The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1913-01-01

been settled.
If you find from the evidence that
In order TO carry out the purposes of
the International. the defendants, or
two or more Of them, entered into d
conspiracy To destroy with dynamite
or nitro -Elycerine the property of the
American Bridge Company and other
open shop concerns, or the structures
which they were erecting in various
states of the Union. and il you find
such conspiracy To destroy such prop
erty included, as necessary step in
the accomplishment Of such destruc-
tion. the unlawful transportation Of
dynamite and t.ro-glyCerine upon the
vehicles uI' common carlGrs engaged
~ the time in the transportation Of
passengers from a place in one State
TO place or places in another, or 9TH
er States of the United States; and
If YOU further find. that such destruc-
ton of property was accomplished by
NNPiOSiohS pl Wy iloIlltc anu HllIO-SIy
cerine in various places throughout
the United states. and that the dyna-
mite and nitro o-glycerine, with which
such explosions were produced were
as matter Of fact transported from
state to State upon the vehicles of
common carriers, engaged at the time
in the carrying of passengers, as
averred, then you will be authorized to
find that a conspiracy was formed to
transport dynamite and ntiro-glyce-
rine unlawfully. as charged in the in
dictment."
Calling attention to the charges of
illegal transportation, the Court said:
You may find the defendants guilty
upon all OF the counts of the indict-
ment upon which they are now upon
trial, If you are satisfied beyond a
reasonable doubt that the proofs JUS
tify 1t. Or you may find the defend
ants guilty upon any one or more Of
the counts of the indictment and not
guilty upon the others. You may find
any defendant guilty or not guilty,
or you may find one or more of them
guilty and the others not guilty. Be
fore you can find any of the defend
ants guilty YOU must be satisfied Of his
guilt in manner and form as charged
in someone of the counts of the in
dictment upon which they are on trial,
beyond a reasonable doubt"
OF McManigal and Edward Clark,
Cincinnati, both Of whom pleaded
guilty and testified for the Govern
ment, the Court said their testimony
should he received with codtion and
scrutinized with care" and added:
The witness. William :. Burns.
while on ."e witness stand, detailed a
conversation that ne had with the de-
fendant, Hockin, In which he made
statements to Hockin about the de-
fendant, Tveitmoe, having been in
prison and having prison rcord.
such statements made by Rurns are
not To be considered 10y YOU i'm any
way in determining the guilt or in
nocence of the defendant, Tvcitmoc,
as To the charges laid i'm this indict-
ment."
Judgc Anderson concluded:
Carefully weigh all the evidence i'm
the case, and from il, under the rules
of law. which l have given you. de-
tcrmine the guilt or innocence Of the
defendants. With you and not with
the Court rests the responsibility OF
finding and determining the facts. The
views of the Court on questions of
fact are not controlling upon you. You
have nothing to do with the case cX-
cept To determine the single question
/ of the guilt or inaoccncc of the de-
PENDANTS. If YOU should return Il
verdict of guilty, the measure of pun
ishment To be inflicted upon the de-
PENDANTS is committed To the Court. -
The testimony of Burns about
: Tvcitmoe, referred to by the Court,
was that Burns had numerous convcr-
sat.ons with ilockin shortly after the
Los Angeles Times explosion and that
Burns related To Hockin how hc en-
pcCtcd Tveitmoc would elbow him
up, hccausc hc OBurns) had obtain
eel 70 photograph Of TVcitmoc in the
garh of Minnesota pcnitcntiary
prisoner and had published it in a
san Francisco newspaper.
inf n II