Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-05-25
THE COURTS CHARGE
Justice Pritohard's Interpre-
tation of Law and Evidence.
r1y1Ar1n nAnn1nn nnTAT
NER- BARRETT TRIAL
NATURE OF THE ACCUSATION
AGAINST DEFENDANTS.
Most of Today Occupied With Argu-
ments Of Counsel-Case in
Hands Of Jury.

1t is expected that Gen. James N. Tyner
and Harrison ]. Barrett, who have been
on trial for nearly a month past in Crimi-
nal Court No. 1 on the charge of having
unlawfully conspired to commit an offenSe
against the United States-the offense of
misconduct on the part of Gen. Tyner In
his Office of assistant attorney general for
the Post Office Department-will know
their fate late this afternoon The time
from 10 o'clock this morning until nearly
3 O'Clock this afternoon was consumed by
the summing-up addresses of Attorney
Worthington for the defense and Major
Conrad for the government At the hour
last mentioned Justice Pritchard began his
charge to the jury. When he concludes
the jury will retire to consider verdict.
1t was rumored that the delivery of the
courts charge would be postponed until
tomorrow morning because one of the
jurors had arranged to be married this ar
ternoon or by reason OF business engage
ment of another of the twelve men VINO are
charged with the duty OF passing upon
the question of the guilt or innocence or
the accused. When asked about the mat
ter Justice Pritchard promptly dlspeneo
the rumor
The attendance in the court room today
was greater in numbers than on any pre-
ceding day of the trial. Gen. Tyner, Mr.
Barrett and the ladies of their party HsLeh-
ed with rapt attention to every word lhat
was spoken by counsel, but none OF them
gave the slightest indication of their feel
ings composure that was almost stoild De-
ing maintained.
In his charge to the jury Justice Pritch-
and explained the nature of the charge
against the defendants, stated that miseon-
duct in office is the willful doing of wrong
full act by an official, or the wlllful neglect
of an official to do an act which ought TO
have been done, and then quoted from the
Court
question
For Jury to Determine.
Continuing, Justice Pritchard said:
TT is for the jury to determine whether
the evidence which has been offered by the
government establishes the facts averred
In the Indictment beyond a reasonable
doubt. They are presumed to be innocent
of the charges contained in the lndict-
ments; and that presumption amounts 10
evidence introduced in their behalf, and re-
mains with them until you are sausfled by
evidence that convinces you beyond a rea-
sonable doubt as to their guilt. 1t Is in
cumbent upon the government to prove the
allegations contained in the indictment by
evidence sufficient to satisfy you as to their
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
The meaning of reasonable doubt was
made plain by the court, who then said:
You are the sole judges of all questions
of fact, and in this respect the court cam
not be of any aid to you. 1t is for you to
say as to the weight which you may give
to the evidence of any witness who may
have testified during the progress of this
trial; and in passing upon the question as
to the credibility of the various witnesses
who have testified you should weigh care
fully every fact and circumstance in con-
nection with the evidence which has been
submitted to you for your consideration
You have had an opportunity of observing
the conduetref the witnesses while on the
witness stand, as well as the interest which
hary bod in hn rra, 500
ton about which he may have testified,
and these are matters which should be con-
sidered by you in determining the question
as to the amount of weight that you are
to give to the evidence of any witness who
may have been introduced either by the
government or by the defense.
The Jurors were informed by the court
| that it was their duty to arrive at con-
| cluson in considering the facts and cir
| substances of the case, the same as they
| would come to a conclusion upon any other
| set of facts In life, and if after impair
| tial consideration of all the evidence they
| could candidly say that they were not salts
| fed of the defendants guilt, they would
| have a reasonable doubt; but If, after such
| impartial consideration of all the evidence,
| they could truthfully say that they had an
| abiding conviction of the defendants guilt,
| they would have no reasonable doubt and
| it would be their duty to return a verdict
| of guilty.
Conspiracy Defined.
| After giving the definition of conspir-
acy as laid down by the Supreme Court of
! the United States. as "a combination of
two or more persons by concerted action
to accomplish a criminal or unlawful pur-
pose" Justice Pritehard pointed cut that
in the case on trial the alleged conspiracy
to defraud the United States was not a
conspiracy to defraud the United States in
the sense that the government actually sus-
tanned a pecuniary loss.
After discussing the nature of the evil
dence, and saying that conspiracy Is rarely
If ever proved by direct testimony Justice
Prtchard concluded his charge as follows
The defendants have gone on the wit
witness stand and testified in their own be-
half. 1t therefore becomes my duty to say
to you that you are to scrutinize their tes-
timony, in view of the fact that they are
interested in the outcome of this trial; but
in doing so l do not wish to be understood
as saying 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 circum-
stances under which it was given. you are
of opinion that they have told the truth
about the matter, it is as much your duty
to give credit to what they may have stated
as II is to believe any other witness who
may have testified during the progress of
the trial.
Scope of Jury's Power.
''You may find the defendants guilty as to
each count charged in the Indictment. or
you may aequit them as to one count and
find them guilty as to the other, as the
case may be- or you may return a verdict
not guilty as to both counts.
You have listened patiently to the evil
dence in the case, as well as the argument
of counsel and I am sure that you are pre-
pared to render fair and impartial YER
diet
I'm considering this case you should not
be infiuenced~by prejudice on the one hand
or moved by sympathy on the other. 1t is
your duty to give these defendants a fair
and impartial trial. according to the evil
dence as testified to by witnesses and the
law given to you by the court.
You should try this case solely upon it's
merits, and without regard to what effect
your verdict may have upon the public
mind. You are the sole judges as to the
facts that have been presented for your
consideration, and upon you alone rests the
responsibility of the outcome of this trial;
and am sure that when you come to de-
eide this matter you will consider solely the
question as to whether the defendants are
guilty as charged in the Indictment"
Mr.. Worthington's Argument.
When court met this morning ATTORNEY
A. s. Worthington, senior counsel for the
defense. began his summing-up address