Strike bulletin. (Clinton, Ill.) 1913-1915, 1914-11-11

Then ,n#t Juris, 81 ID law,.f tu Il.tuo- mat can
IN ~ ""rd~ I'll" mental sttttad. labeled f"a-
H"hhhi" doubt EA"f} man must d'ftu. u fni
hIm~'lf The inner man, tn. better man IN }ou.
M ,I' "a man !" 10, n""s It. ""Anins '>",''
'"ut "Nes Words at idl'. pistthiugs oft.n gliti
used ia thu service. II tn. cunning Wpfls ar.
twisted and arranged into My that =-onletlmts
confuse aud frequently mi-.ad Th.te men
VII" ar aitists in tn misuse Of ~"r'i- fassI.ts
men Who Xix" th. sitEht Ut hand imam dee"iSts
we -. "ith ""tlH d"'"iN" tn minds - "ih"r
men NJ adde's Ia you viii be- fire. han amy
attempt At word sophIstrN. want 10 api'tua,h
ana 'elslnd" my conference win tou ia god ftith
In tds Conversation With you / want to an, ass
IA" "hal. stor' IN IL" n"tshaprl> way a IN, nj
""uId reason with You ~ The Village stofe
The .onIt viii Instruct YOU "A matter OF law
sen d't'ns" There WAS tim" during England
f"udal daas that a man compelled to retreat
to th' wall b"for" IN" right "f self defense
ih" Common la" al mat Jay. when the few WEI"
landed barous aud The many w.r- tenant srrfs
read that the night of self defense dld
""'ll 's"fN effort I" escape. even to retfeating
until an impossible wall or something OF that
nHinf" had been reached Today In country
when all men al. equals thu law Is that man
II uhlawtuilv assaulted in "A piac" where he haS
a right IL b" and put In danger real or reasonably
apparent Of losing hi- life. receiving great
bodily harm. Is not required To sni"avor 10 escape
from his assailsnt but may stand his ground and
repel fore. with force to III. taking o the
lie Of his assailant. II necessary good
apparently nece~sar, for the Preservation Of his
nf. protect himself from receiving great
bodily harm viii not upon you the appro-
priateness and wisdom OF this rule Of law. You
free men. II l. only "a rul. OF common sens.
TO tn" Had been proclaimed b
the courts 1T would have been eli BY jury
In my first word. To the t,rv in making IN.
ope ming statement for the defense, I said and
now call upon YOU To bear me witness. that
| promise made is debt unpaid The words
those OF young poet. Mr. Robert Servi.s At that
time no evidence had been presented Under the
rple~ of practice the states attorney for the pros
made promise of the proof We would offer. have
! before IN. the promise made by the prosecution
prosecution kept faith Have they defauited in
their promise They sad. mot only you should
not hav. a REASONABLE. doubt but you will have
no doubt from the evidence but that this defend
did kin and murder Antoine MuSssr in cold
u u,ooa rms ,hes pfomSed 10 prov. mufner cola
booded murder The charge came from the re-
sponsible officer of this court charged under the
law with the duty OF rrpresen.ins the People OF
the state of Illinois. He made IT with full
consciousness of Its terrible meaning, He Of
, fered to prove beyond every doubt that Carl Per-
son was murderer. u cold biood.d murderer. He
made II after full Investigation. He made It
| after using the grand jury q clearing house
In which TO examine and arrange facs. lie made
II after eight months used In preparing this case
| for trial He mad. II in tn. name Of the People
| OF the state OF Illinois. gentlemen OF the jury I
| accept The challenge. ] accept IL with the full
permission of the defendant whose life 10 At stake
| and now solemny declare to the court and jury
that II that promise Of proof has been fulfilled.
then Carl Person should pay With his life the full
penalty for his crime Thu 10 not the time to
compromise We win not compromise W. stand
the battle line they drew. II Person 10 guilty
of cold blooded murder / Ask no compromise in
mercys name. II he IL not guilty OF what they
charge him with. then I protest against . COM
promise In the name OF conviction. We follow
They said in their offer to prove. The prose-
| cut,on viii show that the defendant rushed tow
ard the deceased"
Tn. prosecution further said THAT Person fired
| all of the shots into the back of the deceased"
and essential elements Of proof necessary 10 the
| conviction OF the defendant We accept the Issue
rendered We address the issue to you. gentlemen
of jury. Have they proved these necessary and
essential elements of their charge beyond all rea-
With the positions of the defense and prosecu-
ton sharply defined and clearly before YOU. come
| srsumen, submitted by the prosecution after the
evidence was all before and the time had
rived for summing up the case
Prosecutor Williams said In his final argument
and ! quote him literally. using . transcript pre-
pared by the court reporter there 10 sharp con-
flict In the evidence. I Apprehend you will have
to determine which class OF witnesses you will
| believe and which you will not believe
conflict In the evidence II l.. as distinct as
| battle line. II runs through the entire case
reply To tn. prosecution that the very clash and
conflict which argue 10 found in the testimony
Is the best and most conclusive reason for this
iury's finding the defendant not guilty 1t is this
conflict which compels reasonable doubt of the
| defendants guilt and therefore under the law
| commands a not guilty verdict from the jury
In the heat OF your esEerness to convict sir
Mr. states Attorney unwittingly serve Justice
When cunning mans mouth !. open sometimes
truth escapes Thank God truth prevalent over
cunning II a single witness here. witness
to the tragedy testified in direct opposition to the
testimony Of witnesses for the state, concerning
matters material TO the Issue here, then YOU. gem
tlemen Of the jury must on your oaths as jurors
you can In good conscience and under the law
vote III. defendant guilty For should YOU believe
there might he truth In the Testimony of a single
witness for the defense that belief will be a rea-
sonable doubt 10 the guilt of the defendant In
believe. testified that the deceased Musser at.
tackled Person at the time Person shot Musser. and
nifty witnesses for the prosecution testified to an
exactly opposite set of facts. IL would be duty
to find the defendant not guilty. To remove the
reasonable doubt you must annihilste all evidence
consistent with the innocence of the defendant