The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-08-15
Judge Inglis Charges Jury For Seven Hours
{Continued from Page D

| tlOl SllOulU IUSJ nave Deeu I6lelTGu to a committee and that approval of the finance board should have been secured were dismissed by the judge. T charge you," he said, "that the vote was not in violation of the city charter"
 The defense, he said, admitted the payments to Levy, but claimed they were justified, and denied the splits which Levy claimed he made with Thomas P. Kelly and others, The judge also recalled to the jury that Levy had changed his story, that he was an accompnce and g confessed perjuror.
 1 Other Frauds Taken Up | The next series of alleged frauds taken up was that involving Harry Mackenzie and Charles E. William son, Republican leaders. Payments of $58,000 to the pair were admitted by the defense, he stated, but 1t was claimed that they were Justified in the city's interest. He reminded the jury that Mackenzie and William son were confessed accomplices, and that differences in their stories had been pointed out
 I Payments to Mayor Hayes made up the next series of frauds claimed by the state, Judge Inglis said. The total amount was $7,800, the state claiming that most of 1t was charged to the official entertainment item in the mayors budget. It Is for the jury to decide whether these payments were justified, Judge Inglis stated.
 The fourth series of alleged H. legal payments were those to Cor poration Counsel Charles s, OCon- nor, the judge said. The total amount claimed by the state was in excess of $25,000. The defense, he said, claimed that all the money was properly expended. Payment to Olsen Tn connection with these pay ments, Judge Inglis instructed the jury, consideration should also be given to payments made to lawyers and law firms. He listed payments the state claimed were made to the late William E. Thoms, John D. Thoms, Carmody & Thoms, Fran cis P. Guilfoile, Judge John F. Mo- Grath, Spellacy & Yeomans, and Herman J. Weisman. The state, he said, claimed these payments were fraudulent, the defense claimed they were justified. It was for the jury to decide, Judge Inglis said.
 How Conspirator Is Born
 What does g person have to do to become a member of a conspir- acy?" asked the judge.
 It is not necessary to make an ex- press agreement he said, but 1t Is enough to have an implicit under standing. If a person conceals acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, the jury might conclude that he was a member of the conspiracy. Continuing, the judge said that if person had the power to halt q conspiracy, but failed to act, the jury might hold him mem; : of the conspiracy. It Is not necessary to prove a motive.
 Crime of Conspiracy It is not necessary, he said, to find that a conspirator entered into the conspiracy with an express agreement with others accused. The crime of conspiracy is continuing offense, he said.
 If other persons came into the conspiracy" he said. land even do single act, they become members, and just as guilty as if they had been members from the beginning" The judge likened a conspiracy to Q partnership. with each mem ber responsible for all the acts com- mitted by the other conspirators for a common design.
 A man becomes chargeable with all the acts done before he joins and after he joins c conspiracy, he said. providing the acts were done in the common design. He Is not re- sponsible for acts Of co-conspira- tors outside the common design. be said, however.
 It f not necessary iw . man so