Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-06-22

the crimes charged Rad been committed
unless the jury found that the government
had suffered injury.
The United States attorney objected to
the course Of his remarks on this point,
but the court allowed counsel for the de-
Tense to proceed. Mr. Worthington had
been speaking for about half an hour when
the midday intermisston was taken.
Claim as to Doremus.
Former Senator Thurston in his address
to the jury In behalf of Doremus declared
that the government had utterly failed to
produce evidence which would justify a
reasonable doubt of the innocence of Mr.
Doremus. The attorney asserted that 1t
would have been proper at the conclusion
of the testimony for the United States at
torney to move for the acquittal of Dore-
mus on the ground that no case had been
made out against him. Mr. Thurston ar
gued that in the division of responsibility
in the conduct OF the affairs OF the Dore-
mus Machine Company Mr.. Doremus had
charge of the mechanical side only andethat
Mr-fruesdell was in control of the business
part of the enterprise. Mr.. Thurston chal-
ienged the government to point to any but
Insignificant and questionable oral testi-
mony tending to show that Mr.. Doremus
had any guilty knowledge Of any wrong
doing. He asserted that the only testi-
mony which might be considered of any
consequence In tnal connection was Inat OF
Herbert j Truesdell. Mr.. Thurston said
he would be entirely willing for the jury to
weigh Truesdelfs statements in the light Of
the testimony of Mr.. Doremus and OF other
witnesses who swere that Truesdell showed
vindictiye hate toward Green. Counsel re-
ferred to Mr.. Doremus as fair witness as
ever went upon the stand. Mr. Thurston
closed with strong appeal for acqulttal
Justice Gould has indicated that In maxi
Ing the charge to the jury tomorrow morn
N RI wi n
an explanatory nature to the formal In
structions already granted. Owing to the
fact that there are two defendants In the
case and two indictments against each de-
PENDANT the total number Of prayers pre-
scented was unusually large. The range Of
the subject-matter also was wide. Justice
Gould refused several prayers on the ground
that they violated the practice Of the court
against segregating pieces of evidence for
instructions to the jury.
In Behalf Of Green.
The list of instructions granted In behalf
Of the defendant Green begins with the
ninth prayer. which deals with the presump-
ton Of innocence Of the defendants. In this
the jury Is instructed that the indictments
are not to be considered as evidence against
the defendants. and also that the law pre-
sumeS them to be innocent.
The tenth recites that in order to convict
George E. Green the jury must be satisfied
of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The
proof contemplated Is defined to be such
as would produce an abiding conviction in
the mind to moral certainty, so that the
jury feels positively assured that 1t does ex-
ist The jury Is instructed that balance of
proof is not sufficient
In the eleventh instruction the jury Is in
formed that II 1t finds from the evidence
that prior to the time the charges against
Green became public in 1903 he had an ex-
cellent reputation for honesty and integrity
In the community in which he had spent his
life, the jury should consider that fact as
one Of the substantive pieces of evidence in
his favor. The twelfth instruction states
that the only thing which the jury is to de-
termine Is whether the defendant Green has
been proven guilty beyond a reasonable
DOUBT in this case The Jury Is instructed
that it is not to determine whether the evil
dence tends to show his guilt of any other
ofrense or offenses. and in determining
whether the evidence does establish his
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of anv of
the onenses charged in either of the indict-
ments before the court the jury is to be
governed by the instruction of the court as
to what are the charges in the indictments
uhoer winch the case is being tried
Thirteenth Instruction.
In the thirteenth instruction the jury is
directed that it cannot find a verdict of
guilty against Green under the bribery In
dictmept, unless the promises therein al
ieged were found from the evidence to have
chine Company. The fifteenth instruction
states that the jury cannot find verdict
of guilty unless 1t is satisfied that the al
legged payments of money were made with
intent to influence Beavers in the perform
anee of his official duties. The sixteenth in
struction relates to the necessity in order
to find the defendant guilty, of the jury's
finding that Green promised Beavers that
the Doremus company would pay him the
alleged commission.
The seventeenth instruction relates to the
law of venue, and the eighteenth states
that the jury cannot find a verdict OF
guilty against Green unless 1t is satisfied
that the alleged conspiracy was entered
into with intent to influence Beavers In his
official duties.
In the twentieth instruction the jury Is
directed that verdict of guilty should not
be returned unless the jury Is satisfied that
payments, if made, followed a fruition
of the agreement.
The twenty-thfrd instruction covered the
weight to be given by the jury to the evi-
dence tending to show that Green gave
Beavers money in connection with the at
fairs of the Bundy and the International
Time Recording companies. In this the
jury Is instructed that the evidence Is not
to be considered except showing prior
relations between Green and Beavers. and
as bearing the question of intent in the
matters charged in the indictments before
the court.