Albuquerque citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1907-1909, 1907-07-27
BOTH SIDES WERE
WELL SATISFIED
He DWelt at Length on Reason.
able Doubt" Question and AC-
instability of Evidence of
Alleged ACCOmpliCe
Harry Orchard.

BOISE, ldaho, july 2I.-Judge FREE
mont Wood today delivered his |
charge to the jury into whose keep
ing was given the fate of william ID. |
Haywood, secretary-treasurer of the
Western Federation of Miners, charg-
ed with the murder of former Gov
ernor Frank Steunenberg, of Idaho.
He gave the jury the choice of five
verdicts: Murder in the first de-
gree, murder in the second degree,
manslaughter and not guilty.
Judge Wood dwelt at length on the
laws of conspiracy and the value of
the evidence given by an accomplice.
The charge was regarded by both
sides as eminently fair. If anything,
1t was one consensus of opinion that
the court leaned to the defense.
Judge Wood completed his charge
at 1853 o'clock. The court room
was cleared at IL and at 1904 the
jury retired A recess until 2 p. m.
was then taken.
Won't Consider Adams.
Judge Wood at the outset thanked
the jurors for 1.-The attentive manner
in which they performed their duty.
He instructed the jury not to con-
slider evidence bearing on the con-
nection of Steve Adams with the
crimes committed in northern Idaho,
defense regarding this deportations i'll
Colorado. and the employment Of
Plnkerton detectives by the mine
owners, on the ground that no proper
connection with the case on trial had
been made in either case.
Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
AFTER quoting and explaining the in
dictment on which Haywood was ar
rected, Judge Wood said:
In
under the law, no jury should con-
Wet a citizen of any crime simply be-
cause there is a strong reason to be-
lieve that he is guilty, but before the
jury can lawfully convict they must
be convinced of the defendants guilt
beyond all reasonable doubt. If it
is possible for you to reconcile the
facts in this case on any reasonable
theory consistent with innocence of
the defendant, 1t is your duty to do
so and find the defendant not guilty"
Evidence Excluded.
After instructing the jury that the
proof of other crimes than the mur-
der of Governor Steunenberg had
been admitted only for the purpose
of showing conspiracy to accomplish
certain objects, Judge Wood con-
tinued:
'It makes no difference, however,
in this case what crimes have been
committed in Colorado, in Coeur
DAlenes or elsewhere, or who Is re-
sponsible for the commission of such
crimes, if any there be, but the de-
fendant cannot be convicted unless
the state has established beyond a
reasonable doubt that he is guilty OF
the felonious killing OF Frank Steun-
enberg."
Nature of Conspiracy.
Judge Wood explained the nature
of the proofs necessary to establish
the charge of conspiracy and said
1T Is not essential to the forma-
ton of a conspiracy that there
should be a formal agreement be-
tween the parties to do the act charg-
ed. 1t is sufficient il the minds of
the parties meet understandlngly so
as to bring about an intelligent and
deliberate agreement TO do such acts,
or commit the crimes charged al
though the agreement be not mani
Tested by any formal words"
IF you believe. in this case. from
the evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt that the defendant aided, abet-
ted, advised and encouraged the kill
ing of Frank Steunenberg, then the
defendant is guilty, and 1t would be
immaterial whether he was actually
present at the time Of the killing or
not"
Testimony of Accomplice.
The law views with distrust the
testimony of an accomplice on ac-
count of the motive he may have for
laying the responsibility for his crime
upon another, when, by so doing, he
may secure immunity for his own
participation In the crime charged.
For this reason the law exacts cor
roboration, and although the jury
may believe that the testimony Of
the accomplice Is true still the jury
could not convict the defendant on
such testimony unless they further
find that the testimony of the accom-
pllce is cOrroborated by other and
Independent evidence"
CorPoboratiVe Evidence Necessary.
This corrObOratiye evidence need
not be sufficient Of itself to establish
the guilt Of the defendant, but It
must tend in some degree to impli-
cate and connect the defendant with
the commission of the crime charg-
ed.
In order 10 ascertain whether or
not the testimony Of an accOmplice is
corrobOrated as the law provides L.
must be. before conviction would be
warranted. you should eliminate from.
the case, the evidence Of the accom-
plice and examine the evidence OF
the other witnesses with a view to
ascertaining II there be evidence
tending To connect the defendant
with the offense II there Is. the ac-