The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-08-18


 thought its strongest weapon was tC force the admission, to extract the admission of guilt from their owT1 lips, if one could be obtained, that the accused were guilty.
 And when your honor charged thit jury that the failure of the accused to testify, that they didn't, among other things, submit themselves tc cross examination, I submit youl honor respectfully violated the rul- ing.
 Rights Violated
 And certainly, your honor, if the jury was enormously instructed as to the law (and I say 1t was done, if it was done, inadvertently because I know how your honor tried all du.- ing this trial to see that all of the accused were protecteO I say, re- gardless of other claims made in this case, regardless of the action of the jury, regardless of the prejudice we claim was motivated, but if that one thing alone was wrong, if this court went beyond the ruling of the Supreme Court, that in itself is suf- ficient cause to set aside this verdict. And say to you with all the sheer ity at my command, violation to that extent exists. I say to you that the constitutional rights have been vio- lated by such a charge that the constitutional rights of the accused under the state constitution have been violated, and the ruling of the Supreme Court in the Ford case has been violated. I submit the verdict must be set aside, and I respectful ly submit your honor to set 1t aside
 Atty. Healey:
 ". It seems to me that the blindness of the mob in 1902 and the hurricane in 1888 were combined with the work of this jury. Another though forces itself into my mind : But for the grace of God, there stand l." And I say, not only for the grace of God, but at the whim of the man who happened to be the prosecuting attorney in this case. don't question Hugh Alcorn, but say to your honor that that is too much power under our system of law to leave in the hands of any man. It should not be so. We mght as well inscribe above the entrance to ths courtroom: "Give up all hopes ye who enter here charged with conspiracy"
 Battling Ghosts
 I have my share of responsibility in the situation and assume 1t. As a lawyer, conscientiously, honestly trying to do my duty, I advised my cients not to take the stand. Why2 How could anybody fighting against 8 nightmare-how can he put @ de- fense in behalf of Crary and Shana- han against what Levy says that Kelly says that Olsen did or didn't do? Might just as well try to battle against a ghost.
 The jury sits here and they con- demn these men, not because of any, thing that they done, not because of anything that has been brought home to my clients, but picked up on this tidal wave, the surf, the hurricane. The result? We all know it. A campaign of hate that has been waged for eighteen or nine- teen months. And poor weak hu- mans that we are. Laying down in the hearts of each one of us of weakened spirit, they likewise would believe the bad things about the other fellow. And 1t is human na- ture to be ready to believe this kind of thing. And this jury was sub- jected to that belief of the populace of Connecticut for months and months before they ever sat in their jury box, and 1t was something more than human If they could pass that path that had been built up.
 No Chance!
 I am not going to talk to your honor about the evidence. There Is no person on earth who knows the evidence better than your honor. Your honor knows all the evidence that is here. But if I had been sit- ting over thess 1T. those chairs with Healey, Kingsley, what chance had IF Just as much chance as 8 tree in the path of the hurricane. And if MT. Alcorn, in his judgment, had seen fit to put me over there, I would have gone down just the same as every one of those defendants. And if in his judgment he had seen it to put Charles A. Templeton over there, to show hundreds and thou sands of checks that MT. Temple toms firm had received, MT. Temple ton would have gone down too.
 I know these men, born, lived here; have known these men as long as I can remember. And I can't put out of my mind and out of my heart the terrible experience of these men.
 Now, MT. Meade Alcor1 in his opening argument to the jury, read. ing, if your honor please, from . prepared manuscript so that i. was no slip of the tongue, said to this jury with reference to Crary and Shanahan: What their connec- ton with the conspiracy was I don't know" Well. if he doesn't know, the jury didn't need to know. They brought in a verdict of guilty just the same.
 I say to your honor there is noth- ing anywhere in these eleven or twelve thousand pages of testimony, not even by the wild stretch of your imagination. which connects or tends to connect Crary and Shan ahan with the acts or conduct of anybody else. There is absolutely no evidence. Meade is right; he didn't know and he didn't know be- cause there was no evidence.
 Now, Minor. Again, your honor. absolutely no evidence in this rec ord, anywhere, to indicate any wrongful conduct on Minors part or any connection with the acts or con- duct of anybody else.
 I say to your honor that If the governmental administration in any city like Waterbury, in any indus trial city of this type, neglected to do everything within its power, ev- crything that could be done to avert industrial difficulties, that that ad- ministration wouldn't be properly