paid in Washington. D. e. Burton received the money at that place and consequently the St. Louis court did not have jurisdiction. Juie- Adams said that point was a matter for the consideration of the tury. and 1 that they should return a verdict in i accordance with their understuudius | of the question. The court said that the seventh, eighth and ninth counts were the same. with the exception or the dates upon which. it Is alleged. Burton received checks
 ] Counsel for the defense then an rounced to the court their objections co the instructions. Judge Adams saiI that he would allow any eNc1pti ur- and asked that they be submitted in l writing.