Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-06-21
EXPECT VERDICT SATURDAY
Opening Argument by United States
Attorney Baker.
MIR. THURsroN FOR DEFENSE
First Hour Of Session Today Occupied
With Consideration of Prayers
for Instructions.

The last stage of the trial of George d.
Green and Willard d. Doremus In Criminal
Court No !, on charges OF bribery and
conspiracy growing out OF the Post once
Department Irregularities was entered upon
today. The government, about IL o'clock.
began the final presentation of the case TO
the Jury. The opening argument was made
by United States Attorney Baker. who re-
viewed the evidence and contended that the
prosecution had presented such direct and
circumstantial proof against the defendants
that the jury would be compelled to render
a verdict of guilty against both Green and
Doremus.
The attorney was followed by former Sem
ator John NJ. Thurston. counsel for Dore-
mus. Attorney Thurston. who began has
address late this afternoon, was speaking
when this report closed.
Attorney John B. Stanchfield Will open
the argument in behalf of Mr.. Green.
The closing presentation for the defense
will be made by Attorney A. s. Worthing-
ton. and Major Holmes Conrad will close
the jury Saturday morning unless some-
thing occurs to prevent.
The first hour of the session today was
taNen up with the consideration of prayers
for instructions TO the jury.
Arguments prayers for instructions
to the jury were concluded this morning q
rev minutes DefOre IL o CLOCK. JUSTICE
Gould then explained that five hours would
be allowed each side for the final pre-
sentation OF the case by counsel The
court also stated that the charge would be
made to the jury Saturday morning.
Justice Gould granted sixteen prayers out
OF the seventeen originally offered by the
government, but several of those granted
were materially modified. Objection by
counsel for the defense had been made
to the fifth prayer the ground that
It affected the constitutional rights OF the
defendant Green. but the court granted II,
as amended stating that the jury would
be instructed that II should not be taken
as bearing upon the failure of Green to tes-
tify in his own behalf or his failure to pro-
duce documents connected with what his
own testimony would have been.
The argument this morning was COM
menced over the fifth instruction. Justice
Gould having indicated his acceptance OF
the first four Yesterday, as stated In The
Star.
Text of Fifth Prayer.
The fifth PRAYER 10 al follows:
1.-The jury is instructed matter OF law
that If it find that the United States has
produced evidence tending to establish the
guilt OF the defendants. or either of them.
under both or either of the indictments, and
should further find that the Defendants or
either OF them. have failed to produce
witness other than themselves available to
them whose testimony might explain the
States. that the defendants. or either Of
them, have failed to produce documents,
checks or papers or other evidence In their
possession or control which might tend TO
explain such evidence offered by the United
States aforesaid. the jury might infer as
matter of fact that the Withholding of such
documents or other evidence by the defend
ants is due to the evidence being unfavof-
able to them. and may infer IL the defend
ants or either of them. fail to produce Slch
evidence that such evidence would not re-
but but would sustain the charges IN tho
indictments and initiate against the de-
fendants"
The sixth instruction is to the effect that
If the jury find from the evidence that
either or both of the defendants have de-
stroyed, or caused or authorized the de-
struction of any evidence, or that
either or both of the defendants have
fabricated or caused or authorized the fab
rication of any evidence, such destruction
or fabrication of evidence is a circumstance
which may be taken into consideration by
the jury in determining the guilt or inno-
cence OF the defendants.
Substance of Seventh Prayer.
The seventh instruction sets forth that IL
is not necessary that the jury. in order to
return a verdict OF guilty shall believe that
every fact or circumstance in evidence has
been proven beyond reasonable doubt, but
that 1t is sufficient IL the jury shall believe
from all the evidence in the case that every
allegation in the indictments, or any of the
counts thereof. according TO its tenor. has
been proven beyond reasonable doubt:
The eighth prayer was Withdrawn. Ihe
ninth is to the effect that If the jury shall
find from the evidence that the defendants
Green and Doremus, or either of them,
entered into an agreement with Beavers
while the latter was an officer OF the United
States by which alleged agreement Green
and Doremus, or either of them. promised
to pay Beavers the sum OF s25 Tor each
canceiing machine purchased by the gov
panf frar 10 DOremlIs Machine COM
peny, the jury is instructed that as mat
ter of law such alleged agreement eonsti-
tuted fraud upon the United states ana
that such fraud was measured, not only by
the sums OF money which Beavers should
receive under any such agreement, but also
by the loss of the services OF Its officer.
beavers which the government thus sus-
tanned
The tenth instruction deals with tho
weight to be given the evidence of the de-
fendant Doremus. 1t Is stated that the
Jury should consider the personal interest
which he may have in the result Of the
trial
Seven for the Government.
The court granted seven instructions for
the government with reference to the brfb-
cry indictment. Each of these fecites the
premises set forth in the first prayer un-
der the conspiracy indictment. which are
In reference to the position of George w.
Beavers in the Post Office Department. his
duties, responsibilities, etc, and TO the po-
sitions OF Green and Doremus with the
Doremus Machine Company. In each II is
stated that II the jury should find that
Beavers, Green and Doremus entered into
an agreement whereby Beavers was to re-
ceive a commission upon the sales OF Dore-
mus machines to the department secured
tarough his influence. and that if~the jury
should find that in pursuance OF such
agreement the several sums (six) alleged
in the Indictments were paid to Beavers
by Green or Doremus then the jury should
find Green and Doremus guilty OF brioefy,
as charged in Indictment No. 1880 In each
case there IL the provision that such vor-
dict should be rendered II the jury should
find from the evidence that such payment
was made with the intent on the part OF
Green and Dorenius to tnf1ufnce Beavers
to commit the fraud against the govern
The seventh instruction Z a. folIoss: IT