IN THE 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS, 
 
 NORTHERN QRAND DIVISION. 
 
 MARCH TERM, A. ID. 1887. 
 
 AUGUST SPIES ET AL., 
 
 PLAINTIFFS, 
 
 VS. 
 
 THE PEOPLE OE THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, 
 
 DEFENDANT. 
 
 Error to the 
 
 Criminal Court of 
 Cook Connty. 
 
 ABSTRACT OF RKCORD. 
 
 W. P. BLACK and 
 
 SALOMON & ZEISLER, 
 
 ATTOBNEYS FOK PLAINTIFFS IN EKIIOII. 
 
 LEONARD S \VBTT, 
 
 Or COUNSEL. 
 
 Vol. I. 
 
 CONTAINING ABSTRACT OF Voi.s. 1, O, A TO 11, INCL., AND VOL. OF EXHIBITS. 
 
 CHICAGO 
 
 SOCIETY 
 
 CHICAGO: 
 
 BARNARD & GUNTHORP, LAW PRINTERS, 44 & 40 LAS.M.LE STREET. 
 
 1887.
 
 DEACCESS10NED BY 
 
 CHICAGO HISTORICAL SOCIETY 
 
 PRINTED COLLECTIONS
 
 CHICAGO 
 
 HISTORICAL 
 
 SOCIETY 
 
 ABSTRACT OF RECORD. 
 
 VOL. 1. 
 
 1 Impaneling of grand jury on May 17, 1886, after excuses being 
 
 2 heard from those summoned and there being only seventeen persons left 
 
 3 upon the panel, by special venire six more persons were summoned and 
 all sworn. 
 
 4 June 4th: Presentment by grand jury of indictment. 
 
 5-20 The indictment, containing sixty-nine counts, charges the eight defend- 
 ants now before the court, together with Rudolph Schnaubelt and Will- 
 iam Seliger, with jointly killing Matthias <J. Degan on May 4, 1886, in 
 the county of Cook and State of Illinois, first with a bomb, second with 
 a revolver, third with an unknown weapon; then with having been 
 present and aiding, and then, without being present, having aided and 
 advised an unknown person in the killing of Degan, first with a bomb, 
 second with a revolver, third with an unknown instrument; then seriatim 
 each of the defendants is charged in a series of counts with killing 
 Degan, first with a revolver, second with a bomb, third with an unknown 
 weapon, the other nine defendants being present, aiding, etc., and in 
 another series with not being present, but having aided, advised, etc., 
 the commission of the crime. 
 
 14 The thirty-eighth count charges that one Rudolph Schnaubelt, on 
 
 May 4, 1886, in Cook county, State of Illinois, unlawfully, wilfully, 
 feloniously, and of his malice aforethought, made an assault upon the 
 body of Matthias J. Degan with a certain deadly and destructive instru- 
 ment, charged with divers dangerous and explosive substances, wilfully, 
 etc., ignited and cast the same upon the ground near to the said Matthias 
 J. Degan, then and there causing the said instrument to explode, and 
 fragments thereof to strike, lacerate, penetrate and wound the body and 
 limbs of said M. J. Degan, giving him divers mortal wounds, etc., of 
 which he languished, and on said May 4th died in Cook county, State 
 of Illinois, and that the nine other defendants, feloniously, unlawfully, 
 etc., did stand by and aid, abet and assist said Rudolph Schnaubelt in 
 the perpetration of the crime aforesaid. 
 
 16 The forty-eighth count charges Rudolph Schnaubelt identically as in 
 
 the thirty-eighth count, alleging that the other nine defendants feloniously, 
 etc., not being present, aiding, abetting and assisting, had advised,
 
 VOL. 1. 
 
 encouraged, aided and abetted the said Rudolph Schnaubelt in the per- 
 petration of the crime aforesaid. 
 
 21, 22 Endorsement of indictment. 
 
 23,24 June 5th: Arraignment of August Spies, Michael Schwab, Samuel 
 Fielden, Adolph Fischer, George Engel, Louis Lingg and Oscar W. 
 Neebe and plea of not guilty entered as to each and every one of them. 
 
 25-27 June loth: Defendants take change of venue from Judge John G. 
 Rogers. 
 
 28, 29 June loth: Cause set for trial by Judge Joseph E. Gary for June 21, 
 1886. 
 
 30,31 June 2ist: Defendants move for leave to withdraw plea of not guilty, 
 which is overruled by the court. Motion by August Spies, Michael 
 Schwab, Samuel Fielden and Oscar W. Neebe for separate trial from 
 
 31 other defendants; overruled. 
 
 32 Defendant Albert R. Parsons arraigned, pleads not guilty. 
 33-40 Orders for special venires and continuances from day to day. 
 
 41 June 25th: J. H. Cole, S. G. Randall, T. E. Denker and C. B. Todd 
 
 sworn to try the cause. 
 
 42-47 Orders for special venires and adjournments from day to day. 
 48 June 29th: Henry L. Ryce appointed a special bailiff to serve special 
 
 venires. 
 
 49-63 Continuances. 
 64 July 8th: Frank S. Osborne, Charles H. Ludwig, A. Hamilton and 
 
 J. H. Brayton sworn to try the cause. 
 65-74 Continuances. 
 
 75 John B. Greiner, G. W. Adams, A. H. Reed and H. T. Sanford sworn 
 to try the cause. 
 
 76 J ur y ordered to be kept together in charge of an officer. 
 77-130 Continuances. 
 
 131 August i9th: After all the evidence and arguments and instructions 
 
 of the court are heard by the jury, the latter retire to consider their 
 verdict. 
 
 132,133 August 2Oth: Verdict returned as follows: We, the jury, find the 
 defendants, August Spies, Michael Schwab, Samuel Fielden, Albert R. 
 Parsons, Adolph Fischer, George Engel and Louis Lingg guilty of 
 murder in manner and form as charged in the indictment and fix the 
 
 
 
 penalty at death. We find the defendant Oscar W. Neebe guilty of 
 murder in manner and form as charged in the indictment, and fix the 
 penalty at imprisonment in the penitentiary for fifteen years.
 
 (3) 
 
 VOL. 1. 
 
 134 Motion for new trial by defendants continued until next term of court. 
 
 137-141 October ist to October 7th: Arguments of counsel on motion for 
 
 new trial. 
 142 October 7th: Motion for new trial overruled and exception. Motion 
 
 in arrest of judgment by defendants, overruled and exception. 
 143-145 October 7th to October pth: Defendants say why sentence should 
 
 not be pronounced against them on verdict. 
 
 146 October pth: Judgment against defendant August Spies, that he be 
 confined in the Cook county jail until December 3, 1886, and on that 
 day between 10 A. M. and 2 p. M., be hanged by the neck until he is 
 dead. 
 
 147 Same judgment against Michael Schwab. 
 
 148 Same judgment against Samuel Fielden. 
 
 149 Same judgment against Albert R. Parsons. 
 
 150 Same judgment against Adolph Fischer. 
 
 151 Same judgment against George Engel. 
 153 Same judgment against Louis Lingg. 
 
 154-155 Judgment against Oscar W. Neebe, that he be taken by the sheriff to 
 the penitentiary of this state, atjoliet, and delivered to its keeper, and 
 that he be confined there for fifteen years at hard labor. 
 
 156 October 28th. On motion of defendants, thirty-five days are granted 
 within which to file bill of exceptions. 
 
 157 November i3th. Bill of exceptions filed. 
 
 159 Grounds of defendants' motion for leave to withdraw their plea of not 
 guilty, and motion to quash the indictment: 
 
 first. There is a misjoinder of counts in indictment. 
 
 Second. There is a multiplicity of counts in indictment. 
 
 Third. The indictment is uncertain and insufficient. 
 
 Fourth. During the consideration of this case by the grand jury, 
 Julius Grinnell, state's attorney, and Edward Furthman, pretending to 
 be in the employ of the state's attorney, were present in the grand jury 
 room and put questions to, and examined witnesses then under exami- 
 nation by said grand jury. 
 
 Fifth. Grand jury were improperly drawn and impaneled, in that 
 certain of said jurors, to wit: John N. Hills, John N. Clark, Edward 
 S. Dreyer, John C. Neemes, W.J. Quan and F. W. Hall were not 
 drawn from the body of the county nor were they bystanders, but the 
 sheriff caused said persons to be improperly selected, and particularly 
 
 1 60 one E, S. Dreyer, who was at the time a personal enemy of August
 
 (4) 
 
 VOL. 1. 
 
 Spies, and in that at the time of the impaneling of said grand jury in 
 the court room, none of these defendants were present in the court room 
 and were prevented from being present by reason of their being confined 
 in the county jail, except Oscar Neebe, who at the time, however, was 
 not held to answer for any crime. 
 
 Sixth. The Hon. John G. Rogers improperly and erroneously 
 charged the grand jury. 
 
 Signed and sworn to by August Spies, Michael Schwab, Samuel 
 Fielden, Adolph Fischer, Louis Lingg, George Engel and Oscar Neebe. 
 
 161 Affidavit of Ernst Legner shows that affiant, whose name is endorsed 
 on the back of indictment in this case, testified before grand jury on or 
 about May 20, 1886, that while so in the grand jury room states's attor- 
 ney Julius S. Grinnell and one Furthman, an assistant of his, were pres- 
 ent, but not as witnesses and not testifying then 'and there, but both said 
 Grinnell and Furthman put questions to affiant and principally conducted 
 his examination; that when affiant answered that he was not a socialist, 
 said Grinnell said in substance: "If you ain't a socialist, you are not 
 far from it." When affiant left grand jury room, said Grinnell and 
 Furthman remained there. 
 
 162 (Said motions were overruled; defendants severally and respectively 
 
 excepted.) 
 
 163 Motion by defendants, August Spies, Samuel Fielden, Michael Schwab 
 and Oscar W. Neebe, to be jointly granted a separate trial from all other 
 defendants with them indicted, upon following grounds: 
 
 1. Testimony against them will be materially different from that 
 against the other defendants with them jointly indicted. 
 
 2. Testimony which may be competent as against other defendants 
 will not be competent as against them, and will prejudice them. 
 
 3. Certain evidence of an alleged conspiracy will be introduced on the 
 trial with which these defendants are in no way connected, and which 
 will prejudice them. 
 
 4. Their defense will be greatly imperiled by reason of such evi- 
 dence, incompetent as to them, in the course of a lengthy and tedious 
 trial. 
 
 5. They are advised that illegitimate evidence will be submitted to 
 the jury, especially in regard to an alleged conspiracy, which they will 
 be powerless to exclude, because it may be competent as against other de- 
 fendants with them jointly indicted. 
 
 164 6. These defendants cannot have a fair, legal and impartial trial, if 
 tried jointly with the other defendants.
 
 (5) 
 
 VOL. 1. 
 
 Affidavit of August Spies, Samuel Fielden, Michael Schwab, and 
 Oscar W. Neebe, shows upon information and belief, that upon the trial 
 of this cause, the prosecution intends to introduce evidence tending to 
 show that some of the defendants participated in a meeting held on May 
 2d and in a meeting held on May 3d, in which it was agreed that vio- 
 lence might or would be used thereafter, and pursuant to which alleged 
 conspiracy the death of M. J. Degan on May 4th last will be claimed to 
 have been caused; that affiants had neither knowledge of or consented 
 
 165 to or counseled the holding of said meetings, nor did any of them ever 
 subsequently thereto acquiesce in or adopt any action or policy alleged 
 to have been adopted, proposed or discussed at any of said meetings. 
 
 Affiants are advised that such evidence will or may be competent as 
 against certain other defendants. 
 
 Affiants show that more than sixty names of witnesses are endorsed 
 on back of indictment, and a list of about an equal number of additional 
 witnesses was furnished to their counsel by the state's attorney ; that the trial 
 will be very lengthy; that if evidence, incompetent as to them, but com- 
 petent as to the other defendants, will be introduced, it will be impossible 
 for the jury to clearly apply such evidence; that the greatest possible pre- 
 judice and damage will result therefrom to these affiants, and that the 
 instructions of the court will not be able to overcome and guard against 
 it in a trial of the magnitude of this; and that the only possible means of 
 their obtaining a fair, legal and impartial trial is by the court ordering a 
 separate trial for these affiants from the remaining defendants jointly in- 
 dicted with them. 
 
 166 Affidavit of Moses Salomon, Sigmund Zeisler, W. P. Black and W. 
 A. Foster shows that they have, since their respective engagements as 
 counsel of defendants, devoted all their time to ascertaining the proof 
 which will be probably offered by the people on the trial of this cause; 
 that the statements relative to the evidence to be introduced, contained in 
 the foregoing affidavit of defendants, are true, and that they verily be- 
 lieve that the only means of obtaining a fair and impartial trial for the 
 defendants, August Spies, Samuel Fielden, Michael Schwab and Oscar 
 W. Neebe, is by permitting them to sever in their trial from the other 
 defendants jointly with them indicted. 
 
 167 Said motion was overruled, and said last named defendants excepted. 
 Albert R. Parsons surrendered himself to the jurisdiction of the court 
 
 on June 21, 1886, and being called upon to plead, etc., to said indictment 
 moved the court to quash the indictment upon the same grounds as em-
 
 (6) 
 
 bodied in the motion of the other defendants, and for a separate trial 
 from the defendants Louis Lingg, George Engel, and Adolph Fischer, 
 the last motion being based upon the same grounds as the motion 
 in behalf of August Spies, Michael Schwab, Samuel Fielden and Oscar 
 W. Neebe, said motions were severally overruled, and said defendant, 
 
 Albert R. Parsons, excepted. 
 VOL. o. 
 
 1 The following instructions were given on behalf of the people: 
 
 i. 
 
 2 The court instructs the jury in the language of the statute that murder 
 is the unlawful killing of a human being in the peace of the people, with 
 malice aforethought, either expressed or implied. An unlawful killing 
 may be perpetrated by poisoning, striking, starving, drowning, stabbing, 
 shooting, or by any other of the various forms or means by which human 
 nature may be overcome, and death thereby occasioned. 
 
 Express malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take away 
 the life of a fellow creature which is manifested by external circum- 
 stances capable of proof. Malice shall be implied when no considerable 
 provocation appears, or when all the circumstances of the killing show 
 an abandoned and malignant heart. 
 
 2. 
 
 The court instructs the jury that whoever is guilty of murder shall 
 suffer the penalty of death or imprisonment in the penitentiary for his 
 natural life, or for a term not less than fourteen years. If the accused 
 or any of them are found guilty by the jury, the jury shall fix the punish- 
 ment by their verdict. 
 
 3- 
 
 The court instructs the jury that while it is provided by the constitu- 
 tion of the State of Illinois, that every person may freely speak, write 
 and publish on all subjects, he is, by the constitution, held responsible 
 under the laws for the abuse of the liberty so given. Freedom of speech 
 is limited by the laws of the land, to the extent, among 
 other limitations, that no man is allowed to advise the committing of any 
 crime against the person or property of another; and the statute pro- 
 vides: " An accessory is he who stands by and aids, abets and assists, or 
 who, not being present, aiding, abetting or assisting, hath advised, en- 
 couraged, aided or abetted the perpetration of the crime. He who thus
 
 (7) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 aids, abets, assists, advises or encourages, shall be considered as principal, 
 and punished accordingly. 
 
 Every such accessory, when the crime is committed within or with- 
 out this state by his aid or procurement in this state, may be indicted 
 and convicted at the same time as the principal, or before or after his 
 conviction, whether the principal is convicted or amenable to justice or 
 not, and punished as principal. 
 
 4- 
 
 3 The court further instructs the jury, as a matter of law, that if they 
 
 believe from the evidence in this case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the 
 defendants, or any of them, conspired and agreed together, or with others 
 to overthrow the law by force, or to unlawfully resist the officers of the 
 law, and if they further believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable 
 doubt, that in pursuance of such conspiracy and in furtherance of the 
 common object, a bomb was thrown by a member of such conspiracy at 
 the time, and that Matthias J. Degan was killed, then, such of the 
 defendants that the jury believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable 
 doubt, to have been parties to such conspiracy, are guilty of murder, 
 whether present at the killing or not, and whether the identity of the 
 person throwing the bomb be established or not. 
 
 5- 
 
 If the jury believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that 
 there was in existence in this county and state a conspiracy to overthrow 
 the existing order of society, and to bring about social revolution by 
 force, or to destroy the legal authorities of this city, county or state by 
 force, and that the defendants, or any of them, were parties to such con- 
 spiracy, and that Degan was killed in the manner described in the 
 indictment, that he was killed by a bomb, and that the bomb was 
 thrown by a party to the conspiracy, and in furtherance of the objects 
 of the conspiracy, then any of the defendants who were members of 
 such conspiracy at that time are in this case guilty of murder, and that 
 too, although the jury may further believe from the evidence that the 
 time and place for the bringing about of such revolution, or the destruc- 
 one of such authorities had not been definitely agreed upon by the conspir- 
 ators, but was left to them and the exigencies of time, or to the judg- 
 ment of any of the co-conspirators.
 
 (8) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 5f 
 
 4 If these defendants, or any two or more of them, conspired together 
 with or not with any other person or persons to excite the people or classes 
 of the people of this city to sedition, tumult and riot, to use deadly weap- 
 ons against and take the lives of other persons, as a means to carry their 
 designs and purposes into effect,- and in pursuance of such conspiracy, and 
 in furtherance of its objects, any of the persons so conspiring publicly 
 by print or speech advised or encouraged the commission of murder 
 
 without designating time, place or occasion at which it should be done, 
 
 fltf 
 
 and in pursuance of, and induced by such advice or .encouragement, mur- 
 der was committed, then all of such conspirators are guilty of such mur- 
 der, whether the person who perpetrated such murder can be identified 
 or not, if such murder was committed in pursuance of such advice or 
 encouragement, and was induced thereby, it does not matter what change 
 if any, in the order or condition of society, or what, if any, advantage to 
 themselves or others, the conspirators proposed as the result of their con- 
 spiracy, nor does it matter whether such advice and encouragement had 
 been frequent and long-continued or not, except in determining whether 
 the perpetrator was or was not acting in pursuance of such advice or en- 
 couragement, and was or was not induced thereby to commit the mur- 
 der. If there was such conspiracy as in this instruction is recited, 
 such advice or encouragement was given, and murder committed in 
 pursuance of and induced thereby, then all such conspirators are guilty 
 of murder. Nor does it matter, if there was such a conspiracy, how 
 impracticable or impossible of success its end and aims were, nor how 
 foolish nor ill-arranged were the plans for its execution, except as bear- 
 ing upon the question whether there was or was not such conspiracy. 
 
 6. 
 
 The court instructs the jury that a conspiracy may be established by 
 circumstantial evidence the same as any other fact, and that such evidence 
 is legal and competent for that purpose. So as to whether an act which 
 was committed was done by a member of the conspiracy may be estab- 
 lished by circumstantial evidence, whether the identity of the individual 
 who committed the act be established or not; and also whether an act 
 done was in pursuance of the common design may be ascertained by the 
 
 5 same class of evidence, and if the jury believe from the evidence in this 
 case beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants or any of them con- 
 spired and agreed together, or with others to overthrow the law by
 
 (9) 
 
 3L. O. 
 
 force, or destroy the legal authorities of this city, county or state by 
 force, and that in furtherance of the common design, and by a member 
 of such conspiracy, Matthias J. Degan was killed, then these defend- 
 ants, if any, whom the jury believe from the evidence, beyond a reason- 
 able doubt, were parties to such conspiracy, are guilty of the murder of 
 Matthias J. Degan, whether the identity of the individual doing the kill- 
 ing be established or not, or whether such defendants were present at 
 the time of the killing or not. 
 
 7- 
 
 The jury are instructed as a matter of law, that all who take part in 
 the conspiracy after it is formed, and while it is in execution, and all who 
 with knowledge of the facts concur in the plan originally formed, and 
 aid in executing them, are fellow conspirators. Their concurrence with- 
 out proof of an agreement to concur, is conclusive against them. They 
 commit the offense when they become parties to the transaction or further 
 the original plan with knowledge of the conspiracy. 
 
 The court instructs the jury as a matter of law that circumstantial evi- 
 dence is just as legal and just as effective as any other evidence, pro- 
 vided the circumstances are of such a character and force as to satisfy 
 the minds of the jury of the defendants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 
 
 9- 
 
 The court instructs the jury that what is meant by circumstantial evi- 
 dence in criminal cases is the proof of such facts and circumstances con- 
 nected with or surrounding the commission of the crime charged, as tend 
 to show the guilt or innocence of the party charged. And if those facts 
 and circumstances are sufficient to satisfy the jury of the guilt of the de- 
 fendants beyond a reasonable doubt, then such evidence is sufficient to 
 authorize the jury in finding the defendants guilty. 
 
 The law exacts the conviction, wherever there is sufficient legal evi- 
 dence to show the defendants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and cir- 
 cumstantial evidence is legal evidence. 
 
 10. 
 
 The court instructs the jury as a matter of law that when the defend- 
 ants, August Spies, Michael Schwab, Albert R. Parsons and Samuel 
 Fielden testified as witnesses in this case, each became the same as any
 
 (10) 
 VOL. O. 
 
 other witness, and the credibility of each is to be attested by and sub- 
 jected to the same tests as are legally applied to any other witness; and 
 in determining the degree of credibility that shall be accorded to the tes- 
 timony of any one of said above named defendants, the jury have a 
 right to take into consideration the fact that he is interested in the result 
 of this prosecution, as well as his demeanor and conduct upon the wit- 
 ness stand during the trial, and the jury are also to take into considera- 
 tion the fact, if such is the fact, that he has been contradicted by other 
 witnesses. And the court further instructs the jury that if, after consid- 
 ering all the evidence in this case, they find that any one of said defendants, 
 August Spies, Michael Schwab, Albert R. Parsons and Samuel Fielden, 
 has wilfully and corruptly testified falsely to any fact material to the is- 
 sue in this case, they have the right to entirely disregard his testimony, 
 except in so far as his testimony is corroborated by other credible evi- 
 dence. - 
 
 ii. 
 
 The rule of law which clothes every person accused of crime with 
 the presumption of innocence and imposes upon the state the burden of 
 establishing his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, is not intended to aid 
 any one who is in fact guilty of crime to escape, but is a human provis- 
 ion of law, intended, so far as human agencies can, to guard against the 
 danger of any innocent person being unjustly punished. 
 
 12. 
 
 7 The court instructs the jury as a matter of law that in considering the 
 
 case the jury are not to go beyond the evidence to hunt up doubts, nor 
 must they entertain such doubts as are merely chimerical or conjectural. 
 A doubt to justify an acquittal must be reasonable, and it must arise 
 from a candid and impartial investigation of all the evidence in the case, and 
 unless it is such that were the same kind of doubt interposed in the graver 
 transactions of life, it would cause a reasonable and prudent man to hes- 
 itate and pause, it is insufficient to authorize a verdict of not guilty. If, 
 after considering all the evidence, you can say you have an abiding con- 
 viction of the truth of the charge, you are satisfied beyond a reasonable 
 doubt. 
 
 The court further instructs the jury, as a matter of law, that the doubt 
 which the juror is allowed to retain on his own mind, and under the influ-
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 ence of which he should frame a verdict of not guilt)-, must always be a 
 reasonable one. A doubt produced by undue sensibility in the mind of 
 any juror in view of the consequences of his verdict, is not a reasonable 
 doubt, and a juror is not allowed to create sources or materials of doubt 
 by resorting to trivial and fanciful suppositions and remote conjectures 
 as to possible states of fact differing from that established by the evidence. 
 You are not at liberty to disbelieve as jurors, if from the evidence you 
 believe as men; your oath imposes on you no obligation to doubt where 
 no doubt would exist if no oath had been administered. 
 
 The court instructs the jury that they are the judges of the law as 
 well as the facts in this case, and if they can say, upon their oaths, that 
 they know the law better than the court itself, they have the right to do 
 so; but before assuming so solemn a responsibility, they should be as- 
 sured that they are not acting from caprice or prejudice, that they are 
 not controlled by their will or their wishes, but from a deep and confident 
 conviction that the court is wrong and that they are right. Before say- 
 ing this, upon their oaths, it is their duty to reflect whether from their 
 study and experience they are better qualified to judge of the law than 
 the court. If, under all the circumstances, they are prepared to say that 
 the court is wrong in its exposition of the law, the statute has given 
 them that right. 
 
 14. 
 
 In this case the jury may, as in their judgment the evidence warrants, 
 find any or all of the defendants guilty or not, or all of them not guilty; 
 and if, in their judgment, the evidence warrants, they may, in case they 
 find the defendants or any of them guilty, fix the same penalty for all 
 the defendants found guilty, or different penalties for the different defend- 
 ants found guilty. 
 
 In case they find the defendants or any of them guilty of murder, 
 they should fix the penalty either at death or at imprisonment in the peni- 
 tentiary for life, or at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of 
 any number of years, not less than fourteen. 
 
 To the giving of which instructions and every one of them, respec- 
 tively, the defendants then and there severally excepted. 
 
 The following instructions asked by the defendants were refused by 
 the court:
 
 (12) 
 VOL. O. 
 
 10 i. No person can be legally convicted under the laws of Illinois on 
 account of any opinion or principles entertained by him. It cannot be 
 material in this case that defendants, or some of them are or may be 
 socialists, communists or anarchists, and no prejudice ought to be borne 
 against them on account thereof by the jury, although the jury may 
 believe their doctrines are false and pernicious. 
 
 2 . If you believe from the evidence that it was only manslaughter in 
 the person inflicting the injury which caused the death of Mathias J. 
 Degan, then it was only manslaughter in the accessory. 
 
 If, therefore, the jury believe from the evidence that on the night of 
 the 41)1 of May, the defendants, or some of them, were present 
 at a meeting held for the purpose of discussing the situation of laboring 
 men, and advising them to insist upon their demands by the use of force, 
 and the deceased, Mathias J. Degan, was one among a number of police 
 officers who attempted unlawfully to disperse the meeting; and there- 
 upon some person, while resisting the act of the police, upon a sudden 
 heat and passion, and without premeditation or malice, threw the missile 
 while resisting such unlawful arrest, then the perpetrator of the act is 
 only guilty of manslaughter. 
 
 11 3. The court instructs the jury that, in order to convict these defend- 
 ants, they must not only find that they entered into an illegal conspiracy, 
 and that the Haymarket meeting was an unlawful assembly in aid of said 
 conspiracy, but that in addition thereto that the bomb by which Officer 
 Degan lost his life was cast by a member of said conspiracy in aid of 
 the common design, or by a person outside of said conspiracy, aided and 
 advised by all or some one of these defendants; but in any event, should 
 you find such a conspiracy from the evidence to have been in existence, 
 any one or more of these defendants not found beyond a reasonable 
 doubt to have been a member thereof, and who is or are not proved 
 beyond a reasonable doubt to have been present at the Haymarket 
 meeting, or who, if present, did not knowingly counsel, aid or abet the 
 throwing of the bomb by which officer Degan lost his life, such defend- 
 ant or defendants you are bound to acquit. 
 
 4. The court instructs the jury that the prosecution is bound to prove 
 the guilt of the defendants beyond a reasonable doubt before they are called 
 upon to offer any evidence of their innocence, and if the guilt of any of 
 these defendants, on the testimony of the state, should be established 
 beyond reasonable doubt in your minds, and such defendant by the testi- 
 mony introduced by him awakens an apprehension in your minds that
 
 ('3) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 he is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the whole of the evidence 
 taken together of the crime as laid in the indictment, you are bound to 
 acquit such defendants. 
 
 5. The court instructs the jury, that the policy of our law deems it bet- 
 ter that many guilty persons should escape rather than that one innocent 
 person should be convicted and punished; so that, unless the jury, after 
 a careful and thorough consideration of all the evidence in the case, can 
 say and feel that every material allegation in the indictment is proved 
 beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury should find the defendants not 
 guilty. 
 
 12 6. The court instructs the jury, if you believe from the evidence that 
 
 on the night of the 4th of May the defendants or some of them were 
 holding a meeting on the Haymarket for the purposes of discussing the 
 grievances of the workingmen, and of advising them to forcibly insist 
 upon their demands from their employers, and the police, although aware 
 of the object of the meeting, and the lawful authorities invested with the 
 power of dispersing said meeting, and being present, sanctioned and 
 conceded its lawfulness, yet a police officer, having the charge, direction 
 and control of a large number of police officers, of his own volition, go 
 upon the scene of the meeting for the pretended purpose of dispersing 
 it, but in fact for the purpose of destroying the lives of all the persons 
 there assembled, and some person in the meeting having a reason to ap- 
 prehend that such was the real purpose of the police force, in order to 
 avoid being killed, hurl a deadly missile at such officers, whereby the 
 life of the deceased, Matthias J. Degan, who was one of said officers, 
 was destroyed, then, in the- eye of the law, such act of the person 
 throwing the missile is justifiable, and neither he nor the persons with 
 whom he is associated, can be held responsible for the act. 
 
 7. While any act done by a member of an unlawful conspiracy in fur- 
 therance of the common design is the act of all; yet collateral acts carry 
 responsibility only to the individual or individuals perpetrating them; the 
 court instructs you, gentlemen, that should you find that the defendants 
 illegally conspiring to overthrow the government, but that they de- 
 clared to their fellow conspirators that nothing should be done in fur- 
 therance of the common design, beyond the making of speeches, should 
 these be found by you to be in furtherance thereof, at the Haymarket 
 meeting, but that, notwithstanding that declaration, a member of the 
 conspiracy so found to be in existence, of his own volition, out of the de- 
 pravity of his own heart, impelled by a vicious, depraved mind, contrary
 
 (H) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 to the advice, intention and design of these defendants, threw the bomb 
 by which officer Degan lost his life, such throwing was a collateral act 
 for which these defendants are not liable, and so finding, you must acquit 
 them. 
 
 13 8. If the jury believe from the evidence that the defendants or any 
 one of them entered into a conspiracy to bring about a change of govern- 
 ment for the amelioration of the condition of the working classes by 
 peaceable means, if possible, but if necessary to resort to force for that 
 purpose, and that in addition thereto in pursuance of that object the 
 Hay market meeting was assembled by such conspirator or conspirators 
 to discuss the best means to right the grievances of the working classes, 
 without any intention of doing any unlawful act on that occasion, and 
 while so assembled the bomb by which officer Degan lost his life 
 was thrown by a person outside of said conspiracy, and without the 
 knowledge and approval of the defendant or defendants, so found to 
 have entered into said conspiracy, then and in that case the court in- 
 structs the jury that they are bound to acquit the defendants. 
 
 9. The court instructs the jury that it is not enough to find that the 
 defendants unlawfully conspired to overthrow the present form of govern- 
 ment, and that the Haymarket meeting was an unlawful assembly called 
 by these defendants in furtherance of that conspiracy, but you must find, 
 in addition thereto, that the bomb by which officer Degan lost his life 
 was thrown by a member of said conspiracy, in aid of the common de- 
 sign; or if you should find that it was thrown by a person not proved 
 beyond a reasonable doubt to have been a member of said conspiracy, 
 then you must find that these defendants knowingly aided and abetted 
 or advised such bomb thrower to do the act, otherwise you are bound to 
 acquit them. 
 
 IV. 
 
 14 10. The mere confession of Lingg that he was at the meeting of the 
 night of the 3d of May is insufficient to establish the fact that he was 
 there, and if you believe that it is shown by other satisfactory evidence 
 that Lingg was not at that meeting and knowingly did no act in further- 
 ance of the plan of the meetings, and was not present at the meeting 
 held on the night of the 4th of May, then he is entitled to an acquittal 
 at your hands. 
 
 n. The court further instructs the jury, that unless you find from the
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 evidence, beyond all reasonable doubt, that there was a conspiracy ex- 
 isting to which the defendants or some of them were parties, and that 
 the act resulting in the death of Malhias J. Degan was done by some- 
 body who was a party to said conspiracy, and in pursuance of the 
 common design of said conspiracy, you must find the defendants not 
 guilty, unless the evidence convinces you, beyond all reasonable doubt, 
 that the defendants or any of them personally 'committed the act re- 
 sulting in the death of Mathias J. Degan, as charged in the indictment, 
 or that the defendants or any of them stood by and aided, abetted or 
 assisted, or not being present, had advised, aided, encouraged or 
 abetted the perpetration of the crime charged in the indictment, and 
 then you should find guilty only those defendants as to whom the evi- 
 dence satisnes you, beyond all reasonable doubt, that they thus com- 
 mitted or aided in the commission of the crime charged in the indict- 
 ment. 
 
 12. The court instructs the jury, as a matter of law, that the guilt of 
 any person, charged as accessory before the fact to any crime, is dependent 
 upon the guilt of the principal. And before you can find any of the de- 
 fendants guilty as accessory before the fact to the crime charged in the 
 indictment, it is incumbent upon the state to show who did the act re- 
 sulting in the death of Mathias J. Degan, as charged in the indictment, 
 and the evidence must convince you, beyond all reasonable doubt, of 
 the guilt of that person thus shown beyond all reasonable doubt to have 
 done the act, and unless you are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt 
 of the principal, it is your duty to acquit the person sought to be held as 
 accessory. 
 
 15 13. The court further instructs the jury, that under the constitution of 
 
 this state it is the right of the people to assemble in a peaceable man- 
 ner to consult for what they believe to be the common good, and that so 
 long as such meeting is peaceably conducted, orderly, and not tending 
 to riot or a breach of the peace, no official or authority has or can have 
 . any legal right to attempt the dispersal thereof in a forcible manner. 
 Such attempt, if made, would be unwarranted and illegal, and might 
 legally be resisted with such necessary and reasonable degree of force 
 as to prevent the consummation of such dispersal. 
 
 If the jury believe from the evidence in this cause that the meeting of 
 May 4, 1886, was called for a legal purpose, and at the time it was 
 ordered to disperse by the police was being conducted in an orderly and 
 peaceable manner and was about peaceably to disperse; and that the
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 defendants, or those participating in said meeting, had, in connection 
 therewith, no illegal or felonious purpose or design, then the order for 
 the dispersal thereof was unauthorized, illegal, and in violation of the 
 rights of said assembly and of the people who were then gathered. 
 
 And if the jury further believe from the evidence that the meeting 
 was a quiet and orderly meeting, lawfully convened, and that the order 
 for its dispersal was unauthorized and illegal under the provisions of 
 the constitution of this state referred to, and that upon such order being 
 given, some person in said gathering, without the knowledge, aid, coun- 
 sel, procurement, encouragement or abetting of the defendants, or any 
 of them, then or theretofore given, and solely because of his own 
 passion, fear, hatred, malice or ill-will, or in pursuance of his view 
 of the right of self-defense, threw a bomb among the police, where- 
 from resulted the murder or homicide charged in the indictment, then 
 the defendants would not be liable for the results of such bomb, and 
 your verdict should be not guilty. 
 
 14. The court further instructs the jury that the mere manufacture and 
 disposition of deadly weapons does not of itself make the party so manu- 
 facturing or disposing thereof responsible thereof for murder committed 
 therewith by third parties. Before such manufacturer or distributor can 
 be held liable for a murder committed by a third party, it must be made 
 to appear by credible evidence, beyond all reasonable doubt, that such 
 manufacturer or distributor countenanced, advised, aided, encouraged or 
 abetted the particular act of such third party, which resulted in the homi- 
 cide, and was thus himself in contemplation of law accessory to the par- 
 ticular act charged as a crime. 
 
 16 1 5. If the jury are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that a conspiracy 
 
 was formed, participated in by defendants, or some of them, to commit a 
 breach of the peace and to use violence in the event of a collision between 
 the police and the striking workmen, or others and further find a crime 
 was committed at the Haymarket by the killing of Degan, still, if from 
 any reasonable hypothesis, the jury believe that some one else than any 
 of defendants unaided, unassisted and unadvised by defendants or any 
 one of them may have committed said crime, it is the duty of the jury 
 to acquit all of said defendants. 
 
 16. The court instructs the jury that, although you may find from the 
 evidence, beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendants or some of 
 them were engaged in a conspiracy, this alone is not sufficient to warrant 
 a verdict of guilty as to those defendants thus believed to have been en-
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 gaged in said conspiracy; but before you can find those defendants guilty, 
 the evidence must also establish, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the 
 party who committed the act resulting in the death of Mathias J. Degan 
 was a party to said conspiracy, and that said act was done in furtherance 
 of the common design entertained by said conspiracy. 
 
 17. If the jury are satisfied that a conspiracy was formed, participated 
 in by defendants or some of them, to commit a breach of the peace and 
 to use violence in the event of a collision between the police and the striking 
 workmen or others, and further find that a crime was committed at the 
 . Haymarket by the killing of Degan, still, unless you believe from the 
 evidence that the death of Degan was caused by some one of the sup- 
 posed conspirators, in pursuance of the common design, and further that 
 a person who was a co-conspirator committed the act which caused the 
 death of Degan, the defendants are entitled to an acquittal. 
 17 18. Although certain of the defendants may have advised the use of 
 
 force in opposition to the legally constituted authorities, or the overthrow 
 of the laws of the land, yet unless the jury can find, beyond all reasonable 
 doubt, that they specifically threw the bomb which killed Degan, or 
 aided, advised, counseled, assisted or encouraged said act, or the doing 
 of some illegal act or the accomplishment of some act by illegal means 
 in the furtherance of which said bomb was :hrown, you should return 
 said defendants not guilty. 
 
 19. If the person who threw the bomb which killed Degan, did so in 
 heat of passion from the sudden appearance of the police and the order 
 to disperse given, or for any other reason, or from any other cause, but 
 without deliberation, premeditation or malice, he would then be guilty of 
 manslaughter only, and not murder. 
 
 20. If the principal is guilty of the crime of manslaughter only, the 
 accessories before the fact to his crime can be guilty of no greater crime; 
 that is, the parties that plan a crime are guilty in no greater degree than 
 the one who executes the plan and commits the act. 
 
 21. The jury may find from the whole evidence that the person who 
 threw the-bomb which killed Degan, acted upon his own responsibility, and 
 that defendants, nor any of them, were in any way connected with said 
 act. If the jury so find, the defendants must be acquitted. 
 
 This proposition being true, it is also true, that before defendants or 
 any of them can be convicted, the people must prove that they either 
 threw the bomb, or that the same was thrown by and through their pro- 
 curement or agency, and with their knowledge, consent, procurement 
 and advice.
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 18 22. The fact, if such is the fact, that the defendant Neebe circulated 
 or distributed or handled a few copies of the so-called Revenge circular, 
 and while doing so said substantially: "Six workmen have been killed 
 at McCormick's last night by the police; perhaps the time will come 
 when it may go the other way," is not of itself sufficient to connect him 
 with the killing of Degan, nor is the fact that he had in his house a red 
 flag, a gun, a revolver and a sword sufficient, even when taken together 
 with the other statement contained in this construction, to connect said 
 Neebe with the act which resulted in the death of Degan, as charged in 
 this indictment. 
 
 23. There has not been introduced any evidence in this case to either 
 show that the defendant Neebe, by any declaration, either spoken 
 or written, has advised or encouraged the use of violence or the doing 
 of any act in any way connected with the offense at the Haymarket, at 
 which Degan was killed; nor is there any evidence that he was engaged 
 at any time in any conspiracy to do any unlawful act, or the doing of 
 any act in an unlawful manner, in the furtherance of which said Degan 
 was killed, and therefore the state has not established any case as against 
 the defendant Neebe, and you are therefore instructed to render a ver- 
 dict of not guilty as to him. 
 
 24. The jury are instructed to return a verdict of not guilty as to the 
 defendant Neebe. 
 
 25. The defendants in this case cannot be convicted upon the mere 
 proof of advice that the use of force and dynamite should be resorted to 
 generally, but such proof must specially refer to some circumstance, time, 
 place or event, so that such advice is directly traceable to the crime, and 
 the crime clearly leads back to such counsel. If this proposition is not 
 established beyond reasonable doubt, the connection between defendants 
 (if they did not themselves throw the bomb) and the person who did 
 throw said bomb is not established, and the defendants must be acquitted. 
 
 19 To the refusal of the court to give above instructions, and each and 
 every one of them, the defendants severally excepted. 
 
 Instructions given on behalf of defendants: 
 
 20 The jury in a criminal case are the judges of the law and the evidence, 
 and have to act according to their best judgment of such law and the 
 facts. 
 
 The jury have a right to disregard the instructions of the court, pro- 
 vided they can say upon their oaths that they believe they know the 
 law better than the court.
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 The law presumes the defendants innocent of the charge in the indict- 
 ment until the jury are satisfied by the evidence, beyond all reasonable 
 doubt, of the guilt of the defendants. 
 
 If a reasonable doubt of any facts, necessary to convict the accused, is 
 raised in the minds of the jury by the evidence itself, or by the ingenuity 
 of counsel upon any hypothesis reasonably consistent with the evidence, 
 that doubt is decisive in favor of the prisoners' acquittal. A verdict of 
 not guilty simply means that the guilt of the accused has not been 
 demonstrated in the precise, specific and narrow forms prescribed by 
 law. 
 
 21 No jury should convict anybody of crime upon mere suspicion, how- 
 ever strong, or because there is a preponderance of all the evidence 
 against him, but the jury must be convinced of the defendants' guilt, be- 
 yond all reasonable doubt, before they can lawfully convict. 
 
 The law does "not require the defendants to prove themselves innocent, 
 but the burden of proof that they are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt 
 is upon the prosecution. 
 
 The indictment is of itself a mere accusation and no proof of the guilt 
 of the defendants. 
 
 The presumption of the innocence of the defendants is not a mere 
 form, but an essential substantial part of the law of the land, and it is 
 the duty of the jury to give the defendants the full benefit of this pre- 
 sumption in this case. 
 
 It is incumbent upon the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable 
 doubt every material allegation in the indictment, and unless that has 
 been done, the jury should find the defendants not guilty. 
 
 22 The burden is upon the prosecution to prove by credible evidence 
 beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendants are guilty as charged in 
 the indictment of the murder of Mathias J. Degan; it is the duty of the 
 jury to acquit any of the defendants as to whom there is a failure of 
 such proof. The jury are not at liberty to adopt any unreasonable 
 theories or suppositions in considering the evidence in order to justify a 
 verdict of conviction. 
 
 A reasonable doubt is that state of mind, in which the jury, after con- 
 sidering all the evidence, cannot say they feel an abiding faith amounting 
 to a moral certainty, from the evidence in the case, that the defendants 
 are guilty as charged in the indictment. 
 
 The rules of evidence as to the amount of evidence in this case are 
 different from those in a civil case; a mere preponderance of evidence 
 would not warrant a verdict of guilty.
 
 (20) 
 VOL. O. . 
 
 23 Mere probability of the defendants' guilt is not sufficient to warrant a 
 conviction. 
 
 Your personal opinions as to facts not proved cannot be the basis of 
 your verdict, but you must form your verdict from the evidence, and 
 that alone, unaided and uninfluenced by any opinions or presumptions 
 not founded upon the evidence. 
 
 The jury are the sole judges of the credibility of witnesses, and in 
 passing thereon may consider their prejudices, motives or feelings of 
 revenge, if any such have appeared, and if the jury believe from the 
 evidence that any witness has knowingly or wilfully testified falsely as 
 to any material fact, they may disregard his entire testimony, unless it is 
 corroborated by other credible evidence. 
 
 24 If one single fact is proved by a preponderance of the evidence, which 
 is inconsistent with the guilt of a defendant, this is sufficient to raise a 
 reasonable doubt as to his guilt and entitles him to an acquittal. In order 
 to justify the inference of legal guilt from circumstantial evidence, the 
 existence of the inculpatory facts must be absolutely incompatible with 
 the innocence of the accused upon any rational theory. 
 
 The witnesses, Gottfried Waller and Wilhelm Seliger, are accom- 
 plices, and while a person accused of crime may be convicted upon the 
 uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, still the jury should weigh 
 it with great care and caution, and convict upon it only, if they are satis- 
 fied beyond any reasonable doubt of its truth. 
 
 If you believe from the evidence that the witnesses Gottfried Waller 
 and Wilhelm Seliger were induced to become witnesses by any promise 
 of immunity from punishment, or by any hope held out to them, that it 
 would go easier with them in case they disclosed who their confederates 
 were, or in case they implicated some one else in the crime, then you 
 should take such facts into consideration in determining the weight to 
 be given to their testimony. 
 
 25 Same instruction in regard to the testimony of any other witnesses 
 for the prosecution. 
 
 The testimony of an accomplice should be subjected to critical exami- 
 nation in the light of all the other evidence. 
 
 A person charged with crime may testify in his own behalf, but his 
 neglect to do so shall not create any presumption against him. 
 
 The jury should endeavor to reconcile the testimony of the defendants' 
 witnesses with the belief that all of them endeavored to tell the truth, 
 and you should attribute any contradictions or differences in their testi-
 
 (21) 
 VOL. O. 
 
 mony to mistake or misrecollection rather than to a wilful intention to 
 swear falsely, if you can reasonably do so under the evidence. 
 
 26 The jury should fairly and impartially consider the testimony of the 
 defendants, together with all the other evidence. 
 
 If the verbal admission of a defendant is offered in evidence, the 
 whole of the admission must be taken together, and those parts which 
 are in favor of the defendant are entitled to as much consideration as 
 any other parts, unless disproved, or apparently improbable or untrue, 
 when considered with all the other evidence. 
 
 It would be improper for the jury to regard any statements of the 
 prosecuting attorneys not based upon the evidence, as entitled to any 
 weight. 
 
 If all the facts and circumstances relied on by the people to secure a 
 conviction can be reasonably acounted for, upon any theory consistent 
 with the innocence of the defendants, or any of them, then you should 
 acquit such of them as to whom the facts proven can thus be accounted 
 for. 
 
 27 It is not enough to warrant the conviction of a person charged with 
 crime that he contemplated the commission of such crime. If any reas- 
 onable hypothesis exists that such crime may have been committed by 
 another in no way connected with the defendants, the accused should be 
 acquitted. 
 
 If the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defend- 
 ants, as charged in the indictment, the jury should acquit, although the 
 evidence may show conduct of no less turpitude than the crime 
 charged. 
 
 The allusions and references of the prosecuting attorneys to the sup- 
 posed dangerous character of any views entertained or, principles con- 
 tended for by the accused, should in no way influence you in determin- 
 ing this case. 
 
 Individuals and communities have the legal right to arm themselves for 
 the defense and protection of their persons and property, and a proposi- 
 tion by any person, publicly proclaimed, to arm for such protection and 
 defense, is not an offense against the laws of this state. 
 
 If the defendants, or some of them, agreed together, or with others, 
 in the event of the workingmen or strikers, that they (defendants) 
 
 would assist the strikers to resist such an attack, this would not consti- 
 
 k 
 
 tute conspiracy if the anticipated attack was unjustified and illegal, and 
 such contemplated resistance simply the opposing of force wrongfully 
 and illegally exercised, by force sufficient to repel said assault.
 
 (22) 
 VOL. O. 
 
 28 The burden is not cast upon the defendants of proving that the person 
 who threw the bomb was not acting under their advice, teaching or pro- 
 curement. Unless the evidence proves beyond all reasonable doubt, that 
 either some of the defendants threw said bomb, or that the person who 
 threw it acted under the advice and procurement of defendants or some 
 of them, the defendants should be acquitted. Such advice may not nec- 
 essarily be special as to the bomb, but general, so as to include it. 
 
 It is not proper for the jury to guess that the person who threw the 
 bomb was instigated to do the act by the procurement of defendants or 
 any of them. There must be a direct connection established by credible 
 evidence between the advice and the consummation of the crime, beyond 
 all reasonable doubt. 
 
 29 The bomb might have been thrown by some one unfamiliar with, and 
 unprompted by, the teachings of the defendants or any of them. Before 
 defendants can be held liable therefor, the evidence must satisfy you 
 beyond all reasonable doubt that the person throwing said bomb was 
 acting as the result of the teaching or encouragement of defendants or 
 some of them. 
 
 Before a person charged as accessory to a crime can be convicted, the 
 evidence must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime was com- 
 mitted by some person acting under the advice, aid, encouragement, 
 abetting or procurement of the defendant whose conviction as accessory 
 is sought. Though you may believe from the evidence that a party in 
 fact advised the commission in certain contingencies of acts amounting to 
 crime, yet if the act complained of was in fact committed by some third 
 party of his own mere volition, hatred, malice or ill-will and not material- 
 ly influenced, either directly or indirectly, by such advice of the party 
 charged, or any party, for whose advice the defendants are responsible, 
 the party charged would not in such case be responsible. 
 
 If you find that at a meeting held on the evening of May 3d at 54 W. 
 Lake street, at which some of the defendants were present, it was agreed 
 that in the event of a collision between the police, militia or firemen and 
 the striking laborers, certain armed organizations, of which some of the 
 defendants were members, should meet at certain places in Chicago, that 
 a committee should attend public places and meetings where an attack 
 by the police and others might be expected, and in the event of such 
 attack report the same to said organizations to the end that such attack 
 might be resisted and the police stations of the city destroyed, still, if 
 
 30 the evidence does not prove beyond all reasonable doubt, that the throw-
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 ing of the bomb which killed Mathias J. Degan was the result of any act 
 in furtherance of the common design herein stated, and if it may have 
 been the unauthorized and individual act of some person acting upon his 
 own responsibility and volition, then none of the defendants can be held 
 responsible therefor on account of said W. Lake street meeting. 
 
 31 The following instruction on behalf of the defendant, Louis Lingg, 
 , was refused by the court: 
 
 32 It is not enough to warrant the conviction of the defendant Lingg that 
 he may have manufactured the bomb, the explosion of which killed 
 Mathias J. Degan. He must have aided, abetted or advised the explod- 
 ing of the bomb or the doing of some illegal act, or the doing of a 
 legal act in an unlawful manner, in the furtherance of which and as inci- 
 dent thereto the same was exploded and said Degan killed. If, as to the 
 defendant Linng, the jury should find beyond all reasonable doubt that 
 he did in fact manufacture said bomb, but are not satisfied beyond all 
 reasonable doubt that he aided, advised, counseled or abetted the throw- 
 ing of said missile or the doing of any unlawful act which resulted in 
 the explosion of said bomb, your verdict should acquit him, so far as the 
 establishment of his guilt is attempted by the manufacture of said mis- 
 sile or bomb. 
 
 33 Which instructions the court marked as given, and proceeded to 
 read the same to the jury until he had read the same about half through, 
 when the court stopped, and remarked in the presence of the jury, in 
 effect, that an instruction often impressed one differently when read aloud, 
 and thereupon suspended the further reading of said instruction, and 
 marked it " Refused," and refused to give said instruction to the jury in 
 the presence of the jury. 
 
 (To which action of the court, and each arjd every part thereof, 
 said defendant, Louis Lingg, then and there excepted.) 
 
 34 Upon the conclusion of the reading of the instructions in behalf of 
 the defendants, which were read after the instruction on behalf of the 
 people, the court of its own motion gave to the jury the following in- 
 struction : 
 
 35 The statute requires that instructions by the court to the jury shall be 
 in writing, and only relate to the law of the case. 
 
 The practice under the statute is that the counsel prepare on each side 
 a set of instructions and present them to the court, and if approved to 
 be read by the court as the law of the case. It may happen, by reason 
 of the great number presented and the hurry and confusion of passing
 
 (24) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 on them in the midst of the trial, with a large audience to keep in order, 
 that there may be some apparent inconsistency in them, but if they are 
 carefully scrutinized such inconsistencies will probably disappear. In 
 any event, however, the gist and pith of all is that if advice and encour- 
 agement to murder was given, if murder was done in pursuance of and 
 materially induced by such advice and encouragement, then those who 
 gave such advice and encouragement are guilty of the murder. Unless the 
 ^ evidence, either direct or circumstantial, or both, proves the guilt of one or 
 more of the defendants upon this principle so fully that there is no rea- 
 sonable doubt of it, your duty to them requires you to acquit them. If 
 it does so prove, then your duty to the state requires you to convict who- 
 ever is so proved guilty. The case of each defendant should be consid- 
 ered with the same care and scrutiny as if he alone were on trial. If a 
 conspiracy, having violence and murder as its object, is fully proved, then 
 the acts and declarations of each conspirator in furtherance of the con- 
 spiracy are the acts and declarations of each one of the conspirators. But 
 the declarations of any conspirator before or after the 4th of May which are 
 merely narrative as to what had been or would be done, and not made to 
 aid in carrying into effect the object of the conspiracy, are only evidence 
 against the one who made them. 
 
 What are the facts and what is the truth the jury must determine from 
 the evidence and from that alone. If there are any unguarded expres- 
 sions in any of the instructions which seem to assume the existence of 
 any facts, or to be any intimations as to what is proved, all such expres- 
 sions must be disregarded, and the evidence only looked to to deter- 
 mine the facts. 
 
 36 (To the giving of which instruction the defendants excepted.) 
 The following was the instruction given as to the form of the verdict: 
 
 37 If all of the defendants are found guilty the form of the verdict will be: 
 We the jury find the defendants guilty of murder in manner and form 
 
 as charged in the indictment, and fix the penalty 
 
 If all are found not guilty the form of the verdict will be: 
 
 We the jury find the defendants not guilty. 
 
 If part of the defendants are found guilty and part not guilty the form 
 of the verdict will be: 
 
 We the jury find the defendant or defendants (naming him or them) 
 not guilty; we find the defendant or defendants (naming him or them) 
 guilty of murder in manner and form as charged in the indictment, and 
 fix the penalty
 
 (25) 
 VOL. 0. 
 
 38 (To the giving of which instructions the defendants excepted.) 
 The defendants moved the court to give an instruction with reference 
 
 to the right of the jury to find a verdict of manslaughter under the in- 
 dictment. The court stated that if the defendants desired such an in- 
 struction given, they could prepare the same and submit it to the court. 
 The jury was then directed to retire. 
 
 And afterwards the court sent for the jury and gave the following in- 
 structions, submitted by counsel for defendants: 
 
 39 Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without mal- 
 ice or deliberation.' Punishment. Under an indictment for murder, the 
 accused may be found guilty of manslaughter. 
 
 43 . On October i, 1886, the arguments on the motion for new trial began. 
 
 The grounds of defendants' motion for new trial were read, showing that 
 the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence in the case; that the 
 court erred in giving the several instructions on behalf of the people, and 
 in refusing and modifying certain instructions asked to be given by de- 
 fendants; in admitting incompetent testimony for the people and excluding 
 testimony for the defendants; that the jury was not impartial; misconduct 
 of the officers summoning the jurors under special venires; there is newly 
 
 44 discovered evidence; the closing argument of the state's attorney was 
 improper; the court erred in its ruling in regard to the competency of 
 jurors, in overruling the motion of defendants Spies, Schwab, Fielden 
 and Neebe for a separate trial. 
 
 47 The defendants then moved the court for leave to examine Otis S. 
 
 Favor in open court touching certain matters referred to in affidavit of 
 defendants and of E. A. Stevens, which were read. 
 
 49 The affidavit of defendants shows upon information and belief the fol- 
 
 lowing: the special bailiff, Henry L. Ryce, with the avowed intention of 
 making sure of the conviction of affiants, selected the parties summoned 
 by him for jury service in this case from men having prejudices in the 
 case and fixed beliefs as to the guilt of affiants; that consequently affiants 
 were compelled to accept such men as jurors to try the case; the above 
 facts can be shown by the testimony of Otis S. Favor, to whom Ryce 
 made statements to the effect that he was managing the case against 
 affiants and knew what he was about, that they would hang as certain as 
 death; that he was summoning as jurors men whom affiants would be 
 compelled to challenge, whereby their challenges would be exhausted, 
 and they would be compelled to accept as jurors such men as were satis- 
 factory to the prosecution. Affiants received information of premises
 
 (26) 
 VOL. O. 
 
 long after the verdict and only within a few days past; said Favor refuses 
 to make anv affidavit substantiating above on account of the popular 
 prejudice against defendants, but would testify to the matters set forth, if 
 
 50 required as a witness to do so; the above remarks of Ryce were made 
 almost immediately upon the appearance, in one of the leading papers in 
 the city, of an editorial, advising, substantially, such a course in the selec- 
 tion of jurors. Affiants therefore ask that Otis S. Favor be required to 
 testify herein touching above matters, and that such testimony when 
 given, may be considered in support of the motion for new trial. 
 
 51 Affidavit of E. A. Stevens shows: he is well acquainted with Otis S. 
 Favor, a citizen of this state, and merchant of standing and repute in 
 Chicago; said Favor is intimately acquainted with Henry L. Ryce, who 
 acted as special bailiff in summoning jurors in this case; affiant has heard 
 Favor state that Ryce said to Favor and others in his presence, that he 
 (Ryce) was managing this case and knew what he was about; that the 
 defendants are going to be hanged as certain as death; he was calling 
 such men as the defense would have to peremptorily challenge and waste 
 their time and challenges; then they would have to take such men as 
 the prosecution wants. Affiant requested Favor to make an affidavit 
 regarding above statements of Ryce, but Favor refused to do so, stating 
 that he would take no action in favor of the defendants, but if called as 
 a witness and compelled to testify, might state the fact as to what was 
 said by Ryce substantially as above stated. 
 
 53 In addition, Mr. Black states, that in a personal conversation with said 
 
 Favor the same did not deny the alleged statements by him, but declared 
 he would not speak of the matter, unless required to do so under some 
 order of court; that Mr. Favor's place of business is close by, and 
 
 54-60 further moves the court to issue a subpoena for Mr. Favor's attendance, 
 who was in town and whose place of business was within a quarter of a 
 mile, so that the proceedings would not be delayed. After argument the 
 court overrules the motion, giving as reasons that the arguments on 
 the motion for new trial had been peremptorily set for this day, and that 
 even if Favor was here, it would be of no consequence, as it was well 
 known to everybody present at the trial that the last fifty of defendants' 
 peremptory challenges were exhausted simply for the purpose of exhaust- 
 
 61 ing them. The defendants excepted to the ruling of the court. 
 
 64, 65 Affidavit of defendants showing that since the trial of this case there has 
 come to their knowledge certain newly-discovered evidence of material 
 matters which could be proved on a new trial and are contained in the
 
 ( 2 7) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 affidavits filed; also that certain expressions of opinion, feeling or purpose 
 of certain jurors set up in affidavits, showing said jurors to have been dis- 
 qualified, have come to their knowledge since they had been respectively 
 accepted. 
 
 66 Affidavit of Thomas J. Morgan shows that he is a citizen of Illinois 
 
 and of the United States, lives at Woodlawn Park, and well knows T. 
 E. Denker, of the same place, who was one of the jurors who tried this 
 case; that on May 6, 1886, when affiant stated in a conversation with 
 his son in reference to a picture of Spies in a Chicago paper, that said 
 picture did not look more like Spies than it did like affiant, said Denker 
 stated, with much feeling and emphasis, in effect as follows: It don't 
 make any difference whether it is like him or not he and the whole 
 damned crowd ought to be hung referring to some of the defendants 
 then under arrest for alleged responsibility for the so-called Haymarket 
 
 66, 67 massacre. Affiant states that he is not and never has been an anarchist. 
 Affidavit of Thomas S. Morgan shows that affiant is a son of Thomas 
 J. Morgan, corroborates the above affidavit of the latter in every material 
 point, and states that affiant is not an anarchist, nor a member of any so- 
 cialistic, communistic or anarchistic group or society. 
 
 68 Affidavit of Michael Cull shows that he has resided at Evanston, 
 
 Cook county, for twenty-four years; is a married man and lives with his 
 family; he is well acquainted since fifteen years with G. W. Adams, of 
 Evanston, who was one of the jurors in this case; that shortly after the 
 Haymarket affair said Adams, affiant and a number of others had a 
 conversation about that affair in the vicinity of Adams' paint shop; that 
 in that conversation affiant stated that the police had no right to interfere 
 with the Haymarket meeting; if the police had let them alone they would 
 have gone home in a little while, to which said Adams replied that the 
 police ought to have shot them all down; that they (meaning defendants) 
 had no right in this country, and if he (Adams) were on the jury he 
 would hang all " the damned buggers." 
 
 Sworn to, on September 30, 1886, before M. Salomon, notary public, 
 and res worn to on October i, 1886, before John Stephens, clerk of the 
 Criminal court of Cook county. 
 
 71 The affidavit of Albert P. Love shows that he is a resident of La 
 
 Grange, Cook county, owns his home there, is a painter and has known 
 Harry L. Gilmer since ten years; that on May 4, 1886, shortly after 8 
 p. M., he and Orrin S. Blossom, a painter, met said Gilmer on Halsted 
 street, somewhere between Madison and Van Buren streets; the three
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 went to a saloon on the north-east corner of Halsted and Van Buren 
 streets, where they and another painter, Phil Hunt, drank and remained 
 in conversation until a little after 9 P. M., when affiant left to take the 9:20 
 p. M. train for home, while Gilmer, Blossom and Hunt remained there; 
 the next morning affiant saw an account of the bomb-throwing on the 
 Haymarket. Affiant has been a resident of Cook county for about 
 twenty years past, having come to Chicago immediately after being 
 mustered out of the United States service, where he was a private 
 
 72 soldier in the 29th Regt. Indiana Volunteers. Affiant never communi- 
 cated the above facts to anybody until after the verdict in this case; is 
 ready to testify to them, if a new trial should be granted; is not a social- 
 ist, anarchist, or communist, and has no relation to any of the defendants. 
 
 Affidavit of Orrin S. Blossom shows that he has known Albert P. 
 Love since eight or ten years, is a painter and remembers being with 
 said Love, one night early in May, 1886, on the west side, and at some 
 place on Halsted street, between Madison and Van Buren; a tall, spare 
 man,, a painter, joined them ; the three went into a saloon at the north-east 
 corner of Halsted and Van Buren streets, about 8 p. M., and remained 
 there some considerable time talking. Affiant did not at the time know 
 the name of the tall painter, but said Love told him it was Harry L. 
 Gilmer; the man was considerable over six feet high, light complexioned, 
 spare and raw-boned. In the saloon they were joined by another painter, 
 who was called Hunt by Love. About 9 P. M. Love left the saloon, 
 while affiant, Gilmer and Hunt remained there drinking and talking 
 
 73 until about half-past 10. Affiant has lived in Chicago since about ten 
 years; is a boss painter since about four years; is not a socialist, anar- 
 chist, or communist; has no relation with any of defendants; has never 
 detailed the above facts until since the verdict in this case; that Love is 
 a man of property and of good standing and repute among his friends, 
 and the above occasion was the only one, when affiant was with said 
 Love at or near that date. 
 
 81 Affidavit of John Philip Deluse, dated August 24, 1886, shows that 
 
 he lives in Indianapolis, Indiana, and keeps a saloon there; that he is no 
 socialist, anarchist or communist, belongs to no labor organization and is 
 not in sympathy with the Chicago anarchists or any other; that on a cer- 
 tain day in May, 1866, a man of medium size, about five feet and two to 
 four inches high, who had a mustache, wore a dark suit and carried a 
 small satchel about one and one-half feet long, entered the saloon, took a 
 drink and asked about the labor movement in Indianapolis. Affiant told
 
 (29) 
 VOL. O 
 
 him that everything was quiet there. The stranger then said: " I come 
 from New York and I guess I will go to Chicago, you will hear of some 
 trouble there very soon "; pointing to his satchel, he continued: " I have 
 got something in here that will work, you will hear of it." Leaving the 
 saloon, he turned again under the door and said once more: "You will 
 hear of it soon." A day or two afterwards the news came of the Hay- 
 market bomb-throwing. Affiant immediately thought of that stranger 
 and spoke to several persons about it, among them Mr. Oscar Sputh, a 
 teacher of gymnastics, and they brought the stranger and his satchel in 
 their minds together with the bomb-throwing. The verdict rendered in 
 this case was discussed last Saturday by a number of guests in my 
 saloon, when Mr. Sputh related the story of the stranger with his 
 satchel in the presence of Mr. Jacob L. Bieler and others. 
 
 82 Affidavit of Jacob L. Bieler confirms the statement in foregoing affi- 
 
 davit in regard to the Saturday conversation. 
 
 Affidavit of Oscar Sputh confirms all the statements relating to him 
 in the above affidavit of Deluse, and states that Deluse told him of the 
 stranger and his peculiar expression on May 5, 1886. 
 
 84 Affidavit of Sigmund Zeisler shows that James H. Cole, who was one 
 
 of the jurors who tried this case, said to affiant, in substance: " We 
 jurors could hardly make a mistake as to what the evidence was. When 
 the taking of evidence commenced, I myself suggested to the other 
 jurors, that this was probably going to be a long and tedious trial and 
 we all ought to take notes of the evidence as it would be introduced. 
 You saw that proposition was carried out; every one of us had a full 
 synopsis of the important points of the evidence. No, we all knew 
 what the evidence was, before the lawyers commenced their arguments." 
 Affiant further says that he observed the jurors during the entire trial 
 and saw that most of them were almost incessantly writing in little note 
 books, while evidence was introduced. 
 
 86 From the affidavit of William P. Black, read to the court on motion 
 for the new trial, it appears that the State's Attorney, Julius S. Grinnell, 
 in addressing the jury, made use of the following language: "In this 
 
 87 temple of justice, founded upon justice, to compare loathsome murderers 
 to Christ! Has the case for the defense descended so low, so mean, that 
 he, who was for peace, shall be compared to these wretches here! Be- 
 sides, a comparison with Christ, the man who was for peace, the com- 
 parison of these men with Victor Hugo, is another cruel thrust at liberty 
 itself. Victor Hugo, a pure man, who never counseled war of this kind,
 
 (3) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 and who was in France the exponent of republicanism, who desired to 
 have there what we have here Victor Hugo, compared with assassins! 
 The gentlemen upon the other side would allow you to believe, although 
 they have no confidence in the words they utter, for it is mere rhetoric 
 and talk for effect, and to save a possible doubt for a lot of wretches, 
 the comparison is made of the defendants with Victor Hugo. His 
 writings are in evidence here, some of them. Think of that for an ad- 
 ditional comparison, and for what purpose? To save these men, not 
 from punishment, for all the counsel admit in their arguments that they 
 should be punished to save them from death. As I said, there is only 
 a step from republicanism to anarchy. Let us never take, that step. 
 Gentlemen, the great responsibility that has devolved on you in this case, 
 is greater than any jury in the history of the world ever undertook. 
 88 This is no slight or mean duty that you are called upon to perform. 
 You are to say whether that step shall be taken." 
 
 " One other suggestion I have to make to you in that connection, is 
 this: You have been trying a murder case in which the defendants are 
 charged with the murder of Mathias J. Degan. He was one of the 
 officers killed by the bomb at the Haymarket riot. You have also, as a 
 matter of law, been trying these defendants for the murder of seven 
 officers; because where the act of any individual or any number of indi- 
 viduals causes the murder of one or two, three or four, or seven indivi- 
 duals, the trial of one is the trial of all. In other words, if you should 
 see fit to acquit the defendants of the charge under this indictment, they 
 never could be tried again." 
 
 " The responsibility, gentlemen, is still greater with you, for a reason 
 which I will state to you. It has been frequently said to you that you 
 are trying these men for the murder of Mathias J. Degan. That is true, 
 technically; but really and actually you are trying the eight men for the 
 murder of the seven officers, as well as for the injury to these sixty others; 
 and that is why all the proof that you have heard has been introduced. 
 They complain of that proof, too. I will suggest another proposition to 
 you; if you should in this case concede that there was a reasonable doubt 
 as to the guilt of these men and acquit them, that is the end. There is 
 no appeal by the State of Illinois, Or if, in the trial of this case, you 
 should conclude that the defendants are guilty from the proof in this case 
 and under the instructions of the court, you then in rendering your ver- 
 dict, would do what the gentlemen on the other side from the numerous 
 exceptions they have taken, expect you to do find the defendants guilty,
 
 (3O 
 
 VOL. 0. 
 
 they can appeal. If they don't like your verdict they can ask this court 
 to set it aside, or the Supreme court of the state to review your judg- 
 ment. The state can never appeal. You remember Mr. Ingham's 
 
 89 analysis of the foolish conduct of a criminal it was admirable and un- 
 answerable. And, in that connection, I would say to you, not only out 
 of compliment to Mr. Ingham, but out of compliment to my profession, 
 Mr. Ingham's argument, gentlemen, stands before you untouched; and 
 as one of the counsel said to me in the hall, his argument was unanswer- 
 able, and therefore they would not undertake it." 
 
 (Objected to by Captain Black.) 
 
 Mr. GRINNELL, (continuing): "I am only giving the compliment to 
 the speech of Mr. Ingham, which it deserves. The fact remains, they 
 have not answered it." 
 
 On the subject of prejudice, he said: "Prejudice! Men, organized 
 assassins, can preach murder in our city for years, and you deliberately 
 under your oaths hear the proof and then say that you have no preju- 
 dice!" 
 
 Objected to by Capt. BLACK, who said." I wish to take an exception to 
 the language of the state's attorney. I should not have interrupted him, 
 but the frequent repetition makes it a decided offense against propriety, 
 that he should refer to these defendants, whose guilt is the question 
 under consideration, as assassins." 
 
 " Save your exception," replied Judge Gary. 
 
 Mr. GRINNELL (continuing): " Before I proceed further in the dis- 
 cussion of the case, that may be in some measure personal to the prose- 
 cution, not in the way of extenuating in the way of apology. We 
 stand here, gentlemen, as I told you yesterday, already with our verdict 
 in our favor; I mean in favor of the prosecution as to the conduct of this 
 case." 
 
 90 Capt. BLACK: " If the court please, I desire to note an exception to 
 that statement by the state's attorney." 
 
 The COURT: " Save the point." 
 
 Mr. GRINNELL (continuing) : " Let me give you a little plain history. 
 This case has engaged my personal attention, gentlemen, since the morn- 
 ing of May 5th, at 7 o'clock. It has been an engrossing attention, ab- 
 sorbing. It was proper that it should. Great interests were at stake 
 the law itself was on trial. Government was on trial. A murder had 
 been committed. The question was, ' Who was responsible?' Gilmer 
 told us the story on the 5th or the 6th or the 7th, I will not be sure about
 
 (32) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 the date, and has told us all the time the same. Remember this fact, 
 gentlemen, that on the first inception of this business, we had no knowl- 
 edge of the conspiracy." 
 
 (Defendants object; the court overrules the objection, and defendants 
 except.) 
 
 91 " When we had Spies under arrest, I confess to you then, after it was 
 developed that a conspiracy existed, I confessed this weakness that I 
 did not suppose that a man living in our community would enter into a 
 conspiracy so hellish and damnable as the proof showed, and our investi- 
 gations subsequently showed, he had entered into; therefore, notwith- 
 standing Gilmer's statements to us so frequently, he was not shown and 
 not identified. My associates found fault with me in the office imme- 
 diately afterwards for not clearly defining it.' ? 
 
 (Defendants except.) 
 
 92 " Don't try, gentlemen, to shirk the issues. Law is on trial, anarchy 
 is on trial; the defendants are on trial for treason and murder." 
 
 (Defendants object; the court overrules the objection, and defend- 
 ants except.) 
 
 " Treason, gentlemen, can only be committed by a citizen. You and 
 I can commit treason. None of these defendants, except Parsons and 
 Neebe, according to the statement of Mr. Foster, can commit treason 
 under the laws. Why? Because there are none of them citizens. If 
 they had been citizens, you (looking at counsel for defense) would have 
 proved it, or else there was more design in it than that. Or you failed to 
 prove it, because, thinking that there might be some possible chance or 
 technicality in the upper court, on the proofs produced here, and the 
 law, that they might be indicted for treason,- if we prove the fact that 
 they were citizens, because an overt act has been committed. That is 
 why they proved a case half at a time. First prove no conspiracy, and 
 then finding the difficulty to become great, assert before you that they 
 are citizens. I don't know whether Neebe was born in Philadelphia or 
 not; neither does Foster. But, gentlemen, Capt. Black suggested that 
 they are not on trial for treason. That is true. The penalty for treason 
 is death, and it is death in treason whether the individual committing a 
 treason, kills a man or not. A man can commit the overt act of treason 
 and injure no individual, and it is then death. Is the offense any the less 
 because seven men are dead and because sixty others, some of them 
 maimed for life? I lhank the gentleman for making the suggestion 
 
 93 about treason. But not content, these revolutionists, these traitors, these
 
 (33) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 men who have committed treason, I thank again the gentlemen for the 
 word, these men who have committed treason, are not content with con- 
 fining their power and influence to the small limits of Cook county, but 
 Spies goes to Grand Rapids, and there gives utterance to these same 
 treasonable sentences; and there is no doubt that other proselytes of the 
 humanitarian crowd were af other places in the country doing the same 
 thing. Another thing, they had prepared before the McCormick meet- 
 ing for this difficulty. How? At Emma street, on Sunday, was a con- 
 spiracy meeting of these infamous scoundrels, seeking our lives, seeking 
 the destruction of the law. For God's sake, has the defense descended 
 so low, that men in their graves must be brought up to save the lives of 
 wretches who have attempted to destroy the law? Weekly since the 
 4th of May have bombs been found scattered in the north and west and 
 south-west part of the city, and they will continue to be found." 
 
 (Defendants object; the court overrules the objection, and defendants 
 
 except.) 
 
 " As Wirt Dexter said in his speech about that matter, in praising the 
 act of the police in that transaction: ' How noble was? their conduct; in- 
 94 stead of fleeing and running, they said: ' Fall in, boys,' and the town was 
 saved. I would like to take you all over to the Haymarket that night, 
 and with you, with tears in your eyes, see the dead and mingle with the 
 dying.' 
 
 " Another thing: One of the officers swears that he was wounded in 
 the knee. I was not looking at Capt. Black when he motioned to you 
 the place where the wound occurred. For the purpose of correcting 
 mvself and making no mistake about it, because the testimony of an 
 officer or any witness who put his finger on the spot, cannot get into the 
 record, and I found that by looking at the record that he pointed his 
 finger here and here. Of course, there was no significance to that. I 
 had the officer come to my office and examined the wound, and I found 
 that the bullet went in there (indicating) and came out above, going 
 around opposite the knee-cap, and was not from behind." 
 
 (Defendants object; the court overrules the objection, and the de- 
 fendants except.) 
 
 96 The following reply affidavits were here read by counsel for the people, 
 copies of which had not been furnished beforehand to the defendants: 
 
 97 Affidavit of John Carney shows, that affiant is captain of police of 
 Evanston; has known Michael Cull for over twenty years; that said 
 Cull is a worthless and shiftless person; spends for liquor whatever he
 
 (34) 
 
 VOL. O. 
 
 earns, and does very little towards the support of his wife and five 
 children. 
 
 99 Affidavit of Geo. W. Adams shows, he was one of the jurors who 
 tried this case, and is the person mentioned in Michael Cull's affidavit; 
 that said Cull is a worthless, shiftless person; spends for liquor whatever 
 he earns; has a bad reputation in Evanston where he resides, for sobriety 
 and truthfulness; affiant never had any conversation with Cull or in his 
 hearing about the throwing of the bomb, the Haymarket affair, or the 
 
 100 action of the police there, or the defendants; never heard said Cull ex- 
 press the opinion attributed to him in his affidavit; affiant never expressed 
 the sentiment attributed to him in Cull's affidavit, nor anything in which 
 such sentiment was contained. 
 
 Affidavit of Theodore E. Denkler shows, he was one of the 
 jurors who tried this case and is the person referred to in the 
 affidavits of T. J. and T. S. Morgan; affiant has known T. J. Mor- 
 gan for some- time; that one morning soon after the 4th of May, 
 1886, affiant asked said Morgan if a picture of Spies in the newspapers 
 was a correct likeness of Spies, to which Morgan replied that it looked 
 no more like Spies than Morgan did; that affiant remembers no further 
 remarks about the Haymarket massacre in that connection; affiant be- 
 lieved at the time that Morgan was in sympathy with Spies and ex- 
 pressed no opinion, in order not to injure his feeling unnecessarily, al- 
 though affiant says that previous to his being accepted as a juror he had 
 an opinion and had expressed it. Affiant is informed and believes that 
 the son of said Morgan mentioned is about thirteen years of age. 
 
 101 Affidavit of Albert P. Love shows, that he is the same person 
 who made a statement purporting to be an affidavit in this case 
 in the morning of September 29, 1886, in the office of Salomon 
 & Zeisler; after signing the statement, a man asked him if the 
 signature was affiant's; affiant said yes, and the man said " all right"; 
 no oath was administered to affiant. A number of statements in said 
 pretended affidavit are not true. Affiant never knew Harry L. Gilmer; 
 never saw him, to his knowledge; did not see him on the night of May 
 4, 1886. Affiant was not in the city of Chicago on that day after 6:20 
 o'clock P. M., and was not, on that night, in company with Orrin S. 
 Blossom at any saloon in Chicago, or at any other place. Affiant spent 
 one evening with said Blossom visiting different saloons, but that was, as 
 
 102 affiant recollects, on May 5lh, while Blossom says he thinks it was on 
 May ist; but affiant has no recollection of having seen Gilmer on that
 
 (35) 
 
 VOL. 0. 
 
 night, or any person answering his description. Affiant knows one 
 Hunt, but has not seen him for five years last past. Affiant made said 
 statement because he had been promised he should be paid therefor im- 
 mediately upon its execution, and believed he could contradict it before it 
 
 
 
 was used in court. After having acknowledged his signature, one Lewis 
 L. Smith, who was present at the time in the office of Salomon & Zeisler 
 and with whom affiant had conversed about the making of such state- 
 ment prior thereto, was given a check by Mr. Zeisler for ninety-one dol- 
 lars. Affiant, Smith and Blossom who also made a statement at the 
 time, then had the check cashed and affiant received from Smith thirty 
 dollars, Blossom received the same, and one dollar was used in the pur- 
 chase of cigars. This affidavit is made voluntarily by affiant and he has 
 told Messrs. Black, Salomon and Zeisler that the former statement signed 
 by him was not true. 
 
 105 Affidavit of Orrin S. Blossom shows, he is the person who signed 
 
 a paper purporting to be an affidavit in this case. Affiant does 
 not know Harry L. Gilmer; never saw him, to his knowledge; 
 was not with him or with Albert P. Love on the west side, or 
 at any place, on the night of May 4, 1886; has no recollection of 
 meeting a tall, spare man, a painter, who answers the description of H. 
 L. Gilmer, on Halsted street between Madison and Van Buren. Affiant 
 t was with Love in different saloons on the night of May i, 1886, until 
 about 9 o'clock, but don't recollect of meeting Gilmer that night, but met 
 many painters whom he knew, and among them some tall men. Affiant 
 made the statement referred to in Salomon & Zeisler's office on Septem- 
 ber 29, 1886; he was simply asked if the signature was his, but no oath 
 was administered to him. Lewis L. Smith was present. Salomon told 
 affiant Smith would settle with him. Affiant received thirty dollars from 
 Smith after Smith had cashed a check of ninety-one dollars at the In- 
 ternational Bank. 
 
 126 Motion by defendants to have a reasonable time allowed to prepare 
 
 and file reply-affidavits as to material matters contained in the counter- 
 affidavits filed on behalf of the people before proceeding further with 
 the argument was overruled by the court, to which the defendants ex- 
 cepted.
 
 ABSTRACT OF JURY EXAMINATION, 
 
 IMPANELING OF THE JURY. 
 VOL. A. 
 
 i All of the jurors herein were first sworn in regular form, to answer 
 
 questions as to their competency. 
 
 William Veney Smith, excused by consent. 
 2-7 David H. Mason, peremptorily excused by state. 
 
 8-12 Edward H. Ca.npbell, peremptorily excused by state. 
 
 H. F. Chandler : I am in the artists' material business for Thayer & Chand- 
 ler; am a brother of the junior member of that firm. I was born in Chicago; 
 
 14 am twenty-four years old. I don't know any t>f the defendants. I have 
 read and talked about this case; was not present at the occurrence on 
 the night of May 4th. 1 would try to determine the innocence or guilt 
 of the defendants upon the proof presented to me in court here, regard- 
 less of everything that I have ever read or heard about it. I believe I 
 
 15 could do it. 
 
 58 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 The first thing I heard of the Haymarket trouble were the reports of 
 the guns that night. I live nearly a mile from the scene of the occur- 
 rence. Afterwards I read about it in the paper, and have been reading 
 
 59 about it ever since. I have formed no opinion upon the question of any 
 of these defendants' guilt or innocence of the murder of Mr. Degan. I 
 have a prejudice against socialists as a class, but none but what would be 
 removed if I heard the testimony. 
 
 71 Mr. Chandler peremptorily challenged by defendants. 
 
 16 W. M. Upham: I am a manufacturer of leather; live at 337 Wash- 
 
 17 ington boulevard. I read about this case and discussed it some; I quite 
 likely expressed some opinions myself and heard some expressions. I do 
 
 18 not know any of the defendants. I think I could determine the guilt or 
 innocence of the defendants upon the proof alone presented here in court, 
 but I don't know as I could distinguish between them. I have a fair 
 
 19 business memory. 
 
 (80)
 
 (37) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 6 1 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 I think I formed an opinion in regard to some of these defendants, 
 upon the question of their guilt or innocence, based upon the belief of 
 what I read and heard. I probably expressed that opinion to others. 
 
 63 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled.) 
 
 The COURT: Q. The question is whether you have ever formed or 
 expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of any one of these 
 eight men of the murder of officer Degan? 
 
 A. I cannot say what I have expressed in words, but my opinion was 
 that some of them are guilty. 
 
 The COURT: That is not any ground of challenge under the law. 
 
 64 I believed the statements upon which I formed my opinion to be true 
 at the time; I have the same opinion now which I then formed. 
 
 Q. Will it require sworn testimony to overcome the opinion which 
 you now have before you will be unbiased and free to act upon the 
 testimony? 
 
 66 (Objected to; objection sustained and exception.) 
 
 67 I have a prejudice against the teachings of socialists and anarchists; I be- 
 lieve their influence pernicious ; I have no prejudice against the individuals 
 which would in any way influence my verdict in this case. I think I 
 could render a verdict according to the law and the evidence. I have 
 
 68 some prejudice against labor organization and against men who teach the 
 right and speak in favor of the organization of laboring men for their 
 own protection. I don't think this prejudice would bias my judgment in 
 
 69 this case. I think I might get mixed up a little in remembering as to 
 which of the defendants the different parts of the evidence apply. 
 
 (Mr. Upham challenged for cause; challenge overruled; exception 
 by defendants. Mr. Upham challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 21-26 Henry H. Aldrich: I live on South Ashland avenue; am a commission 
 merchant on the board of trade. 
 
 4 1-47 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 I have formed and expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of 
 some of the defendants, based upon the belief of what I have read and 
 heard. 
 
 (Challenge for cause by defendants overruled.) 
 
 I have expressed an opinion upon the truth of the reports which I heard 
 about the transaction. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed and sustained.)
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 27-29 George Norval: I live at 159 So. Greene street, am keeping a board- 
 ing house now. 
 
 Challenged peremptorily by the state. 
 30-31 Jerry Albright: Excused for cause by state. 
 32-36 Joseph H. Peterson: Challenged for cause by state. 
 
 37-40 Sidney H. Warner: I live at 582 West Taylor street, employed by 
 the firm of Warner & Wilbur, in the commission business; am a member 
 of the board of trade. I do not know any of the defendants. I have 
 read and heard a good deal about this case and talked about it a little. 
 I think I could determine the innocence or guilt of the defendants upon 
 the proof presented here in court, regardless of everything that I have 
 ever heard about it. 
 
 48-50 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 I knew that the murder of those policemen at the Haymarket was 
 wrong. I did not form an opinion upon the question of the guilt of any 
 of these defendants. I don't think the papers always get it right. 
 
 52 Q. Suppose that it should appear in evidence that the meeting held 
 at the Haymarket square was a meeting called by socialists and anar- 
 chists, and was attended by them and others; suppose that it should fur- 
 ther appear that the bomb which is alleged to have produced the death 
 of Mr. Degan was thrown by some one in sympathy with the socialists 
 or anarchists. Now, provided it was not established beyond all reason- 
 able doubt that these defendants actually threw the bomb, or that they 
 aided, participated in or advised the committing of that wrong: Would 
 the fact that they were socialists or communists have any influence upon 
 your mind in determining their innocence? 
 
 (Question refused to be answered by the court as calling upon the 
 
 53 . juror to swear as to operations of his mind in the future. Excep- 
 
 tion by defendants.) 
 
 54 I have a prejudice against the class of socialists and anarchists, from 
 
 55 what I have heard of their belief. I don't think the fact of their being 
 socialists would prejudice me. 
 
 57 Q. I will ask you whether or not the fact that the defendants affirm 
 
 rather than swear, would in any way affect your mind as to the credit 
 which you would give to their testimony? 
 
 (Objected to; objection sustained, and exception by defendants.) 
 Q. I will ask you whether it would in any way, in your judgment,
 
 (39) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 affect their testimony, provided it would appear that they were atheists or 
 were not believers in the existence of a personal God? 
 
 (Objected to; objection sustained, and exception by defendants.) 
 
 71 Challenge for cause against Warner overruled, and exception. Warner 
 peremptorily challenged by defendants. 
 
 The panel of four jurors tendered to the defendants, namely, Waner, 
 Chandler, Upham and Aldrich, being exhausted by challenges exercised 
 by the defendants, the latter require the state to make another tender of 
 
 72 four jurors, instead of being required to tender back to the state four 
 jurors. The motion was overruled, and exception. 
 
 7378 Hiram A. Yarnell: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 79-82 John F. Vette: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 83-85 Albert Traff : Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 86-90 Arthur M. Elliott: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 91-96 Merrill K. Sweet, accepted and tendered to the State by defendants, 
 
 246-249 was, upon cross-examination, peremptorily challenged by the state. 
 
 97-104-163 Charles L. Wells: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 106-109 Lancaster: I have lived in Chicago eight years; have been engaged in 
 railroading in different capacities all that time. From reading and hear- 
 ing reports in regard to this case, which I believed to be true, I formed 
 an opinion in the case, but not upon the question of the guilt or innocence 
 
 no of any of these defendants. I have a prejudice against the persons who 
 instigated the throwing of the bomb; I have no prejudice against the class 
 of communists or anarchists or socialists; I do not know their objects; 
 
 114 Q. Suppose it should appear in evidence that the meeting held at the 
 
 Haymarket square was a meeting called by socialists or anarchists, and 
 was attended by them and others; sup.pose that it should further appear 
 that the bomb which is alleged to have produced the death of Mr. Began 
 was thrown by some one in sympathy with the socialists or anarchists. 
 Now, provided it was not established beyond all reasonable doubt that 
 these defendants actually threw the bomb, or that they aided, participated 
 in or advised the committing of that wrong; would the fact that they were 
 socialists or communists have any influence upon your mind in determin- 
 ing their innocence? 
 
 Mr. GRINNELL: I will not object to that question. 
 
 Question refused by the court. 
 I am not acquainted with any of these defendants; never saw them 
 
 133 until yesterday. I do not think I could render an impartial verdict in
 
 (40) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 this case. My present state of mind is such that if I was called upon now 
 I could not render a fair and impartial verdict in this case. 
 
 The COURT: The question is whether you believe that you could fairly 
 and impartially render a verdict in the case in accordance with the law 
 and the evidence? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 134 Mr. FOSTER: I will ask you whether or not you are of the opinion that 
 
 from the opinion which you now have, if the testimony was equally bal- 
 anced, you would decide according to your present opinion? 
 (Question refused by the court; exception by defendants.) 
 
 151 Mr. Lancaster was challenged for cause by the defendants; challenge 
 
 152 overruled, and exception; then challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 117-124 M. T. Karey: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 125, 126 Martin Newhouse: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 127-132 Fred. Kohl: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 135-137 Henry Keller: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 138-140 James J. Adams: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 141-148 William Crowley: I was born in Lemont; live there now. I am a 
 farmer. I have heard and read something about the Haymarket trouble, 
 but formed no opinion in the case. I have some feeling against the com- 
 munists, but it is not so strong that I could not render a true verdict in 
 this case under the evidence. I have some prejudice against socialists, 
 communists and anarchists. I would not give the same credit to the tes- 
 timony of an anarchist or communist on the stand as I would' to any 
 other unimpeached testimony. 
 
 (Challenge for cause by defendants overruled, and exception.) 
 Q. If it should be established by competent evidence that a meeting 
 of socialists, anarchists and others was held at the Haymarket square in 
 
 149 this city on May 4th, and that a bomb was maliciously thrown by some 
 one in sympathy with such meeting, and in sympathy with 
 the principles advocated by socialists, communists and anarchists, 
 and that by reason thereof Matthias J. Degan was killed, but 
 if the evidence introduced upon the trial fails to show, beyond a 
 reasonable doubt, that such bomb was thrown by these defendants, or 
 any of them, and that they nor any of them either assisted, aided, 
 abetted, advised or counseled the throwing of such bomb, would your 
 prejudice against socialists, communists and anarchists prevent you from 
 rendering an impartial verdict and acquitting the defendants, or are you 
 now so prejudiced against the classes to which I have referred that you
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 cannot act impartially and fairly as a juror in this case under the facts 
 assumed in the question? 
 
 (Question refused by the court; exception by defendants.) 
 
 150 Q. If the testimony was equally divided upon the trial of this case, 
 
 would you find against the defendants or in favor of the defendants, 
 because of their being socialists, communists or anarchists? 
 
 (Question refused by the court; exception by defendants.) 
 Mr. Crowley was excused peremptorily by defendants. 
 153-155 John W. Scott challenged for cause by defendants. 
 156-162, 224 Lewellyn Lindsey: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 164-166 John Kyle: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 167-169 Benoit Bryard: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 170, 171 John Spain: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 172 James H. Cole: I live at 987 Lawndale avenue; have lived in Chicago 
 seven years. I have been in the railroad business, and I was book-keeper 
 for the Continental Insurance Company up to April ist last; since then 
 I have not been engaged in any business. I heard and read about the 
 
 173 Hay market trouble; I did not believe all that I read in the newspapers; I 
 don't think I have ever formed an opinion upon the question of the guilt 
 or innocence of any one of these defendants. I have a prejudice against 
 all secret societies; I have a prejudice against all organizations that violate 
 the law. From what I know now of socialists, communists and anarchists 
 I have a prejudice against them as a class. That prejudice is not so great 
 
 174 that I could not render a fair and impartial verdict in this case; my ver- 
 dict would be rendered the same as against any other men. I think I 
 could lay aside all opinions which I have formed, and be guided exclus- 
 ively by the law and the evidence. 
 
 176 The identical lengthy question which was asked by defendants of 
 William Crowley on page 149, Vol. A, was asked of Mr. Cole, and refused 
 by the court; exception by defendants. 
 
 177 I was in the Confederate army from 1861 to '65; I am 50 years old now. 
 
 180 Q. Is your bias or prejudice against an anarchist or communist such 
 that it would in any way bias you against the testimony of a witness 
 who was a communist or a socialist? 
 
 (Question refused by the court; exception by defendants.) 
 Q. I will ask you whether your prejudice against socialists, commun- 
 ists or anarchists is such that you would not give the same credence to 
 
 181 their testimony everything else being equal that you would to another 
 witness, and whether that is your opinion now, at the present time. 
 
 (Question refused by the court; exception by defendants.)
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 183, 184 Thomas Ablevvhite: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 185, 187 James B. Thornburgh: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 188, 190 Walter H. Krouskup: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 191, 193 Frank E. Zahner: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 194, 195 Charles F. Hoff: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 196, 197 James Finnigan: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 198 A. F. Bradley: I am sanitary inspector in the employ of the city since 
 
 six years. Before that I was a letter carrier for nine years, and previous 
 to that I worked seven or eight years at my trade as a painter. I have 
 read and heard accounts of the Haymarket trouble; have not formed an 
 
 200 opinion upon the question of the guilt or innocence of any of the accused. 
 
 201 I am not acquainted with any of the defendants. I have a strong prej- 
 udice against anarchists, socialists and communists. I have no prejudice 
 against trade-unions. I don't know whether the prejudice which I have 
 against socialists, communists and anarchists would prevent piy returning 
 
 202 an unprejudiced verdict in this case. I could not tell whether it might or 
 not. 
 
 Q. Would you now receive the testimony from a witness belonging to 
 the organization of anarchists, communists, or socialists as freely and 
 readily as any other witness that might be presented? 
 (Objected to; objection sustained, and exception.) 
 
 The fact that the defendants are anarchists, or communists, or social- 
 ists, would not bias me in determining the question of their guilt or 
 innocence. 
 
 203 Q. You feel that you could lay your prejudice all to one side and be 
 governed exclusively by the testimony as it was introduced arid the law 
 governing the case, as given you by the court? A. No, I don't 
 know about that, as I told you before. I don't know whether I could 
 or not. I cannot answer that, because I don't know. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception.) 
 
 Q. Would you think that you could disregard the prejudice that you 
 have against socialists, communists and anarchists, and render a verdict 
 in this case under the testimony and instructions of the court, fairly and 
 impartially? A. I don't know but what I could, I am not positive 
 upon that point. 
 
 204 The COURT: Do you believe that you can fairly and impartially de- 
 termine the guilt or innocence of the parties here on trial by the evi- 
 dence presented here and nothing else, together with the instructions
 
 (43) 
 
 VOL. A. ' 
 
 of the court? A. I do think L could. I feel the same trying this 
 case as I would any other case that I was trying. 
 
 205 (The identical lengthy question asked by defendants of William 
 
 Crowley, on page 149, Vol. A, was asked of Mr. Bradley, and re- 
 fused by the court; exception by defendants.) 
 
 206 Bradley peremptorily challenged by defendants. 
 207-216 Richard Fitzgerald: Challenged for cause by defendants, 
 
 217-223 R. H. Ashton, accepted and tendered to the state by the defendants, 
 
 236-241 was, upon cross-examination, challenged peremptorily by the sidle. 
 
 225-234 Herman Beifuss, accepted and tendered to the state by the defend- 
 
 242-245 ants, was, upon cross-examination, peremptorily challenged by the 
 
 279 state. 
 
 255-260 Patrick Moss: Peremplorily challenged by ihe state. 
 
 261-265 Henry Turk: Peremptorily challenged by the state. 
 
 266, 267 F. L. Porter: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 268, 269 John L. Clancy: Challenged for cause by ihe state. 
 
 270-273 P.J.Raleigh: I am clerk for the Pennsylvania Coal Company. I 
 heard and read abont the Haymarket trouble. I have a pretty well fixed 
 opinion, and it will take very strong evidence to convince me lo the con- 
 trary; I don't know any of the defendants. 
 
 289-295 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 I have formed a very decided opinion in this case; it will take a good 
 deal of evidence to overcome the opinion I have formed to convince me. 
 
 (Challenge for cause by defendants overruled, and exception.) 
 I base the opinion thai some of ihese defendanls were inslrumental in 
 causing the Haymarket occurrence upon the belief of what I read about 
 it. I gave it as my opinion that what I had read was true. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed and allowed.) 
 274, 275 John Murphy: Peremptorily challenged by the state. 
 276-278 Edward E. Dausenbach, tendered to the defendants, was, upon cross- 
 305-308 examination, challenged for cause by the defendants. 
 280-284 Matthias Schaffhausen: Peremptorily challenged by the slate. 
 
 285-288 Frank Jacobson: I live at 2806 Butlerfield street; I am a watch-case 
 maker at 32 Stale street. I don't know any of the defendants. From 
 what I have read and heard about the Haymarket trouble I have formed 
 some opinion in the case. I think I can determine the innocence or guilt 
 of the defendants upon the proof presented here in court, regardless of 
 what I have read and heard about it.
 
 (44) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 * 
 
 309-312 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 I have read pretty generally the newspaper reports of the Haymarket 
 occurrence. From reading and hearing about the case I have formed 
 and expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these defendants, 
 which 1 still entertain. I never stated that I believed the statements which I 
 heard and read about the case to be correct. I do now believe that the 
 
 313 statements which I read in the newspapers and heard on the street, upon 
 which I based my opinion, are correct. 
 
 314 (Challenge for cause overruled, the court in its opinion announcing 
 
 316 the rule that the opinion about the truth, of the newspaper state- 
 ments or the rumor upon which a person called as a juror has 
 formed an opinion or impression must have been expressed previ- 
 ous to his being called as a juror, in order to disqualify him. De- 
 
 317 fendants except to the ruling of the court.) 
 
 319 I have a prejudice against socialists, communists and anarchists as a 
 class. 
 
 Q. Now, is your prejudice such that it would influence your verdict 
 in this case under the evidence that is introduced upon the trial and the 
 charge of the court, as given by his Honor, the judge? 
 
 320 (Question refused by the court; exception by defendants.) 
 
 I think I can fairly and impartially try the case upon the evidence. 
 
 321 Mr. Jacobson was then peremptorily challenged by the defendants. 
 296-304 John J. Karstens: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 322-327 Paul W. Brooks: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 328-330 Frank Bilderbeck: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 331,332 Edward Einhorn: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 333336 Moses Marcott: Was accepted by defendants and tendered to the 
 state. Upon cross-examination said Marcott was peremptorily chal- 
 lenger by the state. 
 
 337-339 S.. H. Little: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 340-342 Charles H. Tourjee: Excused by agreement. 
 
 343-345 Christian Carlson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 346-351 Patrick H. Powers: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 352-355 Joseph Emblem: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 356-360 T. J. McCormick: Challenged peremptorily by the defendants. 
 
 361, 362 John O'Connell: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 363-365 Michael Fleming: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 366-369 W. S. Walrus: Challenged for cause by defendants.
 
 (45) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 371-373 F. W. Fuller: I have formed and expressed an opinion as to the guilt 
 or innocence of the defendants, based upon the belief of the truth of the 
 statements read, which opinion I still entertain. 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 374) 375 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 I can't say that I ever expressed to anybody that the newspaper state- 
 ments or the accounts which I heard were true. I don't know as any- 
 body ever contradicted them. 
 
 376 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 I did believe those statements and do believe them now to be true. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled and exception.) 
 
 The COURT: Yes; as was said in the Connor case, forty years ago, 
 every intelligent, right-minded man ought to lay aside what they have 
 read and heard. 
 
 (Defendants object to the reading of that case in the presence of 
 the jury.) 
 
 377 Mr. FOSTER: Q. I will ask you whether your opinion now 
 is that the opinion which you have formed could only be removed by 
 sworn testimony contradicting it? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 378 I do not believe that I could lay aside my present opinion and return 
 an impartial verdict under the law and the evidence. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed and allowed.) 
 380-383 Edwin Thomas: Challenged for cause bv defendants. 
 384-386 Thomas Scully: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 387-389 E. F. Shedd: I have formed and expressed and still entertain an 
 opinion upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendants, 
 based upon the belief of the truth of the statements which I read and 
 heard about the case. I have not expressed the opinion that I believe 
 the substance of what I heard or read in regard to it. The doubt of that 
 belief was not questioned. I think I could lay aside all opinions which I 
 have and render an impartial verdict on the law and the evidence. 
 
 390 Q. Now, then, I ask you whether you could lay aside, in your judg- 
 
 ment, your present opinion and not be biased by it in the consideration 
 of the testimony as it is introduced upon the trial of the case? A. I 
 would have my opinion, my own opinion, until it was set aside by the 
 whole testimony.
 
 (46) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 Q. Then you mean to say that it would require some testimony to 
 remove the opinion which you now have before it would be removed? 
 391 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 391-396 After full argument the challenge for cause was overruled and the de- 
 fendants excepted. 
 
 I have a decided predjudice against the class known as socialists, 
 communists or anarchists. I believe that prejudice would prevent my 
 rendering an impartial verdict in this case, provided it was conceded or 
 397 proved the defendants belonged to this class. 
 
 The COURT: I know, or the court judicially, what are the objects of 
 the communists, socialists and anarchists. 
 
 Mr. FOSTER: Beg your pardon. It presumes that the juror knows. 
 The COURT: You must presume that I know, because it has been 
 decided that for a man to say that he is prejudiced against horse thieves 
 is no ground for imputing to him any misconduct as a juror. Now you 
 must assume that I Know either that anarchists, socialists and commun- 
 ists are a worthy, a praise-worthy class of people, having worthy ob- 
 jects, or else I cannot say that a prejudice against them is wrong. I do 
 not know. 
 398, 399 Argument upon this point. 
 
 The COURT: Mr. Shedd, with this prejudice which you have been 
 questioned about, do you believe you can fairly and impartially deter- 
 mine upon the evidence, and upon that alone, the question of the guilt or 
 innocence of these defendants of the crime with which they are charged 
 by this indictment, without any reference to any class to which they may 
 be assumed or supposed to belong? A. Yes, sir; putting it as you did 
 then. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled and exception.) 
 
 400 Mr. FOSTER (resuming) : Q. Now, would the prejudice which you 
 have against communists, anarchists and socialists, as a class, be in the 
 way of your listening to the testimony and rendering an absolutely im- 
 partial verdict, if it was conceded or proved that the defendants belonged 
 to that class? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 401 The COURT: Do you mean by that that you would believe you 
 would not render the same verdict upon the same evidence if it was shown 
 that they were of the same class referred to, as you would if it were not 
 so shown? A. I think the mere fact of their being communists would 
 influence my opinion as a juror.
 
 (47) 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 Mr. BLACK: You would require additional evidence? A. Yes, sir. 
 * * * It would take less evidence from them than from law-abiding 
 citizens, to find a verdict of guilty. 
 
 The COURT: Well, that prejudice of yours then, is based upon your 
 understanding that they are not law-abiding citizens, is it? A. That is 
 what it is. 
 
 (Last question by the court objected to, and exception.) 
 The COURT: Suppose it should turn out that that opinion of yours is 
 402 not correct, that that is a mistake, that in fact they were law-abiding citi- 
 zens, then would that prejudice have any effect upon your verdict or not, 
 in your judgment? 
 
 (Question objected to by defendants, and exception.) 
 A. No, sir; if it should turn out that they were. 
 
 The said E. F. Shedd was thereupon peremptorily challenged by de- 
 fendants. 
 403-405 J. K. Misch: I have formed no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of 
 
 406 the defendants. I have a prejudice against the class known as socialists, 
 communists or anarchists. I think the opinion which I have formed 
 against this class would influence me in .determining this case upon the 
 law and the evidence; I think it would require more testimony before I 
 could find them not guilty, or less before I could find them guilty, than 
 though they did not belong to this class. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 407 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE STATE. 
 
 I do not think I could make a fair juror. I think I would be preju- 
 diced; I think it would take more testimony on account of it. 
 
 The COURT: Is your prejudice upon this subject based upon the idea 
 that you suppose this class are in favor of overturning society by force? 
 
 Mr. BLACK: I desire to except to that question and to ask whether 
 the state objects to our challenge, by its representative. 
 
 The COURT: Well, you can except. (The question of the court being 
 read the juror answered): It is. 
 
 408 Q. If, in the progress of this case, there should not be anything to 
 indicate that these men had any intention of overturning society by force, 
 you still think that you would have the same prejudice that would in- 
 fluence your verdict in the case? 
 
 (Question by the court objected to by defendants, and exception.) 
 A. My prejudice would still remain. I do not think I could give
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 these men a fair and impartial trial regardless of all other circumstances 
 than what may be proved by the evidence in the case. 
 
 409 J. K. Misch, challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 The COURT: I have not overruled the challenge for cause. 
 Mr. BLACK: The record will speak for itself. 
 
 410-411 Frederick B. Smith: Challenged for cause by defendrnts. 
 
 412-414 W. B. Blackman: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 415-418 G. Lindholf: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 419-426 Isaac Freeman: Accepted and tendered to the state by defendants, 
 
 455-459 was, upon cross-examination, peremptorily challenged by the state. 
 
 435-440 August Essenacher: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 441-446 Charles Dyck: .Challenged peremptorily by the state. 
 
 460-462 M. L. Barrett: Accepted and tendered to defendants by the state. 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 1719 Upon cross-examination, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 VOL. A. 
 
 463-470 M. J. Burke: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 471-477 Terrance T. Curry: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 478-484 William Harrison: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 485-488 Charles J. Robinson: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 489-493 Edwin E. Hart: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 494-496 F. H. Medbury: Accepted and tendered to the defendants by the 
 
 state. 
 VOL. B. 
 
 12-16 Upon cross-examination challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 1-4 Sol. Hamburg: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 5-7 H. F. Jaeger: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 8, 9. David L. Streeter: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 10, ii George H. Hess: Accepted and tendered to the defendants by the 
 
 20-25 state. Upon cross-examination challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 25 S.G.Randall: Hive at 42 LaSalle street; am twenty-three years old. I 
 am employed as a seedsman byj. C. Vaughan; have lived in Chicago two 
 and a half years. I came here from Erie county, Pennsylvania, where I was 
 
 26 a farmer. I have heard and read some about the Haymarket occurrence. 
 I have formed no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of any of the de- 
 
 27 fendants. I am not acquainted with any of the defendants. I don't un- 
 derstand the principles advocated by socialists, communists or anarchists. 
 I know of no prejudice or bias or any reason why I could not return a 
 fair and impartial verdict under the law and the evidence. I went into 
 
 29 my present employment last fall. From spring until fall last year I had
 
 (49) 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 a milk route, owned my wagon and bought the milk. Previous to that 
 I was in the City Hotel, i6th and State streets, first as a common laborer, 
 30 then as a waiter. 
 
 Accepted and tendered by the defendants to the state. 
 
 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 32-35 I think 1 could determine the innocence or guilt of the defendants upon 
 the proof presented here in court, regardless of everything else. I think 
 I have seen defendant Fielden upon the lake front one Sunday when I 
 was there, either this summer or last. 
 
 36, 37 M. P. Carroll: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 38-40 F. C. Gibbs: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 Owen Murray: I formed and expressed and still entertain quite a 
 strong opinion upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the accused. 
 I believed the statements which I read sufficiently to base my opinion 
 upon them; I don't know that I ever expressed my belief that the news- 
 paper accounts were true or not. I have a prejudice against the class 
 of communists, anarchists and socialists. 
 
 43 Q. Have you a prejudice which will influence your judgment, sitting 
 
 as a juror, if it should appear or be conceded that the defendants be- 
 longed to the class of communists, anarchists or socialists, which would 
 prevent you from rendering an impartial verdict? 
 
 (Question refused by the court and exception.) 
 
 I don't believe that the opinion which I now have would prevent 
 me from rendering a verdict under the testimony; 1 would not convict 
 the defendants on newspaper reports; I could leave my prejudices 
 entirely out of the case. 
 
 Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 45,46 W. D. Field: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 47-49 M. Gavlev: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 50-52 B. M. Giroux: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 53-55 C. D. Sherman: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 56-59 John Daley: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 60, 61 C. J. Stratton: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 62,63 James P. Dryer: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 64-69 Martin Levy: Accepted and tendered to the state by the defendants 
 
 71 was challenged peremptorily by the state. 
 
 72-74 George A. Hitchcock: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 75> 76 John Goldman: Challenged for cause by defendants.
 
 (50) 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 77,78 James H. Leonard: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 79, 80 Phillip Knusmann: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 81,82 James Foley: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 85, 86 John W. Thomas: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 87, 88 E. L. Park: Challenged for cause b}* defendants. 
 
 89,90 R. B. Whitney: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 91 Frank H. Krugel: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 92-94 J. F. Somes: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 95,96 George J. Smith: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 97,98 C. J. Albertine: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 99 T. H. Dowd: I have formed and expressed and still entertain an 
 
 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of some of these defendants. I did 
 not express an opinion about the correctness of what I heard and said in 
 regard to the matter. I don't think my opinion would prevent me in 
 
 102 rendering an impartial verdict. I have a prejudice against the class of 
 anarchists, communists and socialists. 
 
 Q. I will ask you whether that prejudice is so strong that it will in 
 any way influence your verdict if you should be selected as a juror in 
 this case? 
 
 (Questions refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 Q. Sitting as a juror, listening to the testimony as it may be intro- 
 duced by witnesses upon the stand and the law as given you by the 
 court, do you now believe that the prejudice which you have against the 
 classes to which I have referred would prevent you from rendering an 
 impartial verdict in the case, provided it should be established or con- 
 
 103 ceded that the defendants or some of them belonged to one or the other 
 of the classes to which I have referred? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 Q. If it should appear or be conceded that the defendants were com- 
 munists, anarchists or socialists, would it require less evidence, or more 
 evidence, to acquit or convict than though that fact did not appear? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 104 I think I could act entirely upon the law and the evidence and 
 render a verdict in this case regardless of my opinion and without preju- 
 dice as to the defendants. 
 
 Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 105-106 Henry Hassel: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 107-112 Charles Neumeister: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 113-117 B. W. Pierce: Challenged peremptorily by defendants.
 
 (50 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 118, 119 F. H. Edler: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 120-122 Charles J. Dobson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 123 George Pearce: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 H. Haker: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 125 Theodore Denker: I live at Woodlawn Park, in the town of Hyde 
 Park. I have formed, and expressed, and still entertain an opinion upon 
 the question of the defendants' guilt or innocence upon the charge of 
 murder. 
 
 Q. You believe what you read and what you heard? A. I believe 
 it, yes. 
 
 Q. Is that opinion such as to prevent you from rendering an impartial 
 verdict in the case, sitting as a juror under the testimony and the law? 
 
 126 A. I think it is. 
 
 Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 CROSS-EXAMINATION. 
 
 If I were taken and sworn as a juror in the case I think I could de- 
 termine the innocence or guilt of the defendants upon the proof presented 
 to me here in court, regardless of any prejudice or opinion, or of what I 
 have read. 
 
 The COURT: Do you believe that you can fairly and impartially try 
 the case, and render an impartial verdict upon the evidence as it may be 
 presented here, and the instructions of the court? A. Yes, I think I 
 could. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled.) 
 
 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION. 
 
 127 I have formed my opinion from reading the papers and from 
 conversations, but I don't believe everything I read in the 
 newspapers; I believed enough, however, to form an opinion 
 upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendants. I never 
 
 128 expressed an opinion in regard to whether the newspapers were correct 
 or not. I am shipping clerk for Henry W. King & Co., wholsale cloth- 
 iers, corner Madison and Franklin, since about two years and three 
 months. I am 27 years old. Previous to my last engagement I worked 
 as conductor on a wagon in the United States Express Company. I 
 
 129 have formed my opinion entirely from what I have read in the newspa- 
 
 130 pers. I am unmarried, I live with my parents. I don't know anything 
 
 131 about socialism, anarchism or communism. I think I am a little preju-
 
 (52) 
 VOL. B. 
 
 diced against socialism. I don't know that I am against anarchism, in 
 fact, I don't really understand what their principles are. I think I could 
 try the case upon the law and the evidence, notwithstanding my opinion. 
 I think I have expressed my opinion pretty freely. 
 
 131^ Q. Would you feel yourself in any way governed or bound in listening 
 to the testimony and determining it, by the pre-judgment of the case that 
 you had expressed to others before? A. Well, that is a pretty hard 
 question to answer; I don't think I would have to guard against the 
 
 132 opinion which I have expressed. I think I would lay it aside. 
 Accepted and tendered to the state by the defendants. 
 
 133, 134 Upon cross-examination Mr. Denker was accepted by the state. 
 
 137-139 W. L. Mann: I have read and talked about this case, have foirmed 
 some opinion about it. I don't know any of the defendants. I think I 
 could determine the guilt or innocence of the defendants upon the proof 
 presented to me here in court, regardless of what I have heard or read, 
 or the opinion which I have formed. 
 
 (Accepted and tendered to defendants by the state.) 
 
 140-142 CROSS-EXAMINATON. 
 
 I have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defend- 
 ants, wich I still entertain, from what I have heard and read about the 
 143 case. I don't know that I ever expressed it. I have a prejudice against 
 socialists, communists and anarchists as a class. 
 
 Q. Would that prejudice bias your judgment as a juror in this case 
 if it should appear or be conceded that the defendants were communists, 
 anarchists or socialists? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 Q. I will ask you whether or not it would take more evidence, or 
 less evidence of the guilt or the innocence, as the case may be, to acquit 
 or convict the defendants, from the fact that it might be proved or con- 
 ceded that they were communists, socialists or anarchists? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 Q. Notwithstanding you have a prejudice against these classes, I 
 will ask you if you feel that your mind is absolutely unbiased, and that 
 you can render an unprejudiced verdict under the evidence introduced, 
 and the instructions of the court? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.)
 
 (53) 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 145-150 John A. Anderson: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 151-154 Robert G. Barrett: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 155, 156 John Johnson: I have read the accounts of the Haymarket occurrence 
 and discussed the matter to a certain extent. To a certain extent I be- 
 lieve what I read and heard about it. I have formed and still entertain 
 an opinion as to the defendant's innocence or guilt on account of what I 
 have read and heard, and I believe I have expressed that opinion to others. 
 I think I could return an impartial verdict according to the law and the 
 
 157 evidence. I have to a certain extent a prejudice against socialists, anar- 
 chists and communists. 
 
 Q. Would that prejudice affect your verdict in this case if it were 
 conceded that the defendants belonged to those classes? 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception). 
 
 158 Q. Is this opinion which you have formed a fixed opinion that is, is 
 it a strong opinion, or a slight impression? A. It is not very strong; it 
 can possibly be removed by evidence contrary to what I have read; I 
 I don't think it would prevent me from rendering an impartial verdict in 
 the case. 
 
 Q. Is it one which would require evidence to remove? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception). 
 
 Q. Do you now say that it would require strong evidence to remove 
 your opinion? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception). 
 
 !59 (Challenge for cause overruled; challenged peremptorily by defend- 
 
 ants). 
 
 160, 161 W. H. Barry: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 162, 163 Max Levinson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 164-166 J. B. Sharp: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 167, 168 William Hayden: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 169-171 Henry Carsons: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 172-174 Charles E. Willetts: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 179-183 E. O. Tooker: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 184-186 Joseph Fish: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 187, 188 Clarence H. Hill: I have formed and still entertain an opinion as to the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants, based upon the belief of what I 
 have read about the Haymarket occurrence. I have not expressed that 
 opinion to others. I think I could try the case according to the law and 
 the evidence, notwithstanding my opinion, or what I have read or heard 
 about the case.
 
 (54) 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 194 Q. Have you now any prejudice against the class known as anar- 
 chists, communists or socialists? A. Well I should say I have. 
 
 Q. Now, I will ask you whether that prejudice is such that it would 
 prevent you from listening to the sworn testimony in this case and the 
 charge of the court and render an absolutely impartial verdict in the 
 case? 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.) 
 
 195 Q. Do you believe that notwithstanding your prejudice and opinions 
 you can listen to the testimony of the witnesses sworn in this case and 
 the charge by the court and render an impartial verdict in this case? A. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You have no opinions, biases or prejudices which it would re- 
 quire testimony to overcome? A. Yes, I have. 
 
 (Challenged for cause on the last answer; challenge overruled, and 
 exception.) 
 
 196 Mr. Hill was then peremptorily challenged by defendants. 
 197,198 Cyrus P. Wright: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 199-201 Charles A. Baker: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 202-204 E. B. Kilham: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 205, 206 Henry Sanmeyer: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 207-209 Henry C. Gross: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 210-219 William W. Barnard: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 220-223 James T. O'Rourke: From reading about the Haymarket occurrence 
 
 I formed an opinion that the defendants were morally responsible for it; 
 
 I have that opini.on now. I have not expressed it, to my knowledge, it 
 
 would not prevent me from rendering an impartial verdict in the case 
 
 according to the law and the evidence. 
 
 Challenged peremptorily by the defendants. 
 
 225-227 Richard Waters: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 228-230 John Bodden: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 231, 232 Lewis O'Neil: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 233,234 Rudolph Shavow: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 235-237 B. D. Uptigrove: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 238,239 F. J. Hoffman: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 240, 241 Henry T. Hart: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 242-244 C. McGovern: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 245-247 J. L. Worthington: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 248-250 E. W. Bradbury: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 251, 252 John Soderberg: Challenged for cause by defendants.
 
 (55) 
 VOL. B. 
 
 253, 254 Edwin W. Hanley: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 255, 256 George Olsen: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 257-263 Benjamin F. Nourse: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 264, 265 Felix McHugh: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 266-268 Charles Jesse: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 269-272 G. M. Pitner: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 273-282 E. J. Dutcher: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 283-285 W. H. Stillson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 286, 287 Robert Miller: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 288296 Thomas S. Wild: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 297 C. B. Todd: I live at 1,013 West Polk street; I am a salesman in the 
 Putnam Clothing House. I have read newspaper accounts of the Hay- 
 market occurrence and had conversations in regard to it. I have an 
 
 298 opinion as to the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendants; it 
 is not a firm opinion. I could listen to the testimony and be governed 
 solely and entirely by the evidence and the charge of the court. I have 
 lived in Chicago four years. I came here from the southern part of 
 Minnesota where I lived sixteen years and carried on a mercantile 
 
 299 business for myself. I am a man of family. I have no prejudice against 
 the class of socialists, communists or anarchists. I think of them as ad- 
 vanced thinkers, but have no prejudice. 
 
 300 The matter was talked about in the store; opinions were expressed in 
 my hearing; I presume I expressed my opinion. I am not conscious of 
 
 301 any reason why I could not determine this case purely, solely and en- 
 
 
 
 tirely upon the evidence introduced upon the trial and the charge of the 
 
 302 court. I have no prejudice against trades unions or labor unions. 
 I served in the war from 1864 until the close. I am forty-seven 
 years old. 
 
 303 (Accepted and tendered to the state by the defendants.) 
 
 (Upon cross-examination, Mr. Todd is accepted by the state, and 
 with James H. Cole, S. G. Randall and Theodore Denker, sworn 
 to try the issues in this case.) 
 
 306-308 James W. Newburn: Accepted and tendered to the defendants by the 
 
 365 state, was, upon cross-examination, challenged for cause by the de- 
 
 367 fendants. 
 
 309-311 E. W. Beck: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 312-315 S. K. Whittemore: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 316-318 William Stein: Challenged for cause by the state.
 
 (56) 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 319-322 E. J. Macheret: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 323-325 David Dunseath: Challenged for cause by the. state. 
 
 326, 327 Marshall Fay: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 328-330 and 350 Nathan Dickinson: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 33 I -335 George A. Fellows: Accepted and tendered to the defendants by the 
 
 358 state. Was, upon cross-examination, challenged for cause by the de- 
 
 360 fendants. . 
 
 33^, 339 Martin B. Lightcap: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 340-342 D. H. Broadway: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 343-345 T. J. Doyle: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 346-348 O. F. Carpenter: Accepted and tendered to the defendants by the 
 
 369 state. Was, upon cross-examination, challenged for cause by the de- 
 
 364 fendants. 
 
 351, 352 John Hogelman: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 353-355 B. Herzog: Challenged for cause by the state. 
 
 356) 357 W. D. Curtis: Accepted and tendered to the defendants by the state. 
 
 372375 Was upon cross-examination challenged for cause by the defendants. 
 
 369-371 E. C. Grant: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 377 The last panel of four jurors tendered to the defendants by the state 
 
 having been exhausted by challenges for cause, allowed as to each of 
 them, the defendants move the court to direct the state to tender the de- 
 fendants another panel of four jurors. 
 
 379 (The motion is overruled, and the defendants except.) 
 
 380-388 and 511 K. Einstedt: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 389-393 John Scanlon: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 394-396 Phillip Gedleman: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 397-399 D. D. Thurber: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 400,401 R. L. Guerin: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 402,403 S. E. Nelson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 404-410 A. F. Triester: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 411-415 Samuel Armstrong: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 416-419 William Leanthal: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 420-426 (Vol. C. 90) W. C. Hazeltine: Challenged peremptorily by defend- 
 ants. 
 
 427-436 (Vol. C. 158) R.H.Moore: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 437-446 J. B. Jenkins: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 447-450 S. C. Rowly: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 451-453 C. E. Anderson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 454-456 Charles Holtz: Challenged for cause by defendants.
 
 (57) 
 
 VOL. B. 
 
 457,458 Hamilton Crary: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 459, 460 A. B. Phillips: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 461464 Charles Noyes: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 465,466 G. B. Fisher: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 467, 468 C. O. Winter: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 469,470 Charles Sander: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 471-476 Julius Weske: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 477-479 E. C. Tracy: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 480,481 J. J. Trimble: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 482-493 George D. Eddy: Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 494,495 C. S. Lammert: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 496-498 D. H. Howe: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 499-503 A. Van Sicklen: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 504 D. B. Harris: Excused by agreement. 
 
 505,506 F. A. Hartman: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 507,508 N. B. Hanson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 509,510 W. G. Miller: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 VOL. c. 
 
 1-7 E. Melchior: Examined by defendants, was tendered to state (page 
 
 454), and by the state permptorily excused. (Page 455.) 
 812 O. M. Reed: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 13-15 C. L. Skinner: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 16-19 J. F. Muchmore: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 20,21 W.H.Johnson: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 22, 23 Riley Darnell: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 24,25 John P. Dabney: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 26-28 William D. Hollis: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 29-31 F. Basterfield: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 32, 33 R. I. Stearns: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 34 William C. Nicholas: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 35-39 W. S. Minckler: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 40-43 John N. Chapman: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 4449 James A. Parish: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 50 William Neil, manufacturer of oil tanks; doing business in Chicago; 
 have heard and read about the Haymarket difficulty, and believed enough 
 thereof to form some opinions as to the guilt or innocence of the defend- 
 ants, which opinion I still have, but it is not so strong that evidence would 
 
 51 not change it strong evidence to the contrary would change my opinion. 
 I have expressed that opinion. It would take pretty strong evidence to
 
 VOL. c. 
 
 52 change my opinion, but I believe I could change it. I would stick to my 
 present opinion until changed by evidence. I could not dismiss it from 
 
 53 my mind; could not lay it altogether aside during the trial. Believe my 
 present opinion would influence me in determining and getting at a ver- 
 dict. I believe I could determine the question of the guilt or innocence 
 of the defendants solely upon the testimony in court, without being in- 
 fluenced by my present opinion. I could not lay aside the impression 
 
 54 that I now have during the trial. I could not forget what I have heard 
 and read. The impression would accompany me, and it would require 
 strong evidence to remove the opinion I now have; but I could give a 
 fair verdict on whatever evidence I would hear. Have formed and ex- 
 
 55 pressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of some of the defendants. 
 Challenged for cause. 
 
 56 To the Court: I have no personal acquaintance with any of the de- 
 fendants, and no ill-will towards them, " except such as grows out of 
 what I have read or heard about the transactions at the Haymarket on 
 the night of May 4th, the night of the 4th of May." Believe I could 
 fairly and impartially make up my mind as to what occurred from the 
 evidence in the court know that no man should be convicted except 
 
 57 upon evidence, and believe I could act as a juror here. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants. Chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 58-66 E. D. Kimball, examined by defendants; challenge for cause sustained. 
 67-70 E. B. Reith, examined by defendants; challenge for cause sustained. 
 71-73 M. Spurback, examined by defendants; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 74 W. N. Whitehead: Reside in Evanston; have resided in Cook county 
 
 thirty five years. Am a member of the Chicago and Erie Stove Com- 
 pany, a limited partnership association. I have read and heard about 
 
 7*5 the Haymarket difficulty, and believed enough of what I so read and 
 heard to form an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of one or more of 
 the defendants, which opinion I have expressed, and still entertain. I 
 think I could render a fair verdict uninfluenced by my opinion. I still 
 
 76 have that opinion; have expressed it. It is an opinion. I now believe 
 what I read in the newspapers. Had frequent conversations about the 
 case, but don't think the matter of my belief of what I had heard and 
 read was ever discussed, or that I ever before expressed an opinion 
 
 77 upon that subject. I have expressed an opinion as to the guilt or inno- 
 cence of some of the defendants, which is a pretty firm opinion now.
 
 (59) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 85 I have read of socialists, communists and anarchists, and have formed a 
 decided prejudice against them. 
 
 " Q. Would you extend that prejudice to the individuals who profess 
 the doctrines of socialists, communists or anarchists? " 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception). 
 
 " Q. Do you now believe that if it were conceded or proven on the 
 trial of this case, that these defendants, or some of them, were anarchists, 
 socialists or communists, that fact would influence you one way or the 
 other in arriving at a fair and impartial verdict in the case?" 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception). 
 
 86 I have met a person who claimed to have been present at the Hay- 
 market meeting, and who undertook to detail to me the facts as they oc- 
 curred. What he told me coincided with the facts as I before understood 
 them and supported the opinion which I had formed from reading the 
 
 87 newspapers, and I believed what they said in the main. I believed the 
 account given me by the person who claimed to have been present at the 
 Haymarket meeting. 
 
 122 (This witness was challenged for cause on all his answers; chal- 
 
 lenge overruled; thereupon challenged peremptorily by defend- 
 ants). 
 
 91 James W. Oakley: Reside in Hyde Park; have lived in Cook county 
 twenty years; am in the leather business and manufacture. Have a 
 down-town office and a factory in the north-western part of the citv. I 
 have heard and read of the Haymarket difficulty, and believed enough of 
 the reports to form an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of some of 
 the defendants, which I have expressed and still entertain. 
 
 92 " Q. Is that opinion so strong and firmly fixed in your mind that it 
 would take strong circumstances and evidence to remove it? " 
 
 (Question refused by court, and exception by defendants). 
 
 93 Think I could determine the question of the guilt or innocence of the 
 defendants from the evidence produced in court, but don't think I could 
 do so uninfluenced by the opinion which I now have. I think that the 
 
 94 opinion which I now have, and what I have read and heard would in- 
 fluence me in arriving at a verdict. 
 
 Challenged for cause. 
 
 To the Court: Have no acquaintance with the defendants; don't 
 think I have ever seen them before; have no feeling with regard to what 
 
 95 is called the Haymarket matter, and the connection of the defendants,
 
 (6o) 
 
 VOL,. C. 
 
 or supposed connection of the defendants, or some of them with that. 
 Think I could determine the question of the guilt or innocence of the 
 defendants upon the evidence alone. 
 
 96 Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants. 
 
 97 Further examined: I guess I read about the Haymarket trouble in 
 all the papers. I believed what I read, and have said to my family that 
 
 98 I thought the reports were true; and the indictment by the grand jury 
 has added to my impression. 
 
 Challenge for cause renewed. 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I believe in the main what I read and heard. 
 
 99 To the Court: I don't think I did express any opinion as to the truth 
 of what I had read, but expressed an opinion based on what I had read. 
 
 101 To defendants' counsel: I have read of socialists, communists and 
 anarchists, and formed an idea concerning them; think there is no place 
 in this country for them. 
 
 " Q. If it should be proven or conceded on the trial of this case that 
 the defendants, or some of them, are anarchists or communists, would 
 
 102 this opinion of yours in regard to these classes that you have now ex- 
 pressed, influence you in arriving at a just and impartial verdict? " 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception. Challenged on the 
 ground of the expression of his opinion, and upon his answers 
 generally. Challenge overruled, and exception by defendants.) 
 
 103 Edmund Knauer: Am in the real estate business in Chicago. Have 
 formed and expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of one or 
 more of the defendants, which I now have " a pretty strong opinion; it 
 would take pretty good evidence to change it." Think I could determine 
 the question of guilt or innocence upon the evidence. 
 
 104 (Challenged for cause; overruled, and exception.) 
 
 108 Am prejudiced against socialists and communists. 
 
 " Q. Do you believe that the prejudice against anarchists would con- 
 trol you in a trial in which the defendants were conceded to be an- 
 archists?" 
 
 109 (Question overruled by the court, and exception. Challenged per- 
 
 emptorily by defendants,) 
 
 no-112 George S. Sawyer: Examined by defendants; challenged for cause. 
 
 113-119 I. W. R. Peales, examined by defendants; stated that he had heard 
 and read about the Haymarket affair, sufficient to form an opinion 
 which he still entertained and had occasionally expressed; that he be-
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 lieved what he had read and was prejudiced against socialists and com- 
 munists. 
 
 Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 1 20, 121 Otto Luhring, examined by defendants; challenged for cause. 
 
 123,124 George W. Todd, examined by defendants; challenged for cause. 
 
 125 W. D. Allen: Am in the wholesale rubber business, reside in Chi- 
 cago; of the firm of E. B. Preston & Co.; have read and heard about 
 the Haymarket difficulty, and from what I have read and heard have 
 formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of some of the defendants, 
 which I now entertain and have frequently expressed; a strong opinion. 
 
 126 It is a decided conviction. My mind is made up as to whether the de- 
 fendants are guilty or innocent. It would be difficult to change 
 that conviction; perhaps impossible. " It would be hard to change my 
 conviction." 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I could determine the innocence or guilt of 
 the defendants upon the evidence in court regardless of my opinion. 
 To the Court: I have no personal acquaintance with the defendants; 
 
 127 never saw them before to my knowledge; have no feeling against them 
 " except such as grows out of what I have read or heard in connection 
 with the matter which is referred to as the Haymarket difficulty." 
 Would endeavor to get at the truth as a juror, and believe that I could 
 fairly and impartially try it by the evidence in court and the instructions. 
 Am familiar with the rule of law that a juror should be governed by the 
 
 128 evidence. Believe that I will fairly and impartially apply that rule to the 
 present case. 
 
 128-130 Argument in support of challenge for cause. 
 (Challenge overruled and exception.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 131 A. L. Ketchum: Am in the drug business with Peter Van Schaack 
 & Sons, 138 Lake street; am twenty-two years old; have rtad and heard 
 about the Haymarket difficulty sufficiently to form an opinion as to the 
 guilt or innocence of one or more of the defendants. Have expressed 
 
 132 that opinion and still entertain it. It is a strong opinion, but I think I 
 could render a fair and impartial verdict. 
 
 " Q. Would it require testimony to overcome that opinion, or circum- 
 stances? " 
 
 (Question refused by the court, and exception.)
 
 (62) 
 VOL. C. 
 
 133 Believe I will be uninfluenced in hearing the evidence by my present 
 
 134 opinion. I have conversed about this case. I was pointed out by my 
 
 135 employer to the deputy to be served for a juror in this case was called 
 
 136 down by my employer and pointed out to the sheriff, who then served 
 179 me. I repeat that I have a decided opinion as to the guilt or innocence 
 
 of the defendants, which I have expressed to others and still entertain. 
 
 (Challenge for cause.) 
 
 i So To Mr. Grinnell: I think I can determine the innocence or guilt of 
 
 the defendants on the proofs in court, regardless of my opinion and 
 everything outside. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants. Chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 137, 138 R. D. Woodruff, examined by defendants; challenged for cause. 
 139, 140 G. W. Roberts, examined by defendants; challenged for cause. 
 141-148 William Williamson, examined by defendants; challenged for cause. 
 
 149 H. F. Chandler; am in the stationery business with Skeen, Stuart & 
 Co. Have heard and read of the Haymarket trouble, and from what I 
 have heard and read, have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence 
 of some of the defendants, which I still entertain and have expressed be- 
 
 150 fore coming into court. I believed what I heard and read, but I have 
 never expressed my opinion as to the truth of the accounts received. 
 The opinion I have is a decided opinion, and my mind is pretty well 
 made up. " It will take evidence to satisfy me." My opinion was based 
 
 151 on the newspaper reports. It might be hard to change my opinion. 
 Believe I could determine the question of the guilt or innocence of these 
 
 152 defendants solely upon the evidence presented in court, uninfluenced by 
 my present opinion. Have a pretty strong prejudice against socialists, 
 anarchists and communists. 
 
 " Q. If it should be proven or conceded on this trial that the defend- 
 ants or some of them are socialists, anarchists or communists, do you 
 think your prejudice would in any way influence your verdict?" 
 
 (Question refused by the court and exception by defendants.) 
 157 I was pointed out to the deputy sheriff by my employer to be sub- 
 
 pccnaed as a juror. I repeat that I have formed an opinion as to the 
 
 209 guilt or innocence of some of the defendants, which I have quite fre- 
 quently expressed. 
 
 (Challenge for cause.) 
 
 210 To the court: Dqn't know defendants. Think I have some feeling
 
 (63) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 against the defendants, not only based upon what I have read about the 
 Haymarket trouble, but on matters which I heard before that. The 
 
 211 only opinion I have is based upon what I have heard and read, and I be- 
 lieve that I can fairly trv the case solely upon the evidence. I have now 
 
 212 an opinion upon the question as to whether the defendants did the act 
 which resulted in the death of Mathias Degan. 
 
 212 The COURT: It don't seem to me it makes any difference in the com- 
 petency of a juror, whether he has simply formed an opinion or ex- 
 pressed an opinion which he has formed. I don't see how it makes a 
 particle of difference in his state of mind. Every man is in favor of jus- 
 
 213 tice and fair-dealing as between other people where his own interests 
 are not affected; and, as I have said before, I think it is in the nature of 
 any man when he wants to find out the truth of any transaction, that he 
 will, when the original sources are presented to him, follow them and 
 not any hearsay that he has ever heard. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled. Exception by defendants and 
 challenged by defendants peremptorily.) 
 
 158 Further examination of Mr. Moore: I stated on my examination on 
 
 Saturday, that I had formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of 
 the defendants. I was pointed out to the deputy to be summoned. 
 Excused peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 159-161 A. J. At water, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 162, 163 Charles H. Coffin, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 164-166 Edward Scott, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 167-170 Frank T. Ford, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 171-178 and 396 I. Springer, challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 181-185 P. W. Nelson, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 1 86, 187 M. S. Davis, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 188-190 M. Anderson, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 191, 192 M. B. Frost, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 193, 194 Charles W. Melcher, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 195 D. F. Swan; reside in Chicago; do business at 109 Dearborn street. 
 Have heard and read about the Haymarket trouble, and formed an opin- 
 ion as to the guilt or innocence of some of the defendants, which I still 
 entertain, and have occasionally expressed heretofore. That opinion is 
 at present firmly fixed in my mind. I believe I could be governed as a 
 
 196 juror by the evidence alone. Have a strong prejudice against social-
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 197 ists, communists and anarchists and their views; don't believe in labor or- 
 
 198 ganizalions, and am opposed to many of such organizations. 
 
 199 (The same questions as to possible influence upon the verdict of the 
 
 prejudice against socialists and anarchists, as in other cases, 
 askrd this witness, and refused by the court; defendants except.) 
 
 200 I have had a conversation with a policeman who was present at the 
 Haymarket, in regard to this case, and he made a statement of the facts 
 as they occurred there, to me, which in great measure I believe to be true. I 
 
 201 should say that the names of some of the defendants were mentioned 
 by the officer, who was one of the force on the ground at the time of the 
 trouble, namely, Lieut. Baird. I have freely expressed the opinion as to 
 
 202 the guilt or innocence of the defendants which I have formed, which 
 opinion I still have. 
 
 (Challenge for cause.) 
 To the Court: I have no personal acquaintance with the defendants 
 
 203 nor any feeling against them, except " such as grows out of what I have 
 heard about their connection with the Haymarket." I guess I could sit 
 here and listen to the evidence, and from the evidence make up my mind 
 as to the truth of this matter without reference to what I have heard or 
 read. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled; defendants except, and challenge 
 peremptorily-) 
 
 204 Defendants moved the court for the appointment of a special bailiff to 
 serve the special venires, pursuant to the statute. 
 
 205 Defendants requested the court to instruct the bailiff as to his duties 
 that the bailiff should summon the jurors from the body of the county, 
 and not go into the wholesale district or wholesale houses and ask for 
 names. 
 
 206 Mr. Grinnell suggested Mr. Ryce as special bailiff', and he was ac- 
 cepted and appointed. 
 
 207 Mr. Ryce inquired if he should select jurors from all walks in life and 
 vocations. The court replied: "You must exercise your own judg- 
 ment in getting the best class of men; that is all I know about it. They 
 
 208 may be selected anywhere in the county that the bailiff" pleases, and he 
 must exercise his own judgment to get the best kind of men he can." 
 
 214-216 R. A. Hitchcock, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 217, 218 Richard Braddell, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 219, 220 John Childs, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 221 James P. Hayde, challenged for cause by defendants.
 
 (65) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 222 W. Morgan, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 223, 224 W. T. Burke, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 225, 226 F. W. Thurston, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 227, 228 A. C. Land, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 229, 230 Matthew Smith, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 231 E. M. Endicott, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 232, 233 Watson Griffith, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 234, 235 Charles Rogers, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 236 R. D. Fannon, examined by defendants; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 237, 238 L. M. Tonnoyer, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 239, 240 W. H. V. Thornton, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 241, 242 William Chick, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 243 C. H. Gentry, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 244-246 Ed. J. Grady, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 247-249 A. Carlson, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 250, 251 Geo. Butters, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 252, 253 J. C. Oran, examined by defendants; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 254, 255 James Durham, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 256 A. W. Bonner: Reside at 794 Rawson avenue. In business in floor 
 and ornamental tiles, for myself. Have read and heard considerable 
 
 257 about the Hay market trouble, but did not form any opinion as to the 
 
 258 guilt or innocence of the defendants. Have expressed an opinion con- 
 cerning the truth of the story which I have read and heard. I am 
 
 260 prejudiced against socialists, anarchists and communists. 
 263 Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 264-271 Charles N. Post, fully examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 272, 273 E. S. Downer, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 274, 275 Thomas H. Martin, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 276 M. Tichnor, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 277, 278 James S. Bassett, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 279, 280 Walter M. Beecher, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 281, 282 F. C. Storey, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 283 T. S. Ingham, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 284 F. I. Wilson, examined by defendants; I am a manufacturer of whole- 
 sale galvanized iron, copper and zinc material at 81 East Jackson street, 
 Chicago. I have heard and read about the Haymarket trouble, and 
 have formed an opinion in reference thereto. To a certain extent, I be- 
 
 285 lieved the newspaper account, and have an opinion as to the guilt or in- 
 nocence of some of the defendants, which I have expressed and still
 
 (66) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 entertain. I think that opinion might prejudice me so so as to influence 
 my verdict my best judgment is that it would influence me in rendering 
 a verdict. 
 286 Challenge for cause. 
 
 286 To Mr. Grinnell: I think I might, if taken as a juror, determine the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants, upon the proof presented in court, 
 regardless of my opinion or prejudice. 
 
 To the Court: I have no personal acquaintance with the defendants. 
 
 287 I think, possibly, I have some desire that there shall be evidence pro- 
 duced upon the trial which shall prove some of these men to be guilty. 
 I have no feeling toward them other than what grows out of what I have 
 read about them. It might be that if I were to sit as a juror the effect 
 of the evidence for or against the defendants would be increased or di- 
 
 288 minished by what I have heard and read. I desire that the evidence 
 should establish the guilt of some one, but not necessarily these defend- 
 
 289 ants, and don't know that I am conscious of a desire that they should be 
 found guilty. I don't think I have any other desire than that the truth 
 may be discovered. 
 
 (Challenge for cause was thereupon overruled by the court, to 
 which defendants excepted and challenged peremptorily.) 
 
 290 Charles F. Walker, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 291 Frank S. Osborne, one of the accepted jurors, stated: I am an' em- 
 ploye in the firm of Marshall Field & Co. I have heard and read about 
 the Haymarket trouble, but have not formed an opinion as to the guilt or 
 innocence of the defendants. In the reports I read their names were 
 
 292 mentioned. I saw the action of the coroner's jury, and think I read the 
 verdict, but am not positive; think I must have done so read the papers 
 
 295 every day. I have no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the de- 
 fendants. 
 
 298, 299 J. M. Bennington, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 300-305 Sebastian Bauer, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 306,307 C. F. Orr, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 309 H. C. Griffith, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 310,311 L. J. Mason, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 312-319 Fred. Shank, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 320,321 A. A. W. Burkhardt, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 322-324 S. S. Bliss, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 325-329 George A. Reardon, examined; challenge for cause sustained.
 
 (67) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 330-333 H. Larned, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 334' 335 H. R. Campbell, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 33^,337 George A. Leiter, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 338 Jno. Connoly, clerk at Cranston & Stow's, book publishers, Chicago: 
 Heard and read about the haymarket meeting, and formed an opinion. 
 
 339 Have made up my mind as to whether the defendants are in fact guilty 
 of the offense there committed, which opinion is firmly fixed in my mind, 
 and is in reference to the guilt or innocence of some of these defendants. 
 Think I am open to conversion, and that evidence to the contrary of my 
 
 340 opinionjmight change my views, but until such evidence is produced I 
 would stick to my present opinion. I would try hard to be governed by the 
 evidence I like to be fair-minded and haven't any revengeful opinion. 
 
 341 I have expressed my opinion frequently. In weighing the testimony pre- 
 342 sented in court I might, to some extent, be influenced by the opinion I 
 
 343 now have in determining whether the proof presented is sufficient to 
 establish beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the defendants. I think I 
 would be influenced in that matter. 
 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants.) 
 
 To the Court: I think I would be influenced in the case supposed to 
 some extent by my present opinion, and don't think I can fairly and im- 
 partially try the case on the evidence alone no, I think I could try the 
 case upon the evidence alone, " at least I would try hard to." Don't 
 
 344 know either of the defendants and have no feeling against them " except 
 such as grows out of what I have heard or read about them." 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled. Exception by defendants, and 
 Connoly challenged peremptorily.) 
 
 347-353 William E. Bogg; employe of John V. Farwell & Co., examined; 
 challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 354-356 F. A. Rehkopf, carriage manufacturer, in business for himself, re- 
 siding 745 West Lake street, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 357-360 S. F. English, examined; am a horse-shoer, in business for myself, at 
 817 West Lake street. Challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 361-364 Otis S. Favor, wholesale commission merchant, examined; challenge 
 for cause sustained. 
 
 365-366 Charles Haubald, cigar manufacturer, examined; challenge for cause 
 sustained. 
 
 367-371 C. Maguire, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 372-381 W. T. Glenn, examined; in the grocery and market business for him- 
 self; challenge for cause sustained.
 
 (68) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 382, 383 Edward E. Edgerton, locksmith, doing business for himself; challenge 
 for cause sustained. 
 
 384-388 J. E. Smith, bookkeeper, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 389-395 E. O. Hubbard, examined; stated that he was a shoe salesman for 
 William Goodyear, whose store was about a block from the Desplaines 
 street station that he had read and heard about the Haymarket meeting 
 and had formed an opinion that the defendants were guilty, believing 
 what he had read and heard, which opinion he still entertained, but stated 
 that he believed he could try the case upon the evidence without reference 
 to his opinion. 
 
 444, 445 Have no doubt whatever that I have expressed my opinion to others. 
 (Challenge for cause; challenge overruled; exception by defendants, 
 and said Hubbard challenged peremptorily). 
 
 397-399 Joseph E.Jones, examined; stated that he was in the painting busi- 
 ness for himself at 690 West Lake street; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 400-403 John Kurtz, a butcher at 219 Mohawk street, was challenged 
 peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 404-406 Charles Heinemann, a harness-maker at 620 Wells street; challenge 
 for cause sustained. 
 
 407-411 Nicholas Nelson, shoe salesman, examined by defendants, was upon 
 peremptory challenge excused. 
 
 412-416 George H. Parker, manufacturer of picture frames, examined; chal- 
 lenge for cause sustained. 
 
 417-421 David McLachlin, grocer, etc., examined; challenge for cause sus- 
 tained. 
 
 422,423 J. M. Ranney, dry goods- merchant, examined; challenge for cause 
 sustained. 
 
 424-427 E. C. Daniels, baker and confectioner, examined; challenged for cause. 
 
 428, 429 I. D. Kramer, paint, oil and wall paper dealer; challenged for cause. 
 
 430, 431 Edward Walker, examined; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 432,434 E. H. Lowis, merchandise broker; challenged for cause. 
 
 434-437 H. J. Whitcombe, grocer, in business for himself, examined; chal- 
 lenge for cause sustained. 
 
 438-443 Thomas Sargent, examined by defendants. 
 
 446, 447 Henry Schweigerman, coal dealer at 709 West Lake street, examined; 
 challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 448-452 Charles Michaelis, examined by defendants. 
 
 454 The jurors Osborne, Michaelis, Melchior and Sargent, accepted by 
 
 defendants and tendered to the state.
 
 (69) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 455 E. Melchior, challenged peremptorily by the state. 
 
 457-459 and 476 Thomas Sargent, examined by the state, and peremptorily 
 challenged. 
 
 460-463 and 469 Charles Michaelis, examined by the state and challenged 
 peremptorily. 
 
 464, 468, 470 arid 503 L. S. Steadman, examined by the slate and challenged 
 peremptorily. 
 
 471-475 Frank Mansfield, examined by state and challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 477-480, 502 and 507 H. L. Anderson, grocer and market man, examined by 
 the state. 
 
 481-483 E. E. Brown, hardware merchant, examined by the state; challenge 
 for cause sustained. 
 
 484-489 N. W. Tryon, picture frame dealer, and merchant examined by the 
 state; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 490-492 J. Brietspraak, examined by state; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 493-497 G. N. Decker, evangelist, examined by the state, challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 498-501 M. P. Warner, examined by the state. 
 
 504-506 J. Meade, examined by the state. 
 
 507 State tender to defense Osborne, Meade, Warner and Anderson. 
 
 507-517 H. L. Anderson, cross-examined by defendants. Am a member of the 
 butchers' union not a butcher by trade. The butchers' union is a be- 
 nevolent society. Read about the Flaymarket affair, and formed an 
 
 509 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of some of the defendants. Have 
 very frequently talked the matter over with other people and expressed 
 mv opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, which I still 
 
 510 retain, and it is based not only upon what I read, but on what I heard. 
 I believe enough of what I read and heard to form ah opinion as to the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants. Am sure I could lay aside my 
 
 511 opinion, and try the case upon the evidence alone. Am well acquainted 
 
 512 with some of the police force, some of whom are friends of mine, who 
 were present at the Haymarket, and they have given me their views of 
 the matter since that meeting, and told me what happened there in con- 
 nection with the effort to disperse the crowd. They were on duty that 
 
 513 night, and some of them were injured by the explosion of the bomb. I 
 have not conversed with those who were present at the time and 
 injured, but with those who were present and not injured. I knew 
 one of the men that were killed by the bomb knew him well, i
 
 (70) 
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 formed an unqualified opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defend- 
 
 514 ants, which I regard as deep-seated, a firm conviction that these defend- 
 ants, or some of them, are guilty. I think I could lay that all to one side, 
 however, and try the case without bias. As a result of the conversations 
 that I had with the policemen present at the meeting, I reached an opin- 
 ion as to the guilt or innocence of some of the defendants. 
 
 516 Anderson challenged for cause upon his answers. 
 
 518 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants and chal- 
 
 lenged peremptorily.) 
 
 519-525 M. P. Warner, cross-examined by defendants and challenged per- 
 emptorily. 
 
 526-528 J. Meade, cross-examined by defendants, and challenged peremptorily. 
 
 529,530 John F. Newell, photographer, examined by defendants, and challenge 
 for cause sustained. 
 
 531, 532 E. Hobbs, florist, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 533, 534 W. Tobias, notion business, examined by defendants, and challenge for 
 cause sustained. 
 
 535^539 O'f Jackson, coal merchant, examined by defendants, and challenged 
 peremptorily. 
 
 540-543 Joseph Imlay, merchant, examined, challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 544, 545 A. W. Lauderbeck, auction business, examined by defendants, chal- 
 lenged for cause. 
 
 546-548 Charles M. Barren, formerly in the West Town tax office, regular 
 business meat market, examined by defendants and challenged per- 
 emptorily. 
 
 549-554 August Berg, barber, examined by defendants. 
 
 555' SS^ William F. Bosse, cigar manufacturer, examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause sustained. 
 
 557, 558 Herman Horn, manufacturer of gold and silver leaf, examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 558-!, 559 Jacob Henrich, hardware merchant, examined; challenge for cause 
 sustained. 
 
 560 E. C. Morey, crockery and glass-ware merchant; heard and read 
 
 about the Haymarket difficulty. Have conversed with some members of 
 the police force; know a number of them. 
 
 565 Knew Mathias J. Degan. He had a beat near my store and was very 
 
 566 frequently in it. My acquaintance with him led me to inquire particu- 
 larly into the circumstances of his death, and at the time of such inquirv
 
 VOL. C. 
 
 I formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants or 
 some of them, which opinion I now have and have expressed to others, 
 but I think I could render a fair verdict uninfluenced thereby. 
 
 576 Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 568-575 and 582 A. D. Nye, dry-goods merchant, examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause sustained. 
 
 577-581 C. B. Wilson, druggist, challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 1-5 W. H. Wilder, dealer in meats and vegetables: Examined by defend- 
 
 ants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 6-10 John Mayer, druggist: Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 11-13 Thomas H. Carruthers, boot and shoe dealer: Examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 14 T. A. Harney, clothing dealer: Have read and heard of the Hay- 
 market meeting, and formed an opinion upon the question of the defend- 
 ants' guilt or innocence which I still have. I think it is a strong opinion ; 
 think it would prevent me from rendering an impartial verdict in this 
 case. Challenged for cause. 
 
 15 To Mr. Grinnell: I would not undertake to convict a man or acquit 
 him on a newspaper account, and know that his guilt should be proved 
 in court. .Know nothing in this case, except what I got from the news- 
 papers, and my opinion is based on that; think I could determine the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants upon the proof presented in court, 
 regardless of my opinion. 
 
 16 To counsel for defendants: I have now a firm opinion which I would 
 take with me into the jury, and I think that opinion would influence my 
 verdict after the testimony was introduced and the charge given. I be- 
 lieve I would be prejudiced, and that my opinion would prevent me 
 from rendering an unbiased and unprejudiced verdict; that is my present 
 judgment. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 17 To the Court: Never saw any of the defendants, and whatever opin- 
 ion I have is based on what I heard and read, which I took for granted 
 
 18 to be true; did not know Began; think I have now an opinion as to 
 whether some of these defendants caused the wound from which' Degan 
 died. Know that a man should not be punished unless his guilt is made 
 certain believe I could listen to the evidence, and fairly and impartially 
 make up my mind as to whether their guilt was established beyond rea- 
 sonable doubt; don't believe that conclusion would be affected by my pres-
 
 (72) 
 VOL. P. 
 
 19 ent opinion; think I could consider the evidence alone, and be governed 
 by that. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception. Also, objection and 
 
 exception to the line of inquiry adopted by the court.) 
 Further examined by defendants: I believed enough of what I heard 
 and read to form an opinion; did not express my opinion to others; 
 
 20 talked with policemen who were at the Haymarket; knew one of them 
 
 21 by sight, who told me what occurred there, and my opinion as to the 
 guilt of these men was largely based on what he said; he was one of the 
 
 22 , officers engaged in dispersing the crowd; don't think that my opinion 
 
 would prevent my rendering an impartial verdict; think I could lay it 
 
 23 aside; have lived in Chicago three months; came here the first of last 
 April from LaSalle county; am in business for myself; a single man, 
 
 24 and my parents have resided here a year; rented my present store about 
 the 1 5th of March, and occupied it about the first of April; can't tell ex- 
 actly; came here to stay probably about the first of April; don't remem- 
 
 25 ber the name of the policeman I talked with. 
 
 26 (Further challenged on the ground that it did not appear that the 
 
 juror had been a resident of the county ninety days before being 
 examined.) 
 To the Court: I reside with my parents who have lived here for a 
 
 27 year; came up from La Salle and took my store in March to engage in 
 business, and have since moved up. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled and exception; challenged perempto- 
 rily by defendants.) 
 2 9~3 2 J onn T. McShane, salesman with J. W. Tuohy & Co., dry-goods, 
 
 examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 33~35 J- J- Shivery, traveling salesman, examined by defendants; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 36,37 H. D. Cook, grocer; challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 38-41 Thomas K. Elvey, coal dealer, examined by defendants; stated that 
 
 he had a firm opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants 
 from what he had heard and read, but that he did not believe it would 
 influence his verdict. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 42 T. E. Keefe, grocery salesman, wholesale and retail. Have heard of 
 the Haymarket affair, and from what I have heard and read have formed 
 an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the murder of 
 
 43 Degan, which opinion I still have, and which is a firm opinion. I think
 
 (73) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 such opinion would not influence my verdict. I knew officer Degan for 
 
 45 several months before he was killed; knowing him, what I heard and 
 read caused me td form a very strong opinion upon the question of the 
 guilt or innocence of these defendants, or some of them, which I still 
 have and have expressed to others. I believed what I heard and read, 
 and based my opinion on that belief; I have stated that what I heard 
 
 46 and read I believed, and I did in fact believe the accounts as published 
 and have so stated repeatedly, and at the same time told others my 
 opinion. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I got an opinion from what I read, which I 
 
 47 expressed; I did not say to anybody that I believed what I read; I did 
 believe it but I didn't say so; the opinion that 1 had was as to who was 
 responsible. 
 
 48 To the Court: I have never had any discussion as to the truth of the 
 reports, but I expressed my opinion as to the transaction and the parties. 
 
 48 To Defendant's Counsel: I didn't understand your questions; I have 
 
 49 expressed my opinion, which was based on what I heard and read, which 
 I believed, more what I heard than what I read, and I told others what 
 I had heard; knew officer Degan; I stated toothers that I believed what 
 I had heard, but did not state that I believed what I read; I stated to oth- 
 ers that I believed what I had heard, and gave them my opinion; there 
 is no mistake about this; I said to others that I believed what I heard. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 To the Court: I have heard the Haymarket transaction talked of, 
 51 but I never told anybody that I believed the newspapers had got the 
 story straight, nor that I believed that I had got the story straight from 
 any one who talked with me. 
 
 53 To defendant's counsel: My opinion was largely formed from what 
 I heard; in communicating that opinion to others I said that I believed 
 what I had heard; there is no mistake about this; I told them also my 
 opinion which was based on what I heard and read. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 54 To Mr. Grinnell: I told others in discussing the matter with them 
 
 55 what I had heard, and expressed my opinion, but I did not say that I be- 
 lieved every word or any particular word that had been told me. 
 
 To the Court: Don't remember who first told me about the transac- 
 tion I may have talked with a dozen or two; I have never said anything 
 as to whether I thought they got the story straight.
 
 (74) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 56 To defendants' counsel: I heard the story from several parties, but 
 
 57 cannot give the names, and discussed the matter with a good many; I 
 
 58 formed my opinion from what I believed of what I heard, and repeated 
 
 59 to others what had been told me or part of it, but did not tell them that 
 
 60 I believed what I had heard; I did believe it, but did not say so; I told 
 others in talking with them I believed what I heard, but did not narrate 
 the story fully; I am sure that I did tell them that I believed what I had 
 heard in my conversation with different ones. 
 
 61 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants; chal- 
 
 lenged peremptorily.) 
 
 62-65 A. H. Newman, printer, publisher and dealer in merchandise; exam- 
 ined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 66,67 Kenneth Chisholm, dry-goods salesman; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 68-72 J. F. Dietrich, manufacturer of shirts; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 73> 74 J onn Ashbury, druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 75, 76 David Allard, hat and fur business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 77, 78 C.J. Easterly, gents' furnishing goods; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 79 George F. Baker, in the employ of Carter, Hall & Co., tea importers; 
 have heard and read about the Haymarket meeting, and have formed an 
 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the murder of 
 Degan, which I think I have expressed to others, and which I still enter- 
 tain; it would be a very firm opinion " unless contradicted by very strong 
 
 80 evidence"; it would take very strong evidence to overcome my opinion, 
 and I would start off with a verdict in my mind for the reason that my 
 opinion is so strong. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I have an opinion now which I should be very apt 
 to carry with me. 
 
 81 To defendants counsel: My opinion would stay with me until evidence 
 was introduced to carry it away; it would remain with me until over- 
 come by the evidence; but I don't think it would bias my judgment; I 
 
 82 think I have expressed this opinion to others; it would remain unchanged 
 until overcome by evidence. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants; challenged 
 peremptorily.)
 
 (75) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 83 Magnus A. Hess, printer: Examined by defendants; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 84-89 J. R. Adams, importing commission merchant: Examined by defend- 
 ants; challenged for cause, the juror stating that he believed his opinion 
 or prejudice would prevent him rendering an impartial verdict. 
 
 In the examination of this juror the following occurred: "The COURT: 
 Q. Do you believe that, after you have heard all the evidence that can 
 be presented, or that shall be presented on each side examination and 
 cross-examination that your conclusions then as to what is the truth will 
 be at all affected by what people have said or written about it before you 
 heard any testimony? Do you believe that your conclusions as to what 
 that evidence proved or failed to prove will be at all affected by what 
 anybody has ever said or written about that matter before? A. I believe 
 it would. 
 
 "The COURT: It is incomprehensible to me." 
 
 (To which remark of the court objection and exception was taken. 
 Challenge for cause allowed.) 
 
 90,91 H. A. Butcher, clothing merchant: Examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 92-94 F. J. Poole, dry-goods merchant: Examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 95 H. Grass, knit-goods salesman: Examined by defendants; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 96,97 Edward Bayless, general house furnishing goods: Examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 98,99 H. M. Caswell, manufacturer of mirrors: Examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 99^-101 G. W. Carpenter, butcher: Examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 102,103 Henry Allers, grocer: Examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 104-8 and 127-8 Frank Pike, boot and shoe dealer: Examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 109,110 W. G. Phillips, retail furniture dealer: Examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 in, 112 G. W. Snow, flour and feed dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 113-117 Thomas McCoy, hardware clerk; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged premptorily.
 
 (76) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 118,119 J. H. Jones, boot and shoe dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 120-6, 134 148-9, 213 Frank Hoffman, cigar and confectionery store; excused 
 by agreement. 
 
 129-30 E. D. Morse, livery-stable" keeper; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 131-3 Thomas F. Smith, in the paper and decorating business; examined by 
 defendants; challenged premptorily. 
 
 135-6 Joseph Buchanon, hardware and furnace dealer; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 137-9 R. B. Marsh, market keeper; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 140-41 John Kellar, in the crockery business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 142-3 William Hutchins, employed by the St. Nicholas Toy Company; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 144-7 Henry Higgins, furniture salesman; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 150-1 Gustav Haubold, cigar store and factory; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 152-9 John D. Osgood, employed by Carson, Pirie, Scott & Company, dry- 
 goods; examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 160-1 Edward Riley, keeper of a fruit store; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 162-5 Jacob B. Breese, dealer in investment securities; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 166-174 William Biggs, boot and shoe dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 175-6 A. S. Montgomery, painter and paper-hanger; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 177-9 Charles A. Gaines, shipping-clerk for H. W. Wetherell; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 180-2 A. B. Vandervoort, a lawyer by profession, but not in practice; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 183-4 William E. Taylor, real estate dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 185-190 Robert C. Griswold, hay and seed dealer; examined by defendants; 
 formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants from 
 what he had heard and read, which opinion he still entertained and had
 
 (77) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 expressed to others. " Don't think that opinion would affect my verdict, 
 chosen as a juror; I could try to form my opinion according to the 
 evidence." 
 
 189 " Q. Do you believe that you could lay the opinion that you have 
 aside, and act upon the sworn testimony and the charge of the court?" 
 
 (Question refused by the court and exception by defendants.) 
 
 190 Challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 191 George M. Porter, grocer: Read of the Haymarket meeting every 
 day since it occurred; have formed an opinion on the question of the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants, or some of them, of the murder of 
 
 193 Mr. Degan from what I have heard and read; have expressed that opin- 
 ion; talked the matter over in the store a great many times; it is as 
 strong as could be from reading the papers; think it would take 
 more evidence if I were sitting as a juror than if I had never read 
 about it; my present opinion would bias my judgment, I think. I would 
 try to go by the evidence, but I think what I have read would have a 
 great deal to do with it that it would require more evidence or less, 
 according to my present opinion, to establish a given fact, so that my 
 
 193 mind is, to begin with, biased; it certainly is biased now, " and it would 
 take a good deal of evidence to change it; would try to go by the evi- 
 dence." 
 
 Challenged for cause. 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: Know the rule of law as to' the question of 
 guilt being determined by the evidence and not upon newspaper reports 
 or conversation; I know nothing of this case except what I have read, 
 and would try to be governed by the evidence if taken as a juror, re- 
 gardless of my present opinion; still, I am pretty strongly prejudiced 
 
 194 now, though I would try to give every man the benefit of a doubt; 
 would try to determine the question on the evidence alone rather think 
 I could do so, regardless of my present opinion. 
 
 195 To the Court: As to determining the question on the evidence 
 alotie, " I think what I have read and heard before I came into court 
 would have some influence with me;" don't know as it would influence 
 my conclusion; understand that it would be my duty to render a verdict 
 according to the evidence, but I am afraid that what I have heard and 
 read and mv present opinion would affect the verdict I would render; 
 still I think I could fairly and impartially try the case, taking the evi- 
 
 196 dence as my guide I certainly would try to. Have no personal ac- 
 quaintance with the defendants, nor any feeling against them, " except 
 what grows out of what I have heard and read about it."
 
 (73) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 198 (Challenge for cause overruled, to which defendants except.) 
 
 To defendant's counsel: Don't know any policemen who were at the 
 Hay market, and have not conversed with any who were there; have a 
 prejudice against socialists, anarchists and communists, though I have 
 never investigated and don't really know what they are; don't know that 
 this prejudice would influence my verdict, but I am prejudiced against any 
 
 200 thing of that kind, and have so expressed myself a great many times; I 
 would try to go by the evidence "but I think in this case it would be 
 awful hard work for me to do it." I would try very hard to and believe 
 I could that I could lay aside my present views and be governed by the 
 
 201 testimony. I have frequently expressed my opinion based on my belief 
 in what I read and heard; don't know that I ever expressed my belief of 
 the narrative, but I do "believe what I read in the papers believe that 
 the parties are guilty." In substance, I did, in discussing this matter, state 
 
 202 that I believed what I had read and my opinion was governed by this 
 belief. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 To the Court: As to whether, in my discussions of this matter, any 
 question was made as to the truth of the narrative, "that is a pretty hard 
 question to answer; I don't know; I have expressed myself as believing 
 
 203 it believing what I read in the papers believing alike the story and the 
 opinion believing it just as I read it in the papers." Don't know that 
 any question as to the truth of the narrative was ever raised, or that I 
 ever expressed an opinion as to whether the newspapers got bodily or the 
 substance of the story right; don't know that I ever did express an 
 opinion as to the truth of the story told. 
 
 204 To defendant's counsel: I will not swear that I did not state my belief 
 in the truth of what I had read I don't remember how that was. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants; challenged 
 peremptorily.) 
 
 205-6 M. A. Crocker, hardware merchant; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 207-8 W. G. Watkins, butcher business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 209-212 Mathew Anderson, plumber; examined by defendants; challenged 
 peremptorily. 
 
 214-217 George F. Kimball, plate glass business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed.
 
 (79) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 218-224 A. N. Warner, dry goods; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 225-6 William H. Robinson, flour and feed merchant; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 227 Charles Davidson, meat market; examined by defendants; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 228-35 James W. Nye, wholesale hardware.; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 236-41 Joseph Roder, iron business; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 242 F. D. Slegel, wire goods; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 243-9 C. H. Walters, grocer; examined by defendants; challenged peremp- 
 
 264 torily by defendants. 
 
 250-1 George E. Copper, coal, lumber and wood business; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 252-3 William H. Brackett, hotel keeper: examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 254-5 H. C. Smith, boot and shoe business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 256-8 O. W. Folsom, clerk; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 259 Andrew Hamilton, hardware business; have heard and read of the 
 Haymarket meeting, and have an opinion against somebody as to the 
 
 260 murder of Degan, but don't know whether these parties are guilty; read 
 
 261 the account in the News and Tribune, and have casually followed it up; 
 have no acquaintance with the police force; think I could try the case 
 impartially and render an impartial verdict; don't think that my feeling 
 that somebody ought to suffer would influence my verdict unless it was 
 
 263 proved that these were the men. Usually attend the Baptist church, 
 
 359-61 but am not a member thereof; presume I have said that some one ought 
 
 to be made an example of whoever was responsible for the Haymarket 
 
 trouble; don't remember distinctly using such an expression, and don't 
 
 know these defendants "except once in a while seeing their names in 
 
 the papers; if these are the men I should say yes if it is proven to me 
 
 that these are the men." I have no doubt of my ability to try this case 
 
 fairly. 
 
 365 To Mr. Grinnell: Think I could try this case upon the proofs pre-
 
 (8o) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 sented, without reference to any opinion I now have; do not know any 
 
 366 of the defendants or either counsel. 
 
 265-8 L. D. Tuttle, hardware business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 269-70 George M. Balling, furniture business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 271 Peter Simon, printer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 272-3 Richard E. Lyman, vegetable dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 274-8 Arthur Wallen, dry goods; examined by defendants; challenged per- 
 emptorily. 
 
 279-80 W. H. White, residence 3623 Prairie avenue, examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 281-2 J. E. Rider, chiropodist, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 283-6 L. M. Smith, real estate and renting business, examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 287-8 E. R. Williams, watchmaker and jeweler, examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 289-90 George Walter, butcher, examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 291-2 Theodore A. Gehrmann, grocer, examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 
 
 293-7 M. C. Bryant, clerk, examined by defendants; challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 298-9 Robert Renshaw, painter, examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 300-2 Edward D. Murray, hardware merchant, examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 303 S. H. Brown, grocer, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 304 E. H. Martin, book-keeper in the insurance business: Have read and 
 heard of the Haymarket meeting, and have formed and expressed an 
 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants upon the charge of 
 
 305 the murder of Degan; do not think that would influence my verdict; 
 
 306 read of the occurrence in the Daily News and the Tribune at the time; 
 formed an opinion concerning the guilt or innocence of the defendants;
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 307 I believed what I read to be true, and have stated my opinion to others; 
 I suppose that I stated also my belief that what I had read in the papers 
 was true no, what I mean is that I formed my opinion from what I 
 
 308 read and believed to be true, and stated my opinion based on what I 
 read in the papers, and I said that I based it on what I had read; and I 
 still believe to be true what I so read. 
 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled, and exception; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 309 J. Daniels, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 310 W. G. Hullhorst, bookkeeper; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed.- 
 
 311 H. M. Smith, hardware merchant; have formed and expressed an 
 opinion upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendants of 
 the murder of Mr. Degan, but don't think that would prevent my render- 
 ing an impartial verdict; I read the newspapers at the time and had 
 quite a number of conversations in reference to the matter and formed 
 quite a decided opinion, which I still have. I don't know whether I 
 
 312 would listen to the testimony impartially am afraid I would listen to 
 what supported my opinion a little more intently than to what attacked 
 it " I would be willing to have my opinion strengthened, and would 
 hate very much to have it dissolved." I do not believe I could render a 
 fair and impartial verdict " I think I would be prejudiced, because my 
 feeling is very bitter." I would render my verdict according to the tes- 
 timony, if possible, but I suppose my mind is prejudiced and I think my 
 
 313 prejudice would influence me in arriving at a verdict; " think it would 
 take less testimony as a juryman to come to the conclusion which I now 
 have than to come to an opposite conclusion; that is my best judgment 
 now." 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I think I could determine the guilt or innocence of 
 the defendants upon the proof alone, regardless of what I have heard or 
 
 314 read they are to be judged by the evidence; understand it is the duty 
 of a juror to listen to the testimony and be governed by that alone, and I 
 think I can do that. 
 
 To the Court: Have no personal acquaintance with the defendants. 
 " I have a personal feeling; some of the officers were personal friends 
 of mine;" but I have no feeling towards any of the defendants other 
 than what is based on what I have heard or read; have talked with per-
 
 (82) 
 VOL. D. 
 
 sons who were at the Haymarket, but not as to these special defendants. 
 
 315 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants. Chal- 
 
 lenged peremptorily.) 
 
 316-18 W. R. El well, clerk; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 319-20 Willis Powers, clerk: examined by defendants; challenged for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 321-2 Leo Austrian, mirror business; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 323-5 Peter R. Wright, furniture business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 326 Samuel Carson, dry-goods business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 327-33 David Graham, dry-goods business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 334-8 Edward C. Ruling, out of business at present; was in gents' furnish- 
 ing goods business; examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 339 Isaac W. Pinkham, coffee business; have heard and read of the Hay- 
 market meeting, and have an opinion on the question of the guilt or in- 
 nocence of the defendants, which I have expressed to others, and still en- 
 tertain. Don't know that that opinion would influence my verdict, " if 
 
 340 the evidence showed that I was in error." Of course I have an opinion 
 now. Read all the Chicago papers; think I could listen to the testimony 
 
 341 and render an impartial verdict; " think I could change my opinion if I 
 saw any necessity for it," but it would be necessary to change that opin- 
 ion, for I have an opinion now, and the evidence would have to show 
 
 342 that I was in error. As to acting on the testimony alone, " I presume 
 my present opinion would have to show cause why to change it my 
 present opinion would naturally prejudice me slightly;" don't think that 
 would prejudice me so that the evidence would not be weighed; my 
 
 343 opinion is made up principally from what I read. Should try not to be 
 biased believe I could weigh the evidence can't say more than that 
 can't tell till the time comes. "If the evidence should show that I was 
 in error," I would lay aside my present opinion, but the evidence would 
 have to show that I was in error before I would change my mind it 
 would take testimony to overcome my present opinion. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 344 To Mr. Grinnell: Believe I can determine the innocence or guilt of
 
 (83) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 the defendants upon the proof presented in court alone, regardless of my 
 present opinion, or of what I have heard and read. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily.) 
 
 345~7 Henry B. Edwards, carriage business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 348-9 K. J. Decatur, wholesale salesman; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 350-1 F. A. Smith, carriage business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 352 Charles A. Ludwig, wood mantel business; have heard and read of 
 Haymarket meeting, but neither formed nor expressed an opinion; have 
 
 353 a prejudice against communists, socialists and anarchists from what I 
 have read, but don't know that that would influence my verdict; am 
 
 357 book-keeper for Charles L. Page. 
 
 Thereupon defendants tendered to the state Osborne, Berg, Hamilton 
 and Ludwig. 
 
 363-4 August Berg; examined by Mr. Grinnell: Have talked about this 
 case to others but never expressed an opinion upon it. Was born twelve 
 miles north of Berlin. Am a naturalized citizen. 
 
 367-391 (August Berg challenged peremptorily by the state; objected to as 
 'follows: "August Spies, the accused, objects to any further per- 
 emptory challenge by the attorney prosecuting on behalf of the 
 people, because the said attorney has already been admitted to 
 and has exercised against this accused twenty peremptory chal- 
 lenges, being the full number of peremptory challenges allowed 
 to this accused under the statute, and in the exercise of such 
 challenges, has excluded from the jury divers jurors who were 
 acceptable to and accepted by this accused, to wit: R. H. Ashton, 
 Sweet, Freeman, Martin, Levy, E. L. Melchior, Charles Michaelis 
 and Thomas Sargent.") 
 (The same objection was interposed on behalf of each of the 
 
 defendants.) 
 
 (The objection was fully argued and authorities cited, but was over- 
 ruled and the state's peremptory challenge of August Berg 
 allowed; to which defendants respectively excepted.) 
 
 392-3 Charles H. Ludwig to Mr. Grinnell: Know of nothing to prevent me 
 acting impartially; have no sympathy with any class of individuals who
 
 (84) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 have for their purpose the overthrow of the law by force; am not a 
 
 socialist, and have no friends who are. 
 394-7 Charles H. Curtis, piano business; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 398-400 Morris Cooney, lithographer; challenged for cause by state. 
 401-2 Henry Magnus, laundry; challenged for cause by state. 
 
 403 Foster Watling, commercial traveler. Examined by state. Have read 
 
 404 about this case and formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of 
 these defendants, or some of them, of the crime of murder, which was 
 
 405 formed from what I have read. If taken as a juror " I think I should be 
 very much prejudiced." I believed a great part of what I read and 
 based my opinion upon it, but have not talked with any one who was 
 
 406 present, and only knew of the matter from my reading. As to whether 
 I am prepared to hear the story from the mouths of witnesses and de- 
 termine the innocence or guilt of the defendants, I don't know. " I have 
 a pretty strong opinion on the subject- -it would take very strong evi- 
 dence to change it." I don't think I would convict a man on a newspa- 
 per report, and know the defendants are entitled to a fair trial, the ques- 
 tion of their guilt or innocence to be determined by evidence. I think, 
 
 407 perhaps, I could determine the question of the guilt or innocence of these 
 defendants from the evidence alone. I presume I could. 
 
 Thereupon counsel for the state tendered to defendants, Osborn, Ham- 
 ilton, Ludwig and Watling. 
 
 408 Mr. Watling, examined by defendants' counsel: My opinion, based 
 on what I have heard and read, " would have great weight in the ver- 
 dict" I would render would have great weight in weighing the testimony; 
 don't think I could lay my opinion entirely aside. 
 
 409 (Challenged for cause by defendants. ) 
 
 To counsel for state: I think the defendants are responsible for the 
 offense committed at the Haymarket and believe that opinion would influ- 
 ence my verdict. 
 
 (Challenge for cause allowed.) 
 
 (Thereupon defendants asked the court that in this and every in- 
 stance, the state's representatives should, in the first instance, be 
 required to fill the panel of four and tender them to defendants, 
 which motion was overruled, and defendants excepted.) 
 
 411 M. D. Flavin; engaged in the marble business; interior decorations of 
 
 marbles etc. ; have read and heard about the Haymarket affair, and formed
 
 (85) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the murder 
 
 412 of Degan, which stands pretty strong yet, which I still entertain and 
 which I believe I have expressed to others; one of the officers killed was 
 
 413 a relative of mine Officer Flavin, though the relationship was distant, 
 and for this reason my feeling was perhaps different than from what it 
 
 414 otherwise would have been, and occasion a very strong opinion in my 
 mind as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or some of them. 
 I stated in discussing this matter with others that I believed what I had 
 
 415 heard and read, not so much what I had read as what I had heard; I 
 believe I expressed the opinion that what I heard was a true narrative. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I read the accounts of the Hay market, and from 
 what I heard and read formed an opinion, but don't suppose that I ever 
 told anybody in substance that I believed the story that I had heard and 
 
 416 read was a true story; did not express any opinion as to the truth of the 
 details. 
 
 To defendants' counsel: What I heard had more to do with mv 
 
 417 opinion than what I read. And now, I don't think that I said to any- 
 body that I did believe what I heard. Mr. Grinnell is a neighbor of 
 mine; I have known him quite a while, four or five years, and know Mr. 
 
 418 Ingham by sight. I have no doubt I could give a fair and impartial 
 verdict. 
 
 419 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants. 
 Challenged peremptorily. 
 
 420-9 M. J. Moth, manufacturer of vacuum pumps; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 430-4 Oscar F. Henning, sail-maker; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 435-40 Cyrus H. Underwood, salesman for American Desk and Stool Co.; 
 examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 441-2 Charles J. Reed, stockholder in American Desk .and Stool Co. ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 443-45 E. E. Page, retail cigar dealer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 446-8 Charles Seberry, dry-goods salesman with Carson, Pirie, Scott & 
 Co. Examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 449-50 W. J. Ellston, book agent; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed.
 
 (86) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 451-6 Rudolph Deimel, parlor furniture dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 457-8 R. H. Given, Jr., book-keeper for J. S. Ford, Johnson & Co.; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 459-60 Horace E. Bent, grocers' clerk; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 461-2 P. A. Bonfeig, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 463-8 Harry H. Johnson, sign-writer; examined by defendants and ten- 
 dered to the state with Osborne, Ludwig and Hamilton. 
 
 469-72 Johnston excused by the state and challenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Objection by defendants as before; overruled by the court; per- 
 emptory challenge allowed, and defendants except.) 
 
 473-6 G. W. Price, confectioner and fancy goods dealer, examined by state. 
 Challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 477-8 R. R. Griffith, in the plumbing business; examined by state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 479-31 H. H. Tobias, board of trade operator; examined by state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 482-7 R. W. Sweet, wholesale dealer in cigars; examined by the state; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception as before in behalf of each de- 
 fendannt.) 
 
 488-9 Andrew Scherer, druggist, examined by the state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 490-3 George Beeber, shoe business, examined by the state; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 494-6 Gustav Burkhardt, cornice manufacturer, examined by the state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 497-9 Ed Heffenon, wholesale hat business, with Edson, Keith & Co., ex- 
 amined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 500-3 Edward J. Madden, in charge of telegraph department for Armour & 
 Co., examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 504-5 J. M. McCullough, board of trade speculator, examined by the state; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 506-9 David J. Whittaker, book-keeper, examined by the state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 510-11 R. Berryman, boot and shoe manufacturer, examined by the state; 
 challenge for cause allowed.
 
 (87) 
 
 VOL. D. 
 
 512-15 Hugh Williams, grocer, challenged for cause by the state. 
 51618 Smith Crookes, shoemaker, challenged for cause by the state. 
 519-520 Charles Poorschman, engaged with Clybourne & Smith, retail meat 
 
 dealers, examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 521-4 R. S. T. Barrett, manufacturer of car springs, examined by the state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 525-7 Thos. W. Shaughnessy, hardware dealer, examined by the' state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 528-31 Fred Heide, livery business, examined by the state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 531^-33 M. Kaeper, brush manufacturer, examined by the state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 534-5 August Afton, clerk for E. R. Steck, hardware; examined by the 
 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 536-7 William P. O'Cock, grocer and meat market keeper; examined by 
 
 the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 538-40 Otto Redlich, manufacturer for Redlich Manufacturing Company; 
 
 examined by the state ; challenge for cause allowed. 
 541-2 Thomas C. Peimington, treasurer Chicago City Railway Company; 
 
 examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 543-8 William H. Miller, lumber broker; examined by the state; challenged 
 
 peremptorily; challenge allowed, and same objection, and exception by 
 
 defendants, respectively, as before. 
 549-52 James T. Vickery, grocer; examined by the state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 553-5 John W. Carter, carriage manufacturer, with C. R. Kimball & Co.; 
 
 examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 556-7 David Fisch, furniture dealer; examined by the state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 558-60 M. J. Brown, Thos. H. Brown & Son, Novelty Carriage Works; 
 
 examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 561-2 Maxwell M. Jones, corresponding clerk with Libby, McNeil & Libby; 
 
 examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 563-4 William Wendland, of Wendland Bros. & Doose, truck manufac- 
 turers; examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 565-8 William Meade, shipping clerk for Boyington Folding Bed Company; 
 
 examined by the state; challenged peremptorily; challenge allowed. 
 
 (Same objection and exception in behalf of each defendant as before. ) 
 569-71 Peter Malzen, grocer; examined by the state; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed.
 
 (88) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 1-4 Daniel J. Burke, meat market business; examined by state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 5-8 George W. Winslow, clerk in stationery, tobacco and cigar store; ex- 
 
 amined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 9, 10 John W. Heal, manufacturer of furniture; examined by state,; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 12-14 John W. Kneale, soap manufacturer; examined by state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 1518 J. H. Kennedy, carpenter, doing business for himself; examined by 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 19, 20 George Baker, clerk in coal office of Baker Brothers; examined by 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 21,22 Isidore Lotenstein, grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 23 J. T. Ruth, grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 24,25 C. H. Blackman, commission merchant on board of trade; examined 
 by state; accepted and tendered to defendants. 
 
 26-32 Mr. Blackman, examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 (Defendants moved that the state be required to tender four jurors, 
 the panel of four having been broken; motion overruled, and ex- 
 ception.) 
 
 33-37 A. A. McKay, board of trade speculator; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 38, 39 T. D. Endesly, deputy probate clerk; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 40-42 D. H. Dickinson, wholesale marble dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 44-47 D. S. Wheeler, member Chicago Board of Trade; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 48 William F. Peirronet, board of trade commission; examined by de- 
 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 49-53 Daniel B. Gardner, real estate owner and dealer; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 54-56 Daniel Reily, board of trade grain dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 57 V. Serveny, hardware business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 58 Fred Gillman, music teacher; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed.
 
 (8 9 ) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 59-65 George E. Felton, hosiery business, and former clerk of the Chicago 
 House of Correction; examined by defendants; admitted that he had 
 formed and expressed an opinion in the case; challenged peremptorily by 
 defendants. 
 
 66,67 A. W. Walroth, clerk; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 68 J. W. Barker, contracting car-builder; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 69 Charles H. Dahl; examined by defendants; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 70 D. A. Lang, dry-goods business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 71 G. W. Zeiger, in the butchering business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 72, 73 N. C. Gram, a butcher since he was fourteen years old; not natural- 
 ized; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 74 Gustav Jaeger; unable to speak English. Excused. 
 
 75 J. C. Wendt; in the butchering business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 76 Charles Stilling, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 77,78 Anton Deiden, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. * 
 
 79-82 Charles Carlson, restaurant keeper; examined bv defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 83-87 Olaf Dahling, house trimming and cabinet-making business; member 
 of cabinet makers' union; examined by defendants; accepted and ten- 
 dered to the state. 
 
 88 Mr. Dahling excused peremptorily by the state without examination. 
 
 (Objected to on behalf of each defendant; objection overruled and 
 
 exception.) 
 89-91 John Collins, a laborer; examined by state; excused peremptorily. 
 
 (Objection by each defendant; objection overruled, and exception.) 
 92,93 Henry Wieland, clothier; examined by state; accepted and tendered 
 
 to defendants. 
 
 94-97 Said Wieland examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 (Motion by defendants' counsel that stale be required to tender four 
 jurors; motion overruled, and exception.)
 
 (90) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 98,99 Jacob Helmke, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 100 F. T. Chiniquy, boot and shoe merchant; examined by defendants; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 101, 102 Martin Costigan, coachman for J. C. McMullen, vice-president Chi- 
 cago and Alton railroad; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 1034 Henry Hecht, grocer: Examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 105-13 A. C. Wehrle, assistant teacher National Institute of Pharmacy: Ex- 
 amined by defendants; accepted and tendered to the state. 
 
 114-16 Mr. Wehrle examined by the state; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Objection by defendants respectively, same as before; objection 
 overruled, and exception.) 
 
 117-21 Fred. F. Sherman, clerk in west town assessor's office: Examined by 
 state; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Objection and exception by each of the defendants as before.) 
 
 122-24 Matthias Kaiser, grocer: Examined by state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 125-7 Conrad G. Warnecke, employed in the post-office: Examined by the 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 123-33 Thomas Dyche, freight inspector south-western freight pool: Exam- 
 ined by state; accepted and tendered to defendants. 
 
 134 Mr. Dyche peremptorily challenged by defendants. 
 
 135-6 A. C. Slay ton, retail grocer: Examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 134-43 C. W. Zimmerman, traveling dry-goods salesman: Examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 144-6 Carl John Mortinson, manufacturer of carriages: Examined by de- 
 fendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 147-51 C. B. Kinley, manufacturer of baby carriages: Examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 152-4 George Fraser: Examined by defendants; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 155-61 W. H. Stewart, ex-deputy west town assessor: Examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 162-7 Jhn Klein, saloon and restaurant keeper: Examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily.
 
 (9O 
 
 VOI/. E. 
 
 168,9 H. M. Moody, retail boots and shoes: Examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 170-1 Claus Nillson, car builder for Chicago and North- Western Railroad 
 Company: Examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 172-5 Benedict Messlein, in the real estate business: Examined by defend- 
 ants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 176-80 Henry W. Porter, grocer and tea merchant: Examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 181-8 Andrew Stark, dry-goods merchant: Examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 189-94 Robert Ellis, shipping clerk for Whitman & Barnes Manufacturing 
 Company; examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 195-6 James McGinn, boot and shoe dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 197-202 James E. Kells, machinist and engineer; examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 203-5 D. O. Wilkie, city building inspector; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 206-7 W. R. Dowb, tobacconist; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 208-9 D- C. Loveland, bookkeeper for M. C. Frederickson & Co., land 
 dealers; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 2IO-U M. G. Self, book-binder for J. L,. Regan & Co., examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 212 S. L. Self, brother of last panelman and store-keeper of Commercial 
 
 Hotel; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 213-21 M. D. Rapp, bookkeeper for County clerk and in the Circuit court, 
 but at present out of employment; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 2223 William J. Barth, clerk for Ellinger & Co., cloak manufacturers; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 224-9 George D. Cornell, employed with Crane Bros. Manufacturing Co., 
 examined; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 230-1 Winfield N. Sattley, examined; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 232-4 William C. Dunwell, stationery; examined; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 2 35-7 N. Bruun, druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed.
 
 (92) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 238-45 John N. Phillips, in the employ of Marshall Field & Co., wholesale 
 hosiery department; examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 246-9 J. P. Huggins, traveling agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 250-3 Henry Tillottson, hardware business; examined; challenged by de- 
 fendants for cause; challenge allowed. 
 
 254-6 David Crawford, floorwalker, with Charles Gossage & Co., examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 257-60 H. G. Brown, bookkeeper and general clerk with Mears & Co., 
 lumber dealers; examined; challenged by defendants for cause; challenge 
 allowed. 
 
 261-2 Fred Burkhardt, grocer's clerk; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 263-7 Alexander W. Pond, assistant manager in Dunlap & Co.'s grain 
 warehouse, examined; challenged by defendants for cause; challenge 
 allowed. 
 
 268 (A new venire being about to be called, defendants challenged the 
 
 array on the ground that the venire was not properly drawn from 
 the jury box; challenge to array overruled and exception by de- 
 fendants.) 
 
 268-70 John Heide, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 271-2 Henry Hackbaum, in the rent collecting business; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 273-82 Edwin A. Potter, wholesale crockery and glassware: examined by 
 defendants; claimed exemption from jury service on the ground that he 
 was captain and assistant quartermaster general of the state militia; 
 claim allowed and Mr. Potter excused. 
 
 283-4 Henry L. Turner, real estate dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 285 H. C. Voute, merchant tailor; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 286-91 E. Neville, formerly salesman with Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co., and 
 later, sleeping car conductor for the New York Central Sleeping Car 
 Company; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 292-3 Charles R. Ruggles, buyer for Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co.; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 294-5 William F. Stewart, assistant secretary People's Gaslight and Coke 
 Company; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed.
 
 (93) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 296-300 F. Par Woodruff, dry goods salesman Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co.; 
 examined; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 301-7 James E. Field, buyer for Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co.; examined by 
 defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 308 I. P. Freeman, merchandise brokerage and real estate brokerage; ex- 
 
 amined by defendants. 
 
 309, 310 (A new venire being about to be issued, defendants moved that the 
 special bailiff be instructed to select the panelmen from the jury 
 list. The court refused to give any instructions; to which de- 
 fendants excepted.) 
 
 311-15 Upon further examination of Mr. Freeman, he was challenged for 
 cause by defendants, and the challenge allowed. 
 
 316-26 Samuel Baker, corresponding clerk for Spalding & Merrick, tobacco 
 factory; examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 327-9 W. T. D wight, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 330-1 H. C. Ridgeway, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 332-4 A. L. Butler, Chicago agent for the Crescent Steel Works of Pitts- 
 burgh; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 335-7 Thomas Davies, calciminer and house painter; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 338-9 Edward Biggs, agent for Hoey Bros., baking powder, extracts and 
 supplies; excused by the court, not .being a citizen of Illinois. 
 
 340-1 Madison B. Whitford, jeweler; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 343-4 H. L.Thompson, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 345-8 O. M. Brady, fire insurance agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 349-51 J. B. Birchard, hardware merchant; examined; challenged by defend- 
 ants for cause; challenge allowed. 
 
 352-4 E. S. Runyan, shoe merchant; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 355-6 Frederick Katz, shoe merchant; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 356^ H. C. Wallace, clerk Phrenix Fire Insurance Company; examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed.
 
 (94) 
 VOL. il. 
 357 C. A. Betyke, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 358-60 T. W. Zerberg, real estate agent; examined; challenged by defend- 
 ants for cause; challenge allowed. 
 
 361-2 J. P. Hoffman, cashier Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Compa- 
 ny's office; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 363-4 James Caldwell, shipping clerk Franklin MacVeagh & Co.; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 365 A. F. Johnson, commission merchant; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 366 H. M. Dermody, painter and paper hanger; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 367 Francis Waikman, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 368 E. A. Holroyd, druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 369 J. Husted, dealer in ladies' and gents' furnishing goods, examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 370-1 Charles A. Morrell, wholesale shoe merchant, examined; challenged 
 by defendants for cause; challenge allowed. 
 
 372 F. G. Beehher, coal dealer, examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 373 William Porter, merchant tailor, " 614 West Lake street, opposite the 
 police station," examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 374-5 John Kleinman, hardwood lumber salesman, examined; challenged by 
 defendants for cause; challenge allowed. 
 
 376-7 L. Samuel, crockery and glassware merchant, examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 378 Luke Cassady, retail furniture dealer, examined by defendants; chal- 
 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 379-88 and 3803-3823 A. W. Beecher, printer, examined by defendants, ac- 
 cepted and tendered to the state; excused peremptorily by the state; 
 exception by defendants. 
 
 3833-3843 Charles Nicolai, hardware, examined by state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 3853-38933-390-1 C. O. Pratt, furniture business, examined by st3te; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily; exception on behalf of e3ch defendant. 
 
 392-6 William J. Bowman, plumber and gasfitter, exsmined by stste; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily; subject to the same objection by defendants.
 
 (95) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 397-9 Richard A. Brown, cigar and tobacco merchant, examined by state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 400-4 B. L. Ames, hats and caps, examined by state; am prejudiced against 
 socialists, communists and anarchists it might be a question whether I 
 could determine the matter of the guilt or innocence of the defendants 
 here upon the proof alone, regardless of what I have read and heard; 
 think 1 might determine their guilt upon the evidence. 
 
 Tendered to defendants. 
 
 Challenged for cause by defendants on the answers given. 
 
 To the Court: Don't think I can fairly and impartially hear the evi- 
 dence in this case, and from that evidence, with the instructions of the 
 court, determine the guilt or innocence of the defendants. 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: Think I may be prejudiced from what I have read. 
 
 405 To Defendants' Counsel: Don't know that I could listen to the testi- 
 mony and return a verdict on that alone, uninfluenced by my present 
 
 406 opinion; think my opinions would influence me, and that I, perhaps, 
 could not act in the case without bias or prejudice. 
 
 407 To the Court: Don't believe, everything considered, that I could sit 
 as a juror, listen to the evidence, and from that alone make up my mind 
 as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants; don't know defendants, 
 
 408 but have frequently been with the police; don't think I could listen to 
 the evidence presented and make up my mind from that alone as to 
 whether it proves the defendants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt. 
 
 The COURT: Q. " Why not? What is to prevent your listening to 
 the evidence and acting only upon that? Why can't you listen to the evi- 
 dence and make up your mind on that?" 
 
 (Exception by defendants to said question.) 
 
 A. I can, I suppose, make up my mind, but I might be prejudiced 
 just the same. 
 
 Q. Can you make up your mind whether that evidence proves beyond 
 reasonable doubt whether they are guilty, or does not prove it? A. Yes, 
 sir, I could come to a conclusion. 
 
 Q. Can't you do that impartially? The question in this case for a 
 juror is, not what he may think will be the effect upon his mind, as to his 
 private impressions, suspicions or notions, but what effect the state of his 
 mind will have on his verdict? Will your verdict be influenced by any- 
 thing other than the evidence in the case and the instructions of the court? 
 
 A. I am afraid it would be for certain reasons. 
 
 Q. You do not believe that you could fairly and impartially try the
 
 (96) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 case and render a verdict on the law and the evidence? A. I don't think 
 
 I could. 
 
 409 (Challenge for cause allowed.) 
 
 By Defense: The state has tendered a juror held by the court to be 
 incompetent and we claim that they should now be required to tender us 
 another juror. 
 
 (Motion overruled, and exception.) 
 
 410 George Alles, plumber; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 411-14 E. Greenewald, hardware merchant; examined by defendants; tendered 
 
 to the state. 
 415-18 Mr. Greenewald, examined by the state and excused peremptorily; 
 
 exception by each defendant. 
 417-19 Frank Lawson, bar-tender, examined by state; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 421-23 Wallace L. Gilson, grocer, examined by state; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 424-26 Henry T. Miller, grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed 
 427-30 Henry C. Lands, dry goods business; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 431-3 Herbert L. Wilton, dry goods; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 434 H. W. Cole, general tradesman; real estate and other property; exam- 
 
 435 ined by state; have formed some opinion as to guilt or innocence of the 
 
 436 defendants; if taken as a juror in this case, I might be a little prejudiced, 
 but should probably try to overcome that would want to be sure a man 
 was guilty before I hung him; don't know any of the defendants; if taken 
 
 438 as a juror, I should try to overcome any prejudice, but at the same time 
 I might be a little prejudiced. 
 
 440 Would try to determine the case upon the proofs alone regardless of 
 what I have read or heard; don't know whether I could do so, but think 
 I can. 
 
 441 Tendered by the state. 
 
 Examined by defendants: Am not in good health, and the condition 
 of my health is such that I should think it might interfere with a six 
 weeks' or two months' jurj' service. 
 
 442 Have talked with quite a good number of policemen about this case; 
 
 443 have conversed with policemen a little who were at the Haymarket 
 meeting, and undertook to narrate what occurred there. Mr. Kramer
 
 (97) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 444 was one. " I talked with Mr. Wilson after he got out." My talk with 
 Wilson was recent. I saw him on the street with his hand done up, and 
 asked him how he was getting along, etc. My talk with Kramer was 
 
 445 within a day or two after the trouble, " and he told me about the stam- 
 pede and all those things." From the papers and from all sources I got 
 the impression that these defendants were the instigators or the guilty 
 parties connected with the throwing of the bomb. If taken as a juror, 
 I should try not to be biased, but " I have been a little prejudiced." I 
 
 446 rather think I could give defendants a fair trial under the testimony, 
 448 " but I don't know as I could." I should try not to allow my sympathy 
 
 for the injured policemen to influence me, and don't really think it would. 
 
 450 " I have been a little prejudiced." Have known Capt. Schaack a good 
 many years; knew him in the past quite intimately. I have expressed 
 my opinion as well as formed it, which was based on my belief in the 
 truth of what I read and heard. I did believe what I heard and what I 
 
 451 read, at least sufficiently to form an opinion. I had a very decided and 
 firm opinion, which I still entertain and which I expressed to others; 
 
 can't say whether I ever said to others that I believed what I had read 
 I 
 
 or heard. 
 
 Challenged for cause by defendants; challenge overruled, and exception. 
 Challenged peremptorily. 
 
 452-3 Norman Robinson, florist, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 454-5 Fred Eberhardt, salesman, with Charles Eieu Johnson Co., 
 printers' inks; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 456-8 Frank Deiss, dry goods merchant; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 459-65 Frank Cardiff, locksmith; examined by defendants, and accepted. 
 
 466-8 Tendered to the state, and examined by Mr. Grinnell. 
 
 Excused peremptorily by state; exception by each of defendants. 
 
 469-73 H. W. Duncanson, jeweler; examined by state; challenged peremp- 
 torily; exception by each of defendants. 
 
 474-6 Leonard Gould, wbod and willow-ware dealer; examined by state, and 
 tendered to defendants. 
 
 477 Mr. Gould examined by defendants: 
 
 Am a wholesale dealer; have discussed the Haymarket meeting, and 
 think I formed a pretty decided opinion as to the guilt or innocence of 
 these men. Nothing has since occurred to change that opinion, and I 
 still entertain it.
 
 (98) 
 
 VOL. ti. 
 
 478 " Q. Do you think that the opinion would have any influence upon 
 your mind, if you should be selected as a juror? A. Oh, I think 1 
 could be persuaded. I think I could listen to the evidence, whatever 
 evidence was offered." 
 
 Have a strong opinion against socialism; think I could listen to the 
 
 479 evidence; I don't believe I could be governed by the evidence alone, irre- 
 spective of present prejudices, opinions and conclusions. 
 
 Challenged for cause by defendants. 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I think I could weigh the evidence impartially, but 
 
 480 " I really don't know that I could do the case justice; " think my verdict, 
 if I should sit, would be governed by the testimony alone. 
 
 481 To Defendants' Counsel: I admit that I have some bias and prejudice 
 in this matter. If I were to sit as a juror, I should calculate to be gov- 
 erned by the testimony, but it is a hard question to say whether I could 
 do so, uninfluenced by my present 'prejudice and opinion. 
 
 482 " The COURT: The question is not whether he believes he can act 
 without reference to his prejudice. The question under the statute is, 
 does he believe that he can fairly and impartially render a verdict in ac- 
 cordance with the law and the evidence? Not what may be the strug- 
 gle or preliminary efforts to get rid of all bias, but whether he believes 
 that, in coming to a verdict, he can render a verdict fairly and impartially 
 in accordance with the law and the evidence." 
 
 483 A. Think I could render a verdict in accordance with the law and 
 the evidence. 
 
 By the DEFENDANTS: " Q. Do you believe that you can return a 
 verdict under the evidence and proofs and the charge of the court, and 
 that alone, uninfluenced by any opinion, prejudice or feeling that you 
 now have? 
 
 The COURT: " You are asking whether he himself would be influ- 
 enced; now, the influence may be by his struggling against previous 
 positions. The real question is whether he believes he can render a 
 verdict in accordance with the law and the evidence. 
 
 " Q. Do you believe than you can return a verdict under the evidence 
 and the proof and the charge of the court and that alone, uninfluenced 
 
 484 by any opinion, prejudice or feeling that you now have? 
 
 The COURT: " Whether you mean the verdict uninfluenced or him- 
 self uninfluenced is ambiguous; if you mean himself uninfluenced, that 
 is quite a different thing from the verdict uninfluenced. * * * Un- 
 less you will say which you mean, the verdict or the juror uninfluenced,
 
 (99) 
 
 VOL. E. 
 
 I will hold that the question is not proper, because it is an ambiguous 
 
 485 question. I rule that question is improper on the ground of the ambi- 
 guity of it." 
 
 (Exception by defendants.) 
 I have expressed my opinion to others; the opinion was based upon 
 
 486 a belief of what I had read and heard; I believed the truth had been 
 stated substantially; I did not state to others that I believed what I had 
 read, because I took it for granted. 
 
 " Q. I want to ask you whether you believe you can listen to the 
 testimony and other proofs that may be introduced here in court, and the 
 charge of the judge, and render an absolutely impartial verdict in this 
 case, notwithstanding your present opinion, bias or any prejudices that 
 you may have? A. Well, that is the same question over again. * * 
 I answered it as far as I could answer it. 
 
 "The COURT: You can tell whether you can answer it by yes or 
 no? A. 1 don't know whether I can answer it by yes or no. 
 
 " Q. You say that you do not know that you can answer that either 
 yes or no? A. No, I don't know that I can." 
 
 Challenged for cause. 
 
 487 To the Court: In a general way I think I could listen to the law and 
 the evidence, and form my verdict from that. 
 
 "The COURT: I would have no doubt that you would earnestly wish 
 to render such a verdict , as the evidence proves is a proper verdict to 
 render? A. My disposition is to do that. 
 
 " Q. Now, do you believe that you can? After you have sufficiently 
 reflected upon it, so as to examine your own state of mind, then say yes 
 or no? A. It is a difficult question for me to answer. 
 
 " Q. Well, make up your mind as to whether you believe that you 
 can fairly and impartially render a verdict in accordance with the law 
 and the evidence. Most men in business possibly have not gone through 
 
 488 metaphysical investigations of this sort so as to be prepared to answer 
 offhand without some reflection? A. Judge, I don't believe I can an- 
 swer that question. 
 
 " Q. Can't you answer whether you believe you know? A. I could 
 try; if I had to do it, I should do the best I could. 
 
 " Q. The question is whether you believe you can or not. I suppose, 
 Mr. Gould, that you know that the law is, that no man is to be con- 
 victed of any offense with which he is charged, unless the evidence 
 proves that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? A. That is true.
 
 VOL. ti. 
 
 " Q. The evidence heard in this case in court? A. Yes. 
 
 " Q. Do you believe that you can render a verdict in accordance 
 with that law? A. Well, I don't know that I could. 
 
 " Q. Do you believe that you can? If you do not know of any 
 reason why you cannot, do you believe you can? A. I couldn't 
 answer that question. 
 
 " Q. You can't answer whether you believe that you can or believe 
 that you can't? Can't you say either that you believe that you can, 
 or thatyou can't? A. Well, I said it was a pretty hard question for me 
 to answer. 
 
 " Q. Have you a belief one way or the other as to whether you can 
 
 or cannot? A. If I were to sit on the case I should get just as near to 
 
 489 it as possible, but when it come to laying aside all bias and prejudice and 
 
 making it up in that way, it is a pretty fine point it is a pretty fine 
 
 point to make. 
 
 " Q. Not whether you are going to do it, but what do you believe 
 you can; that is the only thing. You are not required to state what is 
 going to happen next week or the week after, but what do you believe 
 about yourself whether you can or cannot? A. I am just about 
 where I was when I started. 
 
 " Q. Think of it for a little while and see whether you cannot make up 
 your mind as to what you believe about yourself now. It is not that you 
 are to state what you will do, but what you believe you can do you 
 believe about yourself -what you think you can do? A. Well, I be- 
 lieve I have got just as far as I can in reply to that question. 
 
 " Q. I haven't heard you make any reply to that question -whether 
 you believe that you can or that you cannot impartially and fairly render 
 a verdict in accordance with the law and the evidence? A. I have re- 
 plied to it a good v, hile ago. 
 
 " The COURT: Q. This question, naked and simple, of itself, is: Do 
 you believe that you can fairly and impartially render a verdict in the 
 case in accordance with the law and the evidence? A. I believe I 
 could." 
 
 To Defendants' Counsel: " Do you believe that you can do that unin- 
 fluenced by any impression, prejudice or opinion which you now have? 
 A. You bring in that point that I object to, and I don't feel quite com- 
 petent to answer." 
 
 (Challenge for cause on all answers renewed; challenge overruled, 
 and exception. Challenged peremptorily by defendants.)
 
 (101) 
 VOL. E. 
 
 491-3 Charles V. Marsh, agent for a sugar refinery, examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 494-6 A. N. Fuller, wholesale grocer, examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 497 P. C. Hanford, wholesale paints and oils: Have formed an opinion 
 
 from what I read upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the de- 
 fendants, or some of them, of the crime of murder of the policemen, 
 which I have expressed to others; don't think it would influence my 
 
 501 verdict. The opinion which I have formed, expressed and still enter- 
 tain is quite firmly fixed in my mind. 
 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled, and exception. Chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 502 S. A. Maxwell, bookseller: Have heard and read of the Hay market 
 meeting and have formed an opinion touching the guilt or innocence of 
 the defendants of the alleged murder, which opinion I have expressed to 
 others. 
 
 " Q. In your opinion now, do you believe that opinion or conclusion 
 would prevent your rendering an impartial verdict in the case if you 
 should be selected as a juror? A. I don't think it would, provided 
 their innocence could be established provided I could be satisfied that 
 they were not guilty." 
 
 503 Think I could act on the evidence uninfluenced by my present opinion. 
 Have a prejudice against socialists, communists and anarchists. 
 
 " Q. Now, taking all prejudices in your mind, do you believe that 
 you could determine this case absolutely, entirely and only upon the 
 proofs produced in court and that alone? A. Well, I think my preju- 
 dice would have some influence with me." 
 
 504 Think I could act upon the proof introduced into court and under the 
 charge, uninfluenced by my present opinion. I have now " a very firm 
 opinion " as to the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendants, 
 based upon what I read and heard. I believe what 1 read and heard. 
 
 505 In a general way, in talking over the matter, I have stated my belief in 
 what I read on the subject, but I have not stated that I did believe what 
 I read. I think my present opinion would have weight in the consider- 
 ation of the testimony and that " it would take less testimony to estab- 
 lish the guilt or innocence of the defendants in accordance with my 
 
 506 present opinion than upon the other side." Think my opinion would 
 have a great deal to do with my verdict. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.)
 
 (102) 
 VOL. E. 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I would try to determine the question of the de- 
 fendants' guilt or innocence from the testimony, to the best of my abil- 
 ity. " I think my opinion would have something to do with the matter." 
 To the Court: I think I could fairly and impartially render a verdict 
 in accordance with the law and the evidence. 
 
 (Challenged for cause; overruled, and exception.) 
 
 508 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 509-511 S. A. Tollman, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 1-4 Isaac S. Collins, wholesale grocer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 5-7 Charles E. Deane, wholesale grocer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 8-10 J. E. Taylor, of Thompson & Taylor, coffee and spices; examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 11 H. D. Bogardus, flour and fruit merchant; examined by defendants: 
 Have heard and read of the Haymarket meeting, and from what I have 
 read and heard, have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of 
 the defendants of the crime now charged, which opinion I have expressed 
 to others, and still entertain; it certainly would influence my verdict if 
 
 12 selected as a juror; I could not act independent of the opinion; it would 
 "require very strong proof to overcome my opinion. It would be in- 
 fluenced by it, of course," and I would not render my verdict upon the 
 testimony alone, fairly and impartially. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I have talked with some policemen about the 
 Haymarket affair, but whether they were there or not, I do not know. 
 
 13 I have heard no testimony upon the matter. I would be influenced as a 
 juror by my prejudices and opinions against the defendants; "it would 
 require very strong proof to overcome it." I don't believe I could give 
 them a fair trial upon the proof, for it would require very strong proof 
 to overcome my prejudices; " I hardly think that you could bring proof 
 
 14 enough to change my opinion." If accepted on the jury, I would try to 
 do my duty according to the evidence, and might do so; think I could 
 do my duty, " but it would require pretty strong evidence to overcome 
 
 15 my prejudice." Would not convict without some evidence. If taken as 
 a juror in this case, I think I could " determine the guilt or innocence of 
 the defendants upon the proof produced alone, * * * but being
 
 ( I0 3) 
 VOL. P. 
 
 prejudiced, it would take very strong evidence to overcome my preju- 
 dice." 
 
 To the Court: I know the law as to defendants not being convicted 
 except upon evidence on the trial, and I think I might fairly and impar- 
 
 16 tially determine whether the evidence proved that they are guilty be- 
 yond a reasonable doubt, " but it would require pretty strong proof." I 
 can fairly and impartially render a verdict in this case in accordance with 
 the law and the evidence, I think. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception, but ruling withdrawn 
 
 for further examination.) 
 To Defendants' Counsel; " I say it would require pretty strong testi- 
 
 17 mony to overcome my opinion at the present time." Still I think I 
 could act independent of my opinion. I would start with an opinion, 
 however, and " I think that the preponderance of proof would have to 
 be against my opinion strong." I think the defendants are responsible 
 for what occurred at the Haymarket meeting. The preponderance of 
 evidence would have to be in favor of the defendants' innocence with me. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 "The COURT: In the naked question of whether the verdict will be 
 controlled only by the evidence, why, Mr. Bogardus' first answers are 
 all right. Now, as to the effect of his opinions, prejudices and bias, 
 etc., that has nothing to do with it. For example, Mr. Foster, you 
 won't suspect me of either irony or flattery when I say that I believe 
 if you were impaneled as a juror at Richmond to determine whether 
 Jefferson Davis had made war against the United States, you could sit 
 there and find out from the evidence only, and all that you know about 
 it now would not affect the verdict to be given upon the evidence. 
 
 "Mr. FOSTER: No, I think I would have been challenged for cause, 
 and if that had not been sustained, peremptorily, perhaps. 
 
 "The COURT: The question is, what will the verdict be? The stat- 
 ute says that if a man says that he believes that he can fairly and im- 
 partially render a verdict in accordance with the law and evidence, that 
 then the formation of opinions from rumor or newspaper statement is 
 not a ground of challenge; of course, leaving it to the judgment of the 
 tryer, whether that belief of his is well founded or not. But I have ex- 
 pressed my opinion upon that part of the case here, so that it is not 
 necessary to repeat it. Every fairly intelligent and honest man, when 
 he comes to investigate the question originally for himself upon authen-
 
 ( 10 4) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 tic sources of information, will, in fact, make his opinion from the 
 authentic sources instead of the hearsays that he had before." 
 (Exception to the ruling of the court) 
 
 20 6 Upon further examination of this talesman, he finally stated to the 
 court directly, that he would find the defendants guilty unless the evi- 
 dence was very strong and clear, and that, if evenly balanced, his preju- 
 dice would condemn them (page 26) ; and thereupon the juror was 
 finally discharged from the panel and the challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 27-9 Frank W. Oliver, wall paper, paints and oils; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 29-31 F. S. Sherman, wholesale teas, coffees and spices; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 32-4 P. J. Toole, wholesale teas, coffees and spices; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 35 James H. Walker, dry-goods merchant, of James H. Walker & Co.; 
 examined by defendants. Have formed an opinion as to the guilt or in- 
 nocence of the defendants of the murder of Mr. Degan, which I still 
 entertain and have expressed to others; don't think I would be mflu- 
 
 36 enced, if taken as a juror, by my present opinion " more than any intelli- 
 gent man." " I am willing to admit that my opinion would handicap 
 my judgment, possibly." At the outset my judgment would be handi- 
 
 37 capped or influenced by my present opinion. Still, I should expect to be 
 governed by the testimony. I don't say that I think I can determine 
 this case upon the testimony alone, uninfluenced or unbiased by my pres- 
 ent opinion. " I would be handicapped." I believe, however, that I 
 could render a fair verdict by the present opinion. " Certain impres- 
 sions would have to be removed, but I assume that the testimony you 
 
 38 know would decide whether they should be removed or not." 
 
 39 I am prejudiced against socialists, communists and anarchists. Upon 
 the trial of the present case, " if the testimony were equally balanced, 
 I should hold my present opinion," and I suppose that that opinion would 
 justify me in convicting them if the testimony were equally balanced. I 
 believe it would do so. 
 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants.) 
 
 To Mr. GRINNELL: Think 1 could pass upon this case upon the tes- 
 timonv presented in court, and that I would be governed by the law, re- 
 gardless of the opinion which I now have. 
 
 To the COURT: Understand that no man is to be tried on private im- 
 41 pressions, but upon evidence; would try to fairly and impartially render
 
 VOL. f. 
 
 a verdict in accordance with the law and the evidence in the case, if 
 
 taken as a juror, and think I could, " but I should feel that I was a little 
 handicapped in my judgment." 
 
 " The COURT: Well, that is a sufficient qualification for a juror in the 
 case. Of course, the more a man feels he is handicapped, the more he 
 will be guarded against it. 
 
 " Mr. BLACK: We except to that remark of the court. We do not 
 
 42 think it is in accordance with observation and judgment and experience. 
 We think it is an improper remark to make in the presence of the 
 jurors, and would like to have the record show that the seats are full 
 and talesmen present at the time the remark is made." 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants.) 
 
 W. T, Chandler, wholesale grocer; examined by defendants: Have 
 
 43 formed an opinion upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the ac- 
 cused, which I have expressed to others and still entertain ; don't think it 
 
 44 would influence my verdict as a juror. I am prejudiced against social- 
 ists, communists and anarchists, but think I would not be influenced by 
 
 45 my prejudices. Have been in a slight degree affected by strikes; our 
 47 teamsters struck in May last. I had a slight conversation with one po- 
 liceman who was present at the Haymarket, and my opinion is based both 
 upon what I have read and what I heard, but more particularly, I should 
 say, upon what I have read. From what this policeman told me, who was 
 present at the meeting, from what I have heard from others, and from 
 what I have read, I have formed a decided opinion as to the guilt or in- 
 innocence of the accused, or some of them, which I have expressed to 
 others and still entertain. 
 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants; challenge overruled, and 
 
 exception.) 
 
 Further examined:.! have expressed to others my belief that what I 
 
 49 had heard was true, and that what I had read was true. I don't mean 
 
 that I expressed my conclusions alone, but that I expressed the belief 
 
 that what I had read and what I had heatd was true. I passed upon the 
 
 correctness of what I read and heard. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 To the Court: I don't mean that I said anything about whether the 
 story was rightly told; " what I mean is that I remarked that I believed 
 thut the statements were true." I never said anything about the accu- 
 racy of the report, as to whether the newspapers had got the thing in the 
 manner in which it occurred. I expressed my opinion, based upon my
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 51 belief in the truth of what I had heard and read, but I did not tell any- 
 body that I believed the narrative was true. 
 
 (Said challenge for cause not being allowed, the said W. T. Chand- 
 ler was, upon peremptory challenge by the defense, excused.) 
 52-5 Jacob Hirsch, wholesale clothing dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 56 Rush Patterson, in the silk department of Edson, Keith & Co.: Been 
 
 working for Mr. Keith eleven years; had read and heard of the Hay- 
 market meeting and have formed an opinion touching the guilt or inno- 
 cence of the accused, or some of them, of the murder of Mr. Degan, 
 which opinion I have expressed to others, and there has been nothing 
 since to change it. It would have considerable weight with me if 
 selected as a juror. " It is pretty deeply rooted, the opinion is, and it 
 would take a large preponderance of evidence to remove it." Think I 
 
 58 could listen to the testimony and render a verdict upon that alone, unin- 
 fluenced by my present opinion. Am prejudiced against socialists, com- 
 munists and anarchists. I still think it would take a preponderance of 
 
 59 evidence to remove my present opinion. I should naturally take the 
 law from the court and the evidence from the witnesses. I should 
 give the defendants the benefit of a reasonable doubt if the evidence 
 were equally balanced, but to some extent I should be governed by my 
 
 61 present opinion. My opinion is based more upon what I have 
 
 62 read than what I have heard. " It would require the preponder- 
 ance of evidence to remove the opinion I now possess." " I feel 
 like every other good citizen does feel, a feeling that these men are 
 guilty; we don't know which. We have formed this opinion by general 
 reports and the newspapers. Now, with that feeling, it would take 
 some pretty positive evidence to make me think these men were not 
 guilty, if I should acquit them; that is what I mean." I could act en- 
 tirely upon the testimony; "I would do so as near as the main evidence 
 
 63 would permit me to do." Probably I should take the testimony alone. 
 
 " Q. But you say it would take positive evidence of their innocence 
 before you could consent to return them not guilty? 
 
 "A. Yes, sir; I should want some strong evidence. 
 
 " Q. Well, if that strong evidence of their innocence was not intro- 
 duced, then you would want to convict them, of course? 
 
 " A. Certainly." 
 
 Don't know whether, if the testimony was evenly balanced, my opin-
 
 (107) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 ion would turn the scale, but I think it would; I think if the testimouy 
 was evenly balanced, my present opinion would convict them. 
 
 64 (Challenged for cause by defendants.) 
 
 To Mr. GRINNELL: If I did not believe beyond a reasonable doubt 
 these defendants or some of them were guilty, I would be willing to 
 acquit them upon the proof presented in court. I would give the de- 
 fendants the benefit of a doubt. 
 
 653 If the testimony were equally balanced, I think my present opinion 
 
 would convict the defendants. I said so, and I still think so. 
 
 To the Court: I understand that a defendant must be proved guilty 
 by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, or he is entitled to be acquit- 
 
 65 ted. I should give the benefit of the doubt to the prisoners, " unless 
 they were proved to be guilty by the evidence." 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled; exception by defendants; challenged 
 peremptorily by the defendants.) 
 
 66-9 N. C. Tillinghast, wholesale hide and leather dealer; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 70-1 A. L. Simons, wholesale clothing dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 72-6 J. H. Bell, wholesale grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 77-8 C. H. Marshal, wholesale dry goods, C. H. Marshal & Co.; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 79, 80 H. Goodman, wholesale clothing dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 81-4 Marshall M. Kirkman, comptroller for the Chicago and North-West- 
 ern Railroad Company. ; examined by defendants; challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 85-7 W. L. Sherwood, wholesale woolens, Sherwood & Campbell; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 88-90 Edmund A. Cummings, real estate agent; examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 916 Townsend Smith, real estate agent; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 97-100 Samuel H. Sweet, wholesale hats and caps; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 101-2 Austyn Clement, wholesale clothing; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 103-7 E. W. Prescott, cashier and book-keeper of E. Strahorn & Co.,
 
 (ro8) 
 
 VOL. B*. 
 
 Union Stock Yards; examined by defendants; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 108-9 Augustone Hall, crockery and glassware, of the firm of Hall, Birs- 
 back & Co.; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 iio-in John Barnes, retail druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 112 Charles O. F. Sedgwick, not a naturalized citizen; excused without 
 
 examination. 
 
 113-116 B. F. Reitz, saddlery hardware, but at present retired from busi- 
 ness; examined .by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 117, 1 18 T. P. Murray, hardware business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 119 (New panel presented; defendants challenge the array and object to 
 
 the swearing of them, on the ground that they are not drawn as 
 provided by law. 
 
 Challenge to the array overruled, and objection overruled, and ex- 
 ception.) 
 
 120-1 N. C. Nevin, grocer at the Union Stock Yards; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 122-4 E. A. Atwater, hog buyer for Armour & Co.; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 125-9 C. M. Hutchins, carpenter and joiner; examined by defendants; ac- 
 cepted and tendered to the state. 
 
 130-1 Mr. Hutchins peremptorily challenged by the state, to which defend- 
 ants respectively except. 
 
 132-41 J. H. Brayton, teacher in the public schools; admitted that he had 
 formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, based 
 upon what he had read, and that he was prejudiced against socialists, 
 communists and anarchists, but stated that he believed he couM try the 
 case upon the evidence alone without reference to his opinion; was ac- 
 cepted and tendered by the state to the defendants. And upon examina- 
 tion by the defendants, further stated that he believed he could try de- 
 fendants fairly and impartially upon the evidence alone, without refer- 
 ence to his previous opinion, and was thereupon accepted by the defend- 
 ants. 
 
 Second panel of four then sworn to try the case. 
 
 1424 James Johnson, real estate dealer; examined by the state; challenge for 
 cause allowed.
 
 ( I0 9) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 145-7, 190 G. C. Jackson, real estate, renting and collections; examined by the 
 state. 
 
 148-51,189 D. E. Terriere, cashier of the Englewood bank; examined by the 
 state. 
 
 152-4, 191 George N. Chase, in the livery business; examined by the state. 
 
 155-6 H. O. Wilson, in the hotel business in Chicago; examined by the state; 
 challenged peremptorily; exception by each of the defendants on the same 
 ground as before. 
 
 157-8 William F. Curtin, former clerk in the water department in the town of 
 Lake, Cook county; examined by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 159-62 John Scholtz, merchant tailor; examined by the state; challenged per- 
 emptorily; same objection and exception on the part of each of the de- 
 fendants as to peremptory challenge. 
 
 163-5 L. C. Hogan, druggist; examined by the state; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 166-8 George Sherwood, formerly locomotive engineer, but at present look- 
 ing after his own property; examined by the slate; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 169-70 Edward P. Glennin, formerly in the bottled beer business; excused by 
 consent. 
 
 171-3 E. D. White, in the baker business; examined by the state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 174-6 Frederick Malkow, formerly saloon-keeper and restaurauter; examined 
 by the state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 177-8 George Bowhardt, live stock commission; examined by the state; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 180-2 W. H. Mallory, cattle buyer for Nels. Morris; examined by the state; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 183-4 F. J. Rappal, live stock commission; examined by the state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 185-8 Frank Deforrestk, live stock dealer, Union Stock Yards; examined by 
 the state. 
 
 191 State tendered to defendants Frank DeForrest, D. E. Terrierre, D. C. 
 
 Jackson and George M. Chase. 
 
 192-201 G. C.Jackson, examined by defendants and excused for cause, being 
 over sixty years of age. 
 
 202-4 D. E. Terrierre, examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 213-16 George N. Chase, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed.
 
 (no) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 217-21, 266, 351 Frank Deforest, examined by defendants; challenged per- 
 emptorily. 
 
 205-12 C. W. Partridge, dry-goods merchant; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 222-6 E. C. Wilson, of Wilson Bros., wholesale and retail men's furnishing 
 goods; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 227-8 Henry R. Symonds, cashier First National Bank; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 229-33, 268 James K. Demming, insurance agent; examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 234-6 Levi Doud, pork packer, of the firm of Doud & Co.; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 237-9 H. N. Stevens, assistant cashier Commercial National Bank; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 240-2 J. L. Rowe, jeweler, of Rowe Brothers; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 243-8, 252 C. Aldis, book-keeper, Seamens Lungren Gas Illuminating Co.; ex- 
 amined by defendants. 
 
 249-51 A. S. Haskell, manufacturers' agent; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 254-5 John R. Walsh, president Chicago National Bank; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 256-7 Gardner S. Chapin, of the firm of Chapin & Gore, wholesale whiskies, 
 etc.; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 258-68 Charles M. Wellington, general agent for proprietary medicines; ex- 
 amined by defendants. 
 
 269-79 Henry F. Hersey, canned goods and foreign fruit commission busi- 
 ness; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 280-81 John J. McGrath, manufacture and sale of wall paper; examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 282-5 J onn A. King, wholesale druggist; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 286-7 Robert Morrisson, wholesale druggist; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 288-90 J. T. Magner, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 291-4 Henry J. Christoph, banker; examined by defendants; challenged 
 peremptorily.
 
 (Ill) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 295-7 F. A. Winslow, wholesale leather business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 298-307 W. J. Johnson, wholesale bagging; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 308-9 Charles H. Patton, member of the firm of S. I. Pope & Co., steam 
 heating; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 310-14 Erskine M. Phelps, wholesale boots and shoes; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 315-17 E. L. Canfield, real estate brokerage; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 328-19 E. B. Clark, molding and picture frame business; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 320-22 Byron A. Baldwin, real estate agent; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 3235 A. S. Gage, wholesale and retail merchandise; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 327 J. C. Neely, cashier Merchants' National Bank; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 328 E. D. Kinney, fire insurance business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 329-32 T. B. Elliott, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 333-5 P. A. Barnes, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 336-40 G. S. Wheeler, real estate business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 341-3 W. B. VVetherwax, real estate business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 344-5 Charles B. Ross, furniture dealer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 346-7 W. E. Frost, manufacturer of sash, doors and blinds; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 348-50, 369-70 Arthur Lederer, manager of banking house of C. B. Richard- 
 son & Co.; examined by defendants. 
 
 352-3 C. H. Leach, real estate owner and dealer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 354-6 Matthew J. Hackett, clerk in the loan department of the North- 
 Western Mutual Life Insurance Co.; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed.
 
 (112) 
 VOL. F. 
 
 357-8 J. W. O'Dell, grain elevator proprietor; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 359-60 Amos Pettibone, retail and jobbing stationery and blank books; exam- 
 ined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 361 J. A. Bartlet, real estate and loan; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 362 L. Hasbrouck, fire insurance business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 363-4 H. J. Ullman, fire insurance business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 365 C. M. Rogers, fire insurance business; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 366-7 W. W. Baird, real estate business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 371-2 N. A. Mayer, banker, of Leopold Mayer; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 373-4 Frank M. Elliott, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 375-6 Albert Durham, financial broker; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 377-80 Charles Hepper, retail grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 381-2 W. E. Paulsen, insurance business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 383-5 Charles C. Phillips, insurance agent; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 386-90 Otto Wasmansdorf, banker, of the firm of Wasmansdorf & Heineman; 
 examined by defendants. 
 
 (Defendants accepted and tendered to the state Otto Wasmansdorf, 
 Arthur Lederer, C. M. Wellington and H. C. Aldis.) 
 
 395,428-9 H. C. Aldis, examined by the state and challenged peremptorily. 
 (Same objection and exception on behalf of each defendant as before.) 
 
 396-402,407-8 Arthur Lederer, examined by the state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 403-6 Charles M. Wellington, examined by the state; challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception on behalf of each defendant as before.) 
 
 409-11 Otto Wasmansdorf, examined by the state; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed.
 
 ("3) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 41213 J. B. Stevens, in the butcher business; examined by state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 413-17 C. B. Meserve, livery stable proprietor; examined by state. 
 418-20 F. B. Krugg, hardware merchant; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 421-3 Joseph H. Shields, coal and wood business; examined by state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 424-7 Phillip Brask, grocer; examined by state; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 Same objection and exception by each defendant as before. 
 430-2 Edward Schumacher, book-keeper for Cabin & Eckman, plumbers; 
 
 examined by state. 
 433-7 J. C. Magill, real estate and loans, examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 438-40 H. A. Fierson, banker and broker; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 441-4, 449 James Foster, painter in business for himself; examined by state. 
 445-8 G. H. Bauer, hardware merchant; examined by state. 
 449 The state accepted and tendered Edward Schumacher, James Foster, 
 
 G. H. Bauer and C. B. Meserve. 
 450-5 Edward Schumacher, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 456-61, 479 C. B. Meserve, examined by defendants, and challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 464 7n James Foster, examined by defendants, and challenged peremptorily. 
 468-73 G. H. Bauer, examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 474-8 G. B. Milne, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 480-1 E. D. Petrie, book-keeper for Etna Insurance Company; examined by 
 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 482-4 W. R. Scott, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 485-6 George W. Scott, attorney in fact for non-residents, collecting agent, 
 
 etc.; examined by defendants. 
 
 488-92, 520 John W. Becker, real estate agent; examined by defendants. 
 493-5 W. H. Richards, livery and boarding stable; examined by defendants; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 496-502 C. T. Paine, retail furniture dealer ; examined by defendants. 
 503-4 B. J. Ridgeway, coal dealer; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed.
 
 ("4) 
 
 VOL. F. 
 
 505 Charles Anderes, fire insurance agent, etc.; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 506 (New panel of talesmen presented; same challenge to the array; 
 
 overruled, and exception.) 
 
 507-9 George B. Coombs, real estate; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 510-11 August Hussy, cashier and book-keeper for Sutter Bros. ; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 512-13 John H. Brown, wholesale and retail rubber goods business; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 514-15 D. C. Peck, salesman for Electrical Supply Company ; examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 516-17 E. E. Ellsworth, wholesale and retail barbed wire manufacturer; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 518-19 P. P. Gibbs, examined by defendants. 
 
 521 (Defendants accepted and tendered to the state George W. Scott, 
 
 John W. Becker, C. T. Paine and P. P. Gibbs.) 
 
 521-4, 556 John W. Becker, examined by state and challenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Same objection, and exception on behalf of each of the defend- 
 ants.) 
 
 525 George W. Scott, examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 526-9 C. T. Paine, examined by the state. (This juror was subsequently 
 challenged peremptorily by the state, and the same objection and ex- 
 ception in behalf of each defendant as in the other cases. See Vol. G, 
 page 17.) 
 
 530-2, 565-9 P. P. Gibbs, examined by the state and excused for cause. 
 
 533-5 D. H. Patterson, metal manufacturer and agent of the Scoville 
 Manufacturing Company; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 536-7 David Walters, dry-goods salesman; examined by state; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 533-40 John Reynolds, merchant tailor's salesman; examined by state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 541-3 J. P. Deidel, dry-goods and notion merchant; examined by state; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 544-5 Fred Cook, salesman with James Wilde, Jr., & Co., clothier; exam- 
 ined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 546-7 David Vanderwolff, baker and confectioner; examined by state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed.
 
 ("5) 
 
 VOL. P. 
 
 548-50 James Armstrong, dry-goods merchant; examined by state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 551-5 Charles J. True, examined by state. 
 
 557-8 Seifert Bus, grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 559-61 A. Witt, hardware merchant; examined by state; challenged per- 
 emptorily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception in behalf of each defendant as before.) 
 
 562-4 John M. Dickinson, hardware salesman; examined by state; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception by each of the defendants.) 
 
 570-3 H. C. Storey, furniture and household goods; examined by the state. 
 
 574, 578-9 Charles J. True, examined by defendants. 
 
 575-7 W. P. Johnson, grocer; examined by the state; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 586-4 H. C. Storey, examined by defendants. 
 
 584 Mr. Storey challenged peremptorily by the state. 
 
 (Same objection and exception on behalf of each of the defend- 
 ants.) 
 
 VOL. G. 
 
 15, 3-6 Otto G. Hettinger, druggist; examined by state. 
 
 6-9 Christian B. Strange, clerk in First National Bank; examined by state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 10-14 F. M. Williams, druggist; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 15, 16 and 35 Hamilton B. Bogue, real estate agent; examined by state. 
 
 18-21 Stephen A. Farrar, mechanical engineer, Lincoln Park; examined by 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 22-40 W. W. Sherman, division superintendent Union Stock Yard Com- 
 pany; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 25-27 J. P. Kennedy, retail grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 28, 29 William Zeitz, grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 30,31 A. L. Russell, druggist; examined by state; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 32-4 H. R. Lee, wholesale pictures and fmoldings; examined by state. 
 
 37 The state accepted and tendered to defendants Charles F. True, Otto 
 
 G. Hottinger, Hamilton B. Bogne and H. R. Lee. 
 
 37-49, 176-7 Mr. Hottinger, examined by defendants; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed.
 
 (1,6) 
 
 VOL. G. 
 
 50-3 Mr. Bogue, examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 54-60,80-1 Mr. Lee, examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 6r Mr. True, examined by defendants: My opinion as to the guilt or 
 
 innocence of the defendants is quite firm; it is just as strong now as it 
 was before; as far as I know, I have a prettv decided prejudice against 
 socialists, anarchists and communists. I don't know how it would be 
 about my being influenced by the prejudice or bias that I have by 
 reason of my opinion; the best that I could do would be to try to over- 
 come it; I could only guess at it. I cannot say absolutely that I can act 
 upon the proofs alone, and not be influenced by my prejudice and opin- 
 
 62 ion; cannot say whether I would be influenced or would not be influ- 
 enced; I would try not to be, but cannot say; I cannot say I would not be. 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled, and exception. Chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 63-4 L. D. Kent, buyer at the stock yards for C. H. North & Co., of Bos- 
 ton; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 65 William F. Bodley, commission merchant, stock yards; examined by 
 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 74-9 T. M. Hobbs, clerk for Armour & Co.; examined by defendants; ex- 
 cused on account of physical debility. 
 
 824 C. N. Perry, buyer for packing-house of Geo. D. Baldwin & Co.; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 85-93 F. H. Horine, live stock commission business; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 94-6 Arthur K. Brown, retail boot and shoe dealer; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 97-8 Thompson Tipton, live stock commission business; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 99-102 J. W. Perry, assistant salesman for Rosenbaum Brothers, stock yards; 
 examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 103-8 W. J. Quinn, employed by Armour & Co., town of Lake; examined 
 by defendants. 
 
 109-112 B. Conlick, live stock commission business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 113-15 A. D. Osborne, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 116-19 T. B. Seavey, retail hardware; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed.
 
 ("7) 
 
 VOL. G. 
 
 120-2 H. Webster, mechanical engineer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 123, 124 W. T. O'Herne, hardware merchant; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 125-6 D. E. Hennessey, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 117 Arthur Hugunin, clerk in the railroad business; am not actively with 
 
 any company at present; last with the North- Western railroad. Have 
 heard and read about the Hay market meeting; I formed a pretty strong 
 opinion about the matter at the time; I have a rather decided opinion as 
 to the guilt or innocence of the defendants; it would not influence my 
 verdict; I would give them as fair a trial as I know how I know I 
 
 129 could do that. I am not particularly in love with anarchism. Would 
 try to give the defendants as fair a trial as I know how. If I have any 
 
 130 prejudice " there might be evidence enough to overthrow my prejudice." 
 If the evidence was evenly balanced, my prejudice might determine the 
 case; I suppose I would accept more kindly the testimony in favor of my 
 present opinion than what was opposed to it; the evidence being evenly 
 balanced, I would decide in accordance with my present views. 
 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants.) 
 
 To Mr. Grinnell: I know the defendants are entitled to a fair trial, and 
 if, after hearing the proof, I could not tell where the weight of evidence 
 
 131 was, that would raise a reasonable doubt and I would give the defendants 
 the benefit. Think I could try the case and render a verdict on the evi- 
 dence, without reference to my present opinion. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants.) 
 To the Court: I recognize the rule that no man should be convicted 
 unless the evidence proves his guilt, and I believe I can fairly and impar- 
 tially determine whether or not the evidence to be presented in this case 
 does or does not prove these defendants guilty of the crime charged, 
 and unless the evidence establishes their guilt, I would acquit. 
 133-5 Further examined by defendants: 
 
 136 Am acquainted with members of the Chicago police force who were 
 at the Haymarket meeting, and have talked with them about the affair. 
 
 137 I refer to Officer Haas detective Louis Haas. I have known him prob- 
 ably three or four years. He did not mention the names of any of the 
 defendants. 
 
 (Peremptorily challenged by defendants.)
 
 VOL. G. 
 
 140-4 Joseph O'Brien, grocery and market business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 145-6 J. G. Cook, grocery and meat-market; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 147-50 H. W. Durant, grocery business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 151-2 John T. Martin, live stock business at stock yards; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed: 
 
 x 53-7 M. J. Berry, deliverer for the Union Stock Yards Transit Company; 
 examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 153-62 F. D. Buckley, wall paper, paint and oil business; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 163-4 J- McGillicuddy, clerk for Armour & Co. at stockyards; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 165 Leroy Hannah, live stock commission merchant; examined by defend- 
 ants: Have been in business for myself eight years, most of the time 
 
 166 live stock. Have heard and read of the Haymarket meeting, but have 
 formed no opinion touching the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or 
 
 167 any of them. I have a prejudice against socialists, communists and an- 
 archists. I think were I a juror in this case, my verdict might be prej- 
 udiced by my present bias and opinion, and I believe that I cannot act 
 upon the proof presented here in court, alone, uninfluenced thereby. 
 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants.) 
 
 To the State: I have formed an opinion that a crime was perpetrated, 
 but not as to the parties responsible. If taken as a juror, I should try, at 
 
 168 least, to determine the question of the guilt or innocence of these defend- 
 ants, without reference to what I have heard or read, or my own opinion, 
 and I believe I could do so, probably. 
 
 To the Court: Have never seen any of the defendants; have no per- 
 sonal acquaintance with them, and the only opinion that I have about this 
 cause is f rom what I have read and heard. I talked with a policeman, 
 who was present at the Haymarket, but the names of the defendants 
 
 169 were not mentioned, and my conversation had no influence on my opinion 
 as to any of these defendants; think I could listen to the evidence in this 
 case, and decide upon that alone; think I could fairly and impartially 
 render a verdict upon the evidence and in accordance with the law, if I 
 should be selected as a juror. 
 
 (Challenge overruled.) 
 To Defendants' Counsel: I talked with a policeman who was present
 
 ("9) 
 
 VOL. G. 
 
 at the Haymarket meeting, and, in a general way, he told me about what 
 happened there, the marching up of the police, and the throwing of the 
 bomb through the crowd; did not mention any of the defendants, or 
 what particular persons made speeches; but I have heard the names of 
 Spies, Parsons and Fielden, and whatever opinion I have upon the matter 
 has reference to the parties who bear those names; and the prejudice 
 which I have is against these parties bearing those names and the princi- 
 ples they advocate; it applies to Mr. Spies, Mr. Parsons and Mr. Fielden. 
 
 171 It is so strong that it would probably influence me in considering the 
 testimony. I am prejudiced against the principles that they advocate 
 and against them. The way I feel is, that my prejudice might influence 
 my verdict; don't know that it would. "I don't know but we deceive 
 ourselves sometimes, when we say we can do so and so." My prejudice 
 might bias my verdict. 
 
 I 7 2 ~5 (Challenge for cause renewed; argument upon said challenge; 
 
 challenge overruled; exception by defendants, and said Hannah 
 
 193 challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 178-9 F. H. Hebard, expressman, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 180-1 L. G. Lambert, buyer for Edson Keith & Co.; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 182-3 Henry McKenzie, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 184-5 Andrew Murray, live-stock dealer; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 186-92 Henry Nehring, clerk for Edson Keith & Co.; examined by defend- 
 ants. 
 
 194-6 T. E. Paxton, book-keeper in wholesale shoe house; examined by 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 197-201 B. T. Green, clerk in furniture store; examined by defendants. 
 
 202 (Defendants accepted and tendered to the state Henry Nehring, B. 
 
 T. Green, W. J. Quinn and T. M. Hobbs.) 
 
 203 W. J. Quinn, challenged for cause by the state; challenge allowed. 
 204-212 B. T. Green, examined by state; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception in behalf of each defendant.) 
 213 Henry Nehring, examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 214-18 T. M. Hobbs, examined by state and excused upon his statement that 
 he did not believe that he was physically able to sit.
 
 VOL. Q. 
 
 219-21 C. F. Rice, dealer in picture frames, etc.; examined by state; chal- 
 lenge tor cause allowed. 
 223-5 Charles Higgins, book publisher; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. , 
 226-7 George Louderback, employed by H. Blackall, tea and coffee dealer; 
 
 examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 228-30 H. Stilson, furniture dealer; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 231-2 M. M. Grable, salesman for Davis, Morse & Co.; examined by state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 233-4 Henry J. Kirk, salesman for Edson Keith & Co.; examined by state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 2356 J. M. Dimery, gas-fixtures salesman for Wilmarth & Co.; examined 
 
 by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 237-8 H. C. Colby, furniture dealer; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 239-42 J. D. Burris, live stock commission; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 243-6 Patrick A. Valentine, with Armour & Co., as confidential clerk; ex- 
 amined by state. 
 
 '24750 A. E. Schraudenbach, general merchandise; examined by state; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 251-2 F. T. Bishop, clerk with Montgomery Ward & Co.; examined by 
 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 253-66,311 Alanson H. Reed, piano manufacturer and dealer; examined by 
 
 state. 
 267-9 W- G. Woodruff, shipping clerk for Healey & Millet, stained glass 
 
 manufacturers; examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 270-2 W. A. Campbell, wall paper business; examined by state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 273-4 Joseph Spiegel, furniture manufacturer and dealer; examined by state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 275-8 Benjamin Coffman, live stock business at stock yards; examined by 
 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 279-82 F. A. Upham, salesman, in furnishing goods business; examined by 
 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 283-8 John Gauler, butcher, not in business at present; examined by state; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 289-91 D. W. Burchard, wholesale dealer in novelties; examined by state.
 
 (121) 
 
 VOL. G, 
 
 292-4 George W. Singles, salesman for Edson Keith & Co.; examined by 
 state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 295-6 Albert A. Reiley, mantels and grates; examined by state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 2 97~8 J. B. Steager, dealer in pianos; examined by state; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 299 George W. Hill, hardware merchant; examined by state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 300-3 J. E. Lewis, sewing machine supplies; examined by state; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 304-5 Lewis Peterson, grocery clerk; examined by state; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 306-8 William Hayden, furniture dealer; examined by state. 
 
 312 State accepted and tendered Patrick A. Valentine, Alanson H. Reed, 
 
 D. W. Burehard and William Hayden. 
 
 312-18 Patrick A. Valentyne, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 318 (Motion by defendants renewed, that state be required to fill the 
 
 panel of four men; overruled, and exception.) 
 
 319-21 William Hayden, examined by defendants; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 329-35 D. W. Burehard, examined by defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 322-3 C. W. Dingman, clerk with Armour & Co.; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 324-8, 342 John Fitzgerald, clerk for Armour & Co.; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 336-7 W. Bradley, druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 338-41 James C. Connor, contractor and builder; examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 343-7 C. R. Kelley, book-keeper with Armour & Co.; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 348-50 S. D. Lamphier, grocer; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 3514 Charles F. Hellmuth, florist; examined by defendants. 
 
 355 J- B. Greiner, examined by defendants: Employe in the general 
 
 freight office of the Chicago and North-Weslern Railway Company, in 
 charge of the pool maps; examined by defendants. Have heard and 
 read of the Haymarket meeting, and have formed an opinion based upon
 
 (122) 
 VOL. G. 
 
 356 these reports as to the crime committed at the Haymarket. "It is evi- 
 dent that the defendants are connected with it, from their being here." 
 At least, I would expect that it connected them, or they would not be 
 here; so that the opinion which I now have is an opinion touching the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants. I certainly think that opinion 
 would affect my verdict to some extent; " I do not see how it could be 
 
 357 otherwise." I suppose if I were on the jury, it would be my duty to 
 disregard everything except the evidence, and I think I could act upon 
 
 359 the testimony alone, and render an impartial verdict. 
 
 359-62 Mr. Greiner examined by the state by consent. 
 
 363-4 Andrew Simpson, keeper of a meat market; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 365-8 J. R. Snyder, jeweler; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 369-70 N. P. Williams, druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 371-3 Lou Lenhardt, coal, wood, flour, feed, lime and cement merchant; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 374-9 E. H. McGuire, clerk, Union National Bank; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 380-1 M. H. Walker, caterer and restaurant keeper; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 382-93 Alexander Drummond, retail hardware dealer; examined; challenge 
 for cause by defendants allowed. 
 
 394-5 Moses D. Witkowsky. bank clerk, Union National Bank: examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 386-401 W. C. Gar wood, druggist; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 402-3 W. G. Hedden, grocer's clerk; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 404-10 John H. Purdy, map canvasser; examined by defendants. 
 
 410 (Defendants accepted Alanson H. Reed, and tendered with him to 
 
 the state Charles F. Hellmuth, John B. Greiner and John H. 
 Purdy.) 
 
 411 Charles F. Hellmuth, challenged for cause by state; challenge 
 allowed. 
 
 413-16 C. J. Gilbert, real estate dealer; examined by state; challenge for 
 cause allowed.
 
 ( I2 3) 
 
 VOL. G. 
 
 417-21 Robert J. Hobbs, painter; examined by state. 
 
 (Said Hobbs was challenged peremptorily by the state, to which 
 defendants excepted upon the same ground as in other cases. 
 See Vol. H, page i.) 
 
 422-6 John H. Purdy, examined by the state; challenged peremptorily. 
 (Same objection and exception on behalf of each of the defendants 
 
 as before.) 
 
 427-30 D. J. Moss, grocer; examined by state and challenged upon his an- 
 swers for cause by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 431-2 George Taylor, grocer; examined by sfate; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 433-6 Nicola P. Mersch, grocer; examined by state; challenged peremp- 
 torily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception on behalf of each of the defend- 
 ants as before.) 
 
 437 George H. Quinlan, hotel clerk; examined by the state. Was formerly 
 a bank clerk in First National Bank; have read about the Haymarket 
 
 438 affair and have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the de- 
 fendants, which I still entertain; think I could determine the question of 
 their guilt or innocence regardless of my opinion and of what I have 
 
 439 read. Don't know any of the defendants nor their counsel. Have no 
 sympathy with any individual or class of individuals who have for their 
 purpose the overthrow of law by force. I am a little afraid as to my 
 ability to fairly and impartially determine from the proof alone whether 
 the defendants are or are not guilty, for " I have a pretty strong opinion 
 about the thing." Honestly, I do not believe T could do it; I am afraid 
 
 440 I should be biased from the opinion which I have already formed. I 
 know they are entitled to a fair trial, but I do not believe I could be en- 
 tirely impartial. I. know they are entitled to have the question of their 
 guilt or innocence determined upon the proofs, and I know nothing as to 
 the facts myself; I have an opinion based on what I have read; have not 
 talked with anybody who professed to know about the matter or who saw 
 
 441 the transaction. I do not see why I should not determine, if chosen as a 
 juror, whether the defendants are guilty from the proof introduced and 
 that alone, though, of course, I have talked about this thing and have a 
 very strong opinion. 
 
 To Defendants' Counsel: Do not believe 1 could return a verdict in 
 this case on the evidence uninfluenced by my present opinion. 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants.)
 
 (I2 4 ) 
 VOL. G. 
 
 To the State: I have stated that I believed I could determine the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants upon the proof presented here in 
 court, and I still believe so, but my opinion would be biased. " I am 
 
 442 positive that that opinion which I have formed would override my judg- 
 ment." 
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 2,3 Eugene McKay, retail shoe dealer; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 4,5 W. T. Lord, dry goods merchant; examined by state; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 6-8 W. G. Hoag, insurance and banking; examined by state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 9, 10 Daniel S. Smith, painter; examined by state; challenge for cause al- 
 lowed. 
 
 ii Samuel Kaufman, dry-goods merchant; examined by state; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 12-16 A. Montgomery, grocer; examined by state; challenged peremptorily. 
 (Same objection and exception by each defendant as before.) 
 
 17-20 John Culver, real estate and insurance; examined by state; challenged 
 peremptorily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception on behalf of each defendant as 
 before.) 
 
 21-3 John Anderson, furniture dealer; examined by state; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 24-5 Robert Finley, grocer; examined by state; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 26-9 L. Turner, livery-stable keeper, examined by state; challenged per- 
 emptorily. 
 
 (Same objection and exception by each defendant as before.) 
 
 30 George W. Adams, examined by state; am a painter by trade, but 
 
 31 am at present salesman for George W. Pitkin, wholesale mixed paints; 
 
 32 do not belong to any labor organization and never did; am unmarried; 
 saw in the papers the account of the Haymarket occurrence and 
 heard of it as well. Formed an opinion as to the commission of 
 a crime, but not as to the guilt of the defendants, and I have no 
 opinion upon that point. Believe I could determine their guilt or inno- 
 
 34 cence upon the proof presented in court, regardless of anything else. 
 Know of no reason why I cannot fairly and impartially try this case
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 35 upon the proofs presented in court and determine the question of the 
 
 defendants' guilt upon that alone. 
 
 (The state thereupon accepted and tendered to the defense, with 
 Mr. Reed, John B. Greiner, George W. Adams and George H. 
 Quinlan.) 
 
 36 George H. Quinlan, examined by defendants: Do not believe that I 
 could try this case and render a verdict upon the proofs presented in 
 court alone; my opinions and prejudices are so strong that I do not think 
 I could render a fair and impartial verdict if selected as a juror. 
 
 (Challenge for cause allowed.) 
 
 37 Charles G. Klein, flour, feed and groceries; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 38 George H. Adams, examined by defendants: Am twenty-seven 
 years of age: my territory as traveling salesman for Pitkin was in Mich- 
 igan. Read of the Haymarket occurrence both in the Chicago papers 
 and in the Michigan papers, and, after my return, about the middle of 
 May, frequently conversed with my friends as to what was supposed to 
 have occurred there. I formed an opinion as to the offense there com- 
 mitted, and I thought some of these defendants were interested in it, and 
 still think so; nothing has occurred to change that opinion. I remember 
 the names of some of the parties now on trial being mentioned in re- 
 
 40 ports read by me, and that caused me to form an opinion as to the guilt 
 or innocence of some of the defendants; do not think that opinion is 
 strong. Have carried on the business as a painter for myself, employ- 
 
 41 ing others. This was when I was in Kansas City; have no feeling 
 
 42 against the organization of working people, and have no prejudice, so 
 
 43 far as I know, against socialists, communists or anarchists. Notwith- 
 standing the opinion which I now have touching the guilt or innocence of 
 some of the defendants, my mind is in such a condition that I can try 
 this case upon the testimony only which may be introduced in court, 
 and I suppose it to be the duty of the jury to decide and return a verdict 
 
 44 formed entirely upon legal evidence in court. Never sat on a criminal 
 jury before. I understand also that a conviction must be based solely 
 upon the evidence, without reference to outside report, and that in order 
 to justify a conviction, the guilt of the defendant must be established be- 
 
 45 yond all reasonable doubt. 1 believe 1 can render a verdict in this case 
 
 46 unbiased by any opinion I now have. My father is a contractor and I 
 have worked at times for him.
 
 (126) 
 VOL. H. 
 
 47,48 R. W. Hamill, grain commission business; examined by defendants; 
 Have heard and read of the Haymarket meeting and its results, and 
 have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or 
 some of them, but not very decided, nor such as to prevent my render- 
 ing an impartial verdict, I think. 
 
 49 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 50 A. W. Dunlap, employed in the general freight house of the North- 
 Western railroad; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 512 Brainard Parker, livery and real estate business; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 53 James M. Stimpson, cashier Dalziel National Printing Company; ex- 
 
 amined by defendants: Have formed an opinion from what I have 
 heard and read of the Haymarket affair as to the guilt or innocence of 
 the defendants of the murder of Degan or some of them; it is a decided 
 opinion, which I still entertain, and have expressed to others. 
 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled and exception. Chal- 
 lenged peremptorily.) 
 
 54-5 Frank Cassidy, traveling auditor for the Northwest Traffic Associa- 
 tion; examined by defendants. 
 
 (Adams accepted by defendants and with Cassidy, Greiner and 
 Reed tendered to the state.) 
 
 56 Cassidy examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 57-8 R. F. Harriett, traveling agent for the Lackawanna Fast Freight Line; 
 examined by state; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 59-62 B. H. Patterson, examined by state and tendered to defendants, with 
 Adams, Greiner and Reed. 
 
 63 (Excused peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 64-5 J. G. Thorn, west bound agent for the Lackawanna line; examined 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 66-7 Oscar Dunklee, livery stable business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 68 A. R. Porter, dry goods merchant; examined by defendants: Have 
 
 read and heard of the Haymarket meeting and of the killing of Mr. 
 Degan, and have formed an opinion upon the matter, which I still enter- 
 tain and have expressed to others. It is an opinion touching the guilt 
 or innocence of the defendants. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 Examined by state. The opinion is based on what I have read and
 
 (I2 7 ) 
 VOL. H. 
 
 49 heard. It is an opinion as to the crime committed and not as to the 
 guilt of defendants. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception. Challenged per- 
 emptorily by defendants.) 
 
 70-1 John D. Zoller, painter, examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 72-3 William Moore, salesman with Edson Keith & Co; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 74-5 Alexander Stevens, carpenter; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 76-7 W. L. Robbinson, coal dealer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 78-9 Wirt J.Allen, agent for the Nickel Plate Fast Freight Line; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 80 i F. W. Irwin, railroad business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 82-3 Frank Ray, clerk First National Bank; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 84 James A. Rowe, in the employ of the Union National Bank; exam- 
 ined by defendants: Have heard of the Haymarket meeting and the 
 killing of Mr. Began. I have formed an opinion as to the guilt or inno- 
 cence of the defendants of that offense, based on what I have read in the 
 papers, which opinion I have expressed to others and which I still 
 entertain. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 85 Examined by State: I can't say that I have an opinion that any one 
 of these eight men was guilty of the offense, not knowing of my own 
 knowledge. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by. defendants.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 86-7 J. R. McAdam, residing in Hyde Park; examined; challenged by 
 
 defendants for cause; challenge allowed. 
 
 88n Daniel F. Wynn, clerk; examined by defendants; challenged per- 
 
 emptorily. 
 
 89 F. L. Billion, examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 90 Charles Roberts, grocer; examined by defendants: Have heard 
 and read of the Haymarket meeting and have formed an opinion as to 
 the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the killing of Mr. Began, 
 which opinion I still entertain and have communicated to others. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.)
 
 ( I2 8) 
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 Examined by State: The opinion is based generally upon news- 
 paper reports read by me, but also upon conversations at different times, 
 but with no one who was present at the Haymarket meeting that 1 know 
 91 of, I have decidedly an opinion as to whether or not these defendants 
 or any of them were guilty or not of that crime. I think I could fairly 
 and impartially try this case and render a verdict upon the evidence. 
 Have told others that I believed what I read in the paper. Have com- 
 municated my opinion to different parties at different times. 
 
 " Q. The question is not whether you ever told anybody your opin- 
 ion, but whether you have told anybody that you believed the facts 
 which you read in the newspapers to be true that is, after you read the 
 newspaper and then said to some one man, ' I believe that statement to 
 be true?' A. I think I have made that statement." 
 
 " The COURT: There is a distinction between expressing an opinion 
 about the fact of a crime having been committed or about the guilt or 
 innocence of any of the defendants, and expressing an opinion as to 
 whether the story as told in the paper was rightly told by the paper. 
 Now, have you ever expressed any opinion about the newspaper, 
 whether the newspaper had a right version of the story or not? A. I 
 read the report in the different newspapers." 
 
 " Q. Have you ever said anything about whether the version in the 
 newspaper, or any of them, was a correct version of the transaction or 
 not? A. I do not know that I have." 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 94-5 George Key, engaged in the plumbing business; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 96 H. Meyers, book-keeper with J. M. W.Jones company; examined by 
 defendants: Have heard of the killing of Mr. Degan and read about it, 
 and have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defend- 
 ants or some of them of that offense. Have no opinion now. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 97 Thomas Carr, examined by defendants: Have read the newspaper ac- 
 counts of the Haymarket affair, and in those accounts saw the names of 
 Fielden, Spies and Parsons. If the defendants, Fielden, Spies and Par- 
 sons, are the same persons named in the report, I have an opinion as to 
 their guilt or innocence, which I have expressed to others and still enter- 
 tain. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.)
 
 ( I2 9) 
 
 VOL. H 
 
 To the State: My opinion was based upon the account simply. Think 
 I could try the case fairly and impartially upon the evidence if taken as 
 a juror. Have never expressed an opinion as to. the truth of the state- 
 ment in the newpaper. 
 
 98 To the Court: Don't know the defendants, and whatever feeling I 
 
 have in reference to them grows out of the report which I have heard 
 and read. Have not talked with anybody present at the Haymarket. 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 99-101 William B. Webb, reside in Hyde Park; examined. 
 
 (Challenge for cause allowed.) 
 
 102-3 E. W. Beedle, engaged with the South- Western Railway Association; 
 examined by defendants: Have a prejudice against the organization of 
 laboring men and the establishment of trades unions a decided preju- 
 dice, and also against those engaged in organizing these unions. " I think 
 they are a hurt to the country." 
 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled, and exception by de- 
 fendants; challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 104 F. C. Nicholas, in the railroad business; examined by defendants: 
 
 Have a decided and firm prejudice against socialists, communists and 
 anarchists. 
 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled, and exception; chal- 
 lenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 105-6 John H. Fitch, hardware dealer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 107-8 J. R. Bour, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 109 Frank L. Koontz, railroad clerk; examined by defendants; have heard 
 
 of the Haymarket meeting; have formed and expressed an opinion as to 
 the guilt or innocence of the defendants, which I still entertain and 
 which I have expressed to others. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 Examination by the State: The opinion is based partially upon the 
 newspaper reports and partly on conversations, but not with any who 
 no were present at the Haymarket. Believe that I can fairly and impar- 
 tially render a verdict upon the law and the evidence. Don't know that 
 I ever made the statement that I believed the statement of facts which I 
 had read in the newspapers to be true. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception; challenged per- 
 emptorily by defendants.)
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 in Joseph P. Ravanaugh, construction agent for the Chicago and North- 
 
 Western road; examined by defendants; have heard of the Haymarket 
 meeting and the killing of Officer Degan. From all that I have read 
 and heard, I have formed an opinion upon the question of the guilt or 
 innocence of the defendants, or some of them, which I expressed to 
 others. 
 
 112 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 113 Harold F. Walcott, in the storage business; examined by defendants; 
 challenged peremptorily. 
 
 114 A. Nelson, clerk in a stationery house; examined by defendants: 
 Have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants 
 of the murder of Mr. Degan, which I still entertain and have expressed 
 to others. It is a good, firm conclusion that I have come to. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 Examined by the State: My opinion is based solely upon what I have 
 read in the newspapers. I have an opinion as to whether one or more 
 
 115 of the defendants in this case is guilty of the offense charged, but that 
 opinion is based on newspaper report. Think I could fairly and impar- 
 tially try this case upon the law and the evidence. Never told anybody 
 that I believed what I had read. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception; challenged peremp- 
 torily by defendants.) 
 
 116-17 G. Q. Dow, dry-goods merchant; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 118-19 E. W. Smith, undertaker; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 120-1 Werner Pappe, railroad clerk in the Michigan Central office; ex- 
 amined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 122 C. P. Moynahan, mantels and grates; examined by defendants; chal- 
 
 lenge for cause allowed. 
 
 123-4 M. J. Wheeler, railroad engineer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 125-6 G. S. Calkins, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 127 E. W. Hale, manufacturer of safes; examined by defendants: Am de- 
 
 cidedly prejudiced against the organization of laboring men and the or- 
 ganizations of trades unions, etc. Don't believe laboring men have any 
 right to meet as an organized society, to discuss what they believe for
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 their general interests, and am prejudiced against them if they do that, 
 even if they keep within the law. 
 
 (Challenged for cause; challenge overruled, and exception by de- 
 fendants; challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 128 J. W. Ellsworth, miner and shipper of coal; examined by defendants: 
 Am affected by labor strikes nearly all the time, and have a prejudice 
 
 ^ against coal miners. Am decidedly opposed to unions; have always suf- 
 fered from them and feel a prejudice against all such organizations. 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 129 To the Court: The organization of laboring men without any breaches 
 of peace, have you any objection to? A. Well, as I have stated, I have 
 always suffered from their organization. I could not say that I would 
 have any prejudice against a supposed organization which did not con- 
 template nor permit any breach of the peace. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 130-1 James W. Wolls, dealer in and manufacturer of furnaces, ranges and 
 
 stoves; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 132-3 Walter C. Nelson, in real estate business; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 134! Edward Brown, examined by defendants: My home is Chicago, but at 
 
 present I am residing out of the city. Am doing business in Wisconsin, 
 traveling, and my family reside in Wisconsin. My wife lives there and I 
 live with her. We have a home in Chicago, but my wife is now living in 
 Wisconsin. I presume that I live in Wisconsin and simply own a house 
 here which I have rented to somebody else. 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 135 To the Court: First came to Chicago in 1876. Left Chicago about 
 the first of last March. We had been keeping house in Chicago until 
 about March, 1885; went to Kansas to go into business, but returned to 
 Chicago. Am in the lumber business in Kansas, with an office in Chicago 
 Ship lumber from Wisconsin and Chicago. Voted last spring, but not last 
 
 136 fall. Never had intended to make my permanent home elsewhere than 
 in Chicago. My residence now in Wisconsin is simply for the accom- 
 modation of my business. 
 
 137 To Defendants' Counsel:! went into Wisconsin about the first of March 
 and my family moved there about the first of May. It is uncertain as to 
 when we shall return, possibly not in five vears.
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 To the Court: When we went to Wisconsin, we thought we should 
 
 138 remain there about a year and then return to Chicago. Was in Kansas 
 hardly a year. Then came to Chicago and remained about a month 
 and then went to Wisconsin. It is uncertain when I will come back from 
 there and I may never return. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception.) 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 139-40 H. G. Dim mock, soliciting freight agent for the Milwaukee and St. 
 Paul railway; examined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 141-2 Samuel Sawyer, real estate dealer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 143-4 Henry Cook, wholesale grocer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 145-6 -J. H. Cowles, board of trade market reporter; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 147 H. E. Graves, general agent Central Vermont Railroad and Fast 
 Freight Line; examined by defendants: Have a prejudice against the 
 organization of labor unions or trades unions; am opposed to the organi- 
 zation of laboring men for their own protection and advancement, 
 although they confine themselves in the limits of the law. I think they 
 have no right to meet and discuss wages, what they will and what they 
 won't work for. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 To the Court: Have an objection to workingmen forming an organi- 
 
 148 zation; am opposed to such organizations; think that individual competi- 
 tion should be the rule. I object to the laboring men forming an organi- 
 sation even for the purpose of governing their own conduct. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception; challenged per- 
 emptorily by defendants.) 
 149-50 F. L. Wellner, newspaper stenographer; examined by defendants; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 151-3 Baron Van Dyke, sign painter; examined by defendants; challenge 
 
 for cause allowed. 
 154-5 W. J. Edbrooke, architect; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 
 156 (A new venire about to be called, objection was made by defend- 
 
 ants to the swearing of any person summoned on such venire, 
 and also there was a challenge to the array upon the grounds
 
 ( J 33 ) 
 VOL. H. 
 
 heretofore submitted, and on the further ground that the jurors 
 were summoned from a particular class or classes of people, 
 to wit: clerks, merchants and salesmen, and not generally from 
 the body of the county. Challenge and motion sworn to and a 
 demand by defendants that the state be required to plead, answer 
 or demur to the motion and challenge. 
 
 162 After argument, the court refused to make any order, and 
 
 refused to require the state to answer either in law or in fact. 
 Defendants except.) 
 164-70 L. R. Stone, salesman for D. B. Fisk & Co.; examined; challenge for 
 
 cause allowed. 
 171-2 Joseph N. Robinson, wholesale and retail tobacco dealer; examined by 
 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 173-4 Fred W. Gardiner, manager Michigan Stove Company; examined by 
 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 175-6 M. A. Ford, salesman 'wholesale boots and shoes; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 I 77~8 J. E. Aldrich, board of trade commission merchant; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 179 W. F. Conklin, residing at 167 Dearborn avenue; examined by de- 
 fendants: Have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the 
 defendants of the murder charged; a decided opinion which I still enter- 
 tain and which I have communicated to others. 
 
 (Challenged for cause.) 
 
 To the State: My opinion is based on what I read in the newspapers; 
 think I could fairly and impartially try this case and return a verdict 
 from the evidence. Have never told any one that I believed the news- 
 paper account. 
 
 180 To the Court: The only feeling that I have against the defendants 
 grows out of what I have read and heard. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception; challenged peremp- 
 torily by defendants.) 
 181-3 H. C. Metcalfe, engaged in the stationery and book business ; examined ; 
 
 challenged peremptorily by defendants. 
 
 184-5 A. S. Phelps, manager Chicago branch Detroit stove works; exam- 
 ined by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 186 J. S. Atwater, publisher, examined by defendants: Have read the 
 
 newspaper accounts of the Haymarket affair, and with reference to the
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 187 defendants have concluded that the law has probably got the right men. 
 Have formed an idea that the defendants might be connected with the 
 murder charged. In order to try this case upon the evidence introduced 
 and the proofs alone, " I would have to set aside a good deal of my 
 personal feeling." I understand that the defendants can be legally con- 
 victed only in the event of the evidence establishing beyond all reasonable 
 
 1 88 doubt their conviction, but I also understand that it is sometimes very 
 difficult to get the evidence before the jury." " Then whatever they do 
 not get they do not consider? A. Yes, but they may have conclusive 
 opinions of their own in regard to the matter." 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 189-90 William McElwaine, cashier for Hiram G. Thompson, manufacturer 
 of molding and picture frames; examined by defendants: Have formed 
 an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused or some of them. 
 Q. Is your condition of mind such that you can listen to the testi- 
 
 190 mony here in court and return a fair and impartial verdict, do you be- 
 lieve? A. Well, I am prejudiced now. Don't know whether I could 
 lay aside that prejudice and try the case upon the testimony. Have a 
 strong prejudice against socialists, communists and anarchists. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 191 Henry Hoadley, blank-book and stationery business; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 192 James S. McKenzie, salesman with D. B. Fisk & Co.; examined by 
 defendants; challenged peremptorily. 
 
 193-5 O- B. Tennis, wholesale millinery ; examined by defendants: challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 196 Theodore Kane, manufacturer of school furniture and slates, exam- 
 ined by defendants. Have heard of this case, and have an opinion as to 
 
 197 the guilt or innocence of the defendants from the newspaper accounts 
 and what I have heard. Would try to be impartial if chosen as a juror 
 in all cases, but as to whether my mind is in a condition that I can say I 
 believe I can fairly and impartially try them, I guess you are ahead of me. 
 Have given the best answer I can. Don't know whether any man can 
 tell whether he can lay aside his prejudices. 
 
 198 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 199 Edward Wright, livery business; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 200-5 F. E. Moore, merchant and dealer in clocks and diamonds; examined 
 by defendants, and excused by court on the ground of physical inca- 
 pacity.
 
 ('35) 
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 206-8 I. P. Rumsey, board of trade commission merchant; examined by de- 
 fendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 209-11 George Robinson, foreman Sawyer's livery stable, examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 212, 13 A. F. Seymour, salesman in the flour business; examined by defend- 
 ants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 214 Marks Levy, butcher, examined by defendants: Have heard of the 
 Haymarket meeting and the killing of Mr. Degan. Have formed an 
 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants a pretty strong 
 opinion. Read the papers every day. Still have that opinion, and have 
 communicated it to others many times. Don't think it would influence 
 my verdict. 
 
 215 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 216 Charles Roberts, book-keeper for Robert Knight; examined by de- 
 fendants: Have an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants 
 in this case a strong one. Have expressed it to others, and still enter- 
 tain it. Think it would influence my verdict in this case. 
 
 Challenged for cause. 
 
 To the State: If taken as a juror, I could probably try the case upon 
 
 217 the evidence without bias from my present opinion. Think I could try 
 it fairly. Know nothing about the case except from report. Never 
 talked with any one who was present at the Haymarket, or that pro- 
 fessed to know anything of their own knowledge about the guilt or 
 innocence of the defendants. Never told anybody that I believe what 
 the newspaper said was true. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception.) 
 
 Further examined by defense: Know nothing about socialism, com- 
 munism or anarchism. Never heard anything about socialism to amount 
 to anything not enough to form an opinion. My opinion is such that I 
 now believe it would influence my verdict, from what I have read since 
 the occurrence. 
 
 (Challenge for cause renewed.) 
 
 To the Court: Don't know and never saw either of these eight men. 
 This is the first time to my knowledge that I ever saw any of them. 
 The feeling that I have grows out of what I have heard and read about 
 this occurrence. Think I could fairly and impartially attend to the evi- 
 dence, and render a verdict in accordance with the law and evidence. 
 
 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception. Challenged per- 
 emptorily by defendants.)
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 222 D. F. Enwright, butter and cheese commission business; examined by 
 
 defendants: Heard of the killing of Mr. Degan by the bomb at the 
 Hay market on the 4th of May. I have formed an opinion as to the 
 guilt or innocence of the defendants from what I have read in the papers. 
 
 221 I consider it a firm opinion which I still entertain, and have, I believe, 
 expressed to others. Don't think it would influence my verdict. Think 
 
 222 I have a prejudice against communists. I think it is a strong prejudice. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 223-4 ^- Parker, grain commission merchant; examined by defendants; 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 225 W. F. Hartney, railroad clerk; not employed by any company at pres- 
 ent; examined by defendants: Have formed an opinion as to the guilt or 
 innocence of the defendants, what I still entertain and have expressed to 
 
 226 others; don't think it would influence my verdict; I believe I could listen 
 to the testimony and determine it without reference to my opinion; have 
 a prejudice against communists, I think. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 227 Philo J. Beveredge, merchandise broker; examined by defendants: 
 Have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, 
 which is moderately firm; don't think it would influence my verdict; am 
 
 228 opposed to socialists, communists and anarchists; decidedly opposed, have 
 a strong opinion against them. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 229-30 M. Hayden, clerk in coal office; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 231-2 J. A. Samuelson, furniture dealer; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 233-6 Samuel Falkner, Chicago manager of Proctor & Gamble, of Cincin- 
 nati, soap and candle business; examined by defendants; challenge for 
 cause allowed. 
 
 237 Daniel Hugenon, fire insurance business; examined by defendants: 
 Have an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or some 
 of them, of the murder of Mr. Degan a firm opinion which I have 
 
 238 expressed to others and still entertain; don't think it would influence my 
 verdict; have a strong prejudice against the views entertained by social- 
 ists, communists and anarchists. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 239-40 A. E. Dickerman, furniture business; examined by defendants; chal- 
 lenge for cause allowed.
 
 (^37) 
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 241 John Monahan, clerk for J. T. Lester & Co.; examined by defendants; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 242-3 T. C. Baldwin, manufacturer of perfume; examined by defendants; 
 
 challenge for cause allowed. 
 244-7 John Bradford, manufacturer of Tuttle's retaining valves; examined 
 
 by defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 248-9 Samuel E. Dunham, commission man on board of trade; examined by 
 
 defendants; challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 250 Adolph W. Kueker, hardware business; examined by defendants: 
 Formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or 
 some of them, which I still entertain, and have expressed toothers; think 
 I could, notwithstanding my opinion, listen to the testimony and render 
 an impartial verdict in the case under the evidence produced here in 
 
 251 court; believe the opinion I now have would not prevent my doing that; 
 am opposed to socialists, communists and anarchists. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 W. H. Madden, in the pig-iron rail business; examined by defend- 
 
 2523 ants: Have an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or 
 
 some of them, which I still entertain and have expressed to others. Think 
 
 I could listen to the testimony that is introduced in court and render an 
 
 252 impartial verdict in the case. I am opposed to the views of socialism, 
 communism and anarchism decidedly opposed to all of them. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily.) 
 
 253 G. M. Weinberger, druggist; examined by defendants: Have an 
 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, a pretty decided 
 opinion, which I have expressed to others and still entertain. Believe I 
 could listen to the testimony in court, the charge of judge, and render a 
 
 254 fair and impartial verdict in the case. Have a feeling against socialists, 
 communists, and anarchists a decided feeling- a very determined and 
 decided opinion. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 255 F. A. Ruck, meat market business; examined by defendants: Have 
 an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants. I could listen 
 to the testimony introduced in court and the charge of the judge, and 
 
 256 render a fair and impartial verdict, uninfluenced by my present opinion. 
 I have a decided opinion against socialism, communism and anarchism, 
 
 257 very much prejudiced against them; very firm and decided opinion. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.)
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 258 R. B. Hooker, boot and shoe dealer; examined by defendants: Have 
 
 a kind of opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants, which I 
 have not expressed to others, but which I still entertain. Believe I could 
 listen to the testimony and decide the case upon the evidence alone, and 
 render an impartial verdict. 
 
 260 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 261-2 Michael W. McDonald, clerk with Franklin MacVeagh & Co., whole- 
 sale grocers; examined by defendants; challenge for caused allowed. 
 
 263 S. A. West, livery and boarding stable; examined by defendants: 
 Have had an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the 
 
 264 alleged murder of Mr. Degan, but I dont think I have an opinion on 
 the question now. Have a prejudice against socialists, communists and 
 anarchists. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 266 Owen Fay, clerk in the Grand Pacific livery office; examined by de- 
 
 266 fendants: Have read of the Haymarket affair. Am somewhat opposed 
 to socialism, and to the principles of socialists, communists and anarchists, 
 and am opposed to those entertaining such views. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 267 P. J. Sullivan, grocer and saloon keeper; examined by defendants: 
 Have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants 
 of the alleged murder of Degan. Have a very strong opinion upon the 
 
 268n question. Am decidedly opposed to the views of socialists, communists 
 and anarchists. Think I could decide the case, if taken as a juror, with- 
 out reference to my opinion or prejudice. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 269 J. H. Trumbull, real estate agent; examined by defendants; challenge 
 for cause allowed. 
 
 270 H. Bowman, tailor, examined by defendants: Have no opinion upon 
 the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendants. Have heard of 
 the Haymarket matter, and did form an opinion in reference to it. Don't 
 like socialists, communists and anarchists. 
 
 378 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 273-4 William H. Rich, grocer; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 allowed. 
 
 2 75 John L. Bennett, wholesale druggist; examined by defendants: Have 
 an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants of the crime 
 
 276 alleged, based on what I read in the papers. Think I could disregard 
 that opinion in reaching a verdict. Am strongly prejudiced against
 
 (139) 
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 socialists, communists and anarchists. Have never read any works on 
 the subject. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by the defendants.) 
 
 277-9 A. W. Ramlin, boots and shoes; working for Doggett, Bassett & 
 Hills; examined by defendants. Challenge for cause allowed. 
 
 280 M. L. Beers, architect; examined by defendants: Have a firm 
 opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants. Don't know any- 
 thing as to the facts, and think I could listen to the testimony and render 
 
 281 an impartial verdict on the proofs in court. I have a very decided and 
 enthusiastic opposition to socialists, communists and anarchists very de- 
 cided. Have never read any work upon these subjects. 
 
 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 282-3 F. B. Wilson, banker; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 284-7 E. V. Lathrop, banker; examined by defendants; challenge for cause 
 
 allowed. 
 
 288 W. E. Wait, examined by defendants: Formerly chief deputy sheriff 
 of Cook county; not in business now. Have read and heard about the 
 
 289 Haymarket matter and the killing of Officer Degan. Don't know any- 
 thing about whether the defendants are legally liable for the throwing of 
 the bomb. Believe I can listen to the testimony and render a fair ver- 
 dict. Since leaving the sheriff's office, have been in the employ of the 
 West Park board of the Board of Education, as superintendent for some 
 
 290 of their work. I suppose, as the result of my reading, the anarchists 
 undertake to break the law. Never read any authorities upon social- 
 ism, communism and anarchism, but anarchy implies an absence of all 
 law, or the breaking of all law. 
 
 292 (Challenged peremptorily by defendants.) 
 
 293 H. T. Sanford, examined by defendants: Am a clerk in the North- 
 Western railroad office, in the freight auditor's office, and have been 
 
 294 there about fifteen months. I am twenty-four years old. Was formerly 
 a petroleum broker in New York for a time. I have an opinion as to 
 the guilt or innocence of the defendants, or some of them, of the murder 
 
 295 of Degan. Based upon what I have read, my opinion is as to the guilt 
 or innocence of some of the defendants of the throwing of the bomb. 
 Understand that a defendant is entitled to be tried upon the evidence 
 
 296 produced in court alone, and believe in this case that I could fairly and 
 impartially try and determine this case upon the evidence listen to the
 
 ( 
 
 VOL. H. 
 
 testimony, and render an impartial verdict. Have a decided prejudice 
 against socialists, communists and anarchists. I know so little about the 
 case, however, that it is hard to answer whether that prejudice would 
 
 297 influence my verdict. I would attempt to try the case upon the evidence 
 
 298 introduced here. Believe that I would be able to determine the question 
 from the witnesses produced and their testimony, regardless of the im- 
 
 299 pression that I now have. Have no acquaintance with any of the attor- 
 neys representing the prosecution, nor with any of the detectives of tne 
 city to my knowledge. 
 
 (Challenged for cause by defendants.) 
 
 300 Examined by State: My opinion is based upon what I read in the 
 newspapers. Never talked with any one who was present at the Hay- 
 market or professed to know personally about it. Don't recall whether 
 or not I have ever said to any one that I believed the statements of facts 
 in the newspapers to be true, " but still I have no reason to think they 
 were false." 
 
 301 (Challenge for cause overruled, and exception by defendants.) 
 
 It was stated by the clerk of the court that the defendants had ex- 
 hausted their 160 peremptory challenges, the defendants, upon the chal- 
 lenge for cause to Sanford being overruled, stopped. 
 
 302-6 Mr. Sanford, further examined by state, was accepted by the state, 
 and thereupon, together with Greiner, Mr. Reed and Mr. Adams, was 
 sworn to try the cause, completing the panel of twelve.
 
 VOLUME OF EXHIBITS. 
 
 Exhibit i. Photograph of plat of Haymarket square and vicinity. 
 
 Exhibit 2. Photograph of plat of NefT's Hall on Clybourne avenue, 
 two-story frame building. 
 
 People's Exhibit 3. Photograph of plat showing basement and first 
 floor of GreifP s Hall, 54 West Lake street. 
 
 People's Exhibit 4. Photograph of plat of Zepf's Hall. 
 
 People's Exhibit 5. Handbill printed in German and English calling 
 the Haymarket meeting, and containing the line in English: "Working- 
 men, arm yourselves and appear in full force," and in the German part 
 the German equivalent. 
 
 People's Exhibit 6. The revenge circular, so called, printed in Ger- 
 man and English. The English part of the circular is as follows: 
 
 " REVENGE. 
 
 " Workingmen! To arms! 
 
 " Your masters sent out their blood-hounds the police they killed 
 six of your brothers at McCormick's, this afternoon. They killed the 
 poor wretches, because they, like you, had the courage to disobey the 
 supreme will of your bosses. They killed them becanse they dared 
 ask for the shortening of the hours of toil. They killed them to show 
 you ' Free American Citizens ' that you must be satisfied and contented 
 with whatever your bosses condescend to allow you, or you will get 
 killed! 
 
 " You have for years endured the most abject humiliations; you have 
 for years suffered immeasurable iniquities; you have worked yourselves 
 to death; you have endured the pangs of want and hunger; your 
 children you have sacrificed to the factory lords in short, you have 
 been miserable and obedient slaves all these years. Why? To satisfy 
 the insatiable greed, to fill the coffers of your lazy, thieving master? 
 When you ask them now to lessen your burden, he sends his blood- 
 hounds out to shoot you, kill you! 
 
 " If you are men, if you are the sons of your grandsires, who have 
 shed their blood to free you, then you will rise in your might, Hercules, 
 and destroy the hideous monster that seeks to destroy you. 
 
 " To arms, we call you, to arms! 
 
 " YOUR BROTHERS." 
 141
 
 People's Exhibit 7. Copy of the Arbeiter Zeitung of the issue of 
 May 3, 1886, printed in German, containing certain articles, translations 
 of which were read and appear later as exhibits. 
 
 People's Exhibit 8. Copy of Arbeiter Zeitung of issue of May 4, 
 1886, printed in German, with various marked articles, translations of 
 some or all of which were offered later as exhibits. On the first column 
 on the fourth page of this issue, after two paragraphs, appears the fol- 
 lowing: " Briefkasten Ruhe!" the words being printed in a black-faced 
 type slightly heavier than the main body of the paper, but apparently 
 the same as that in which the first paragraph in the column is printed. 
 
 People's Exhibit 9. Photograph of Rudolph Schnaubelt. 
 
 People's Exhibit 10. The two words, in manuscript, " Briefkasten 
 Ruhe!" 
 
 People's Exhibit loa. Copy of the English portion of the " Revenge 
 circular," so called. 
 
 People's Exhibit rob. "Letter-box Y; Come Monday night." (Trans- 
 lation of notice in the Fackel of Sunday, May 2d.) 
 
 People's Exhibit 12. Photograph of front view and floor plan of 442 
 Sedgwick street (testified of as the house occupied by Seliger, and in 
 which Lingg roomed). 
 
 People's Exhibit 13. Copy of map in Chicago Daily News January 
 14, 1886. 
 
 People's Exhibit 14. Photograph of diagram showing plan of the 
 four floors of the Arbeiter Zeitung building, 107 5th avenue. 
 
 People's Exhibit 15. "Science of Revolutionary War. Manual for 
 instruction in the use and preparation of nitro-glycerine, dynamite, gun- 
 cotton, fulminating mercury, bombs, fuses, poisons, etc., etc., by Johann 
 Most, New York. Printed and published by the Internationale Zeitung 
 Verein (International News Co.), 167 Williams street." 
 
 The substance of this treatise is as follows: 
 
 About the importance of modern explosives for the social revolution, 
 present and future, nothing need be said. They will form a decisive 
 element in the next epoch of the world's history. It is, therefore, natural 
 that the revolutionists of all countries should be anxious to obtain these 
 explosives and learn to apply them practically. Too much time has been 
 wasted, books are expensive, etc. Even explanations of learned treatises 
 are unavailing. Persons attempting to experiment according to the in- 
 structions met with results not encouraging. The matter was expensive, 
 dangerous, etc.
 
 Some under experiment have produced tolerable gun-cotton, and 
 small quantities of nitro-glycerine converted into dynamite. But this 
 was of small value, as with small quantities of dynamite little can be done, 
 and it is expensive. For manufacture of dynamite on a large scale, an ex- 
 pensive outfit is required and separate quarters. A private dwelling cannot 
 be used. Such a laboratory must be kept in a secluded spot, because of the 
 stench which would lead to discovery and ejection. We have not, 
 however, abandoned experiments, but concluded that dynamite cannot be 
 successfully supplied by private manufacture, but must be obtained from 
 professional manufacturers. Not an ounce of dynamite heretofore used 
 has been manufactured by revolutionists, but obtained by them. Watch- 
 men cannot prevent the securing of a supply. Beside, it is now an article 
 of commerce for many purposes, so that its obtainment cannot be pre- 
 vented. The purchase is easier and cheaper than private manufacture, 
 and for this money is required. Dynamite factories may be confiscated. 
 The purpose of this treatise is to publish the simplest methods for the 
 manufacture of explosives, and to explain their use and effect. In this 
 direction many mistakes have been made, attributable to ignorance. 
 Dynamite may be exploded by a spark of fire, but it is not so usually, for 
 when brought in contact with the flame, it usually burns without causing 
 further effects. It is exploded by shock and therefore must be handled 
 carefully. Explodes easier when frozen than not, and freezes a few de- 
 grees above zero, Reaumer. It will stand a high degree of heat without 
 exploding. Moisture has no effect upon it, as the principal ingredient, 
 nitro-glycerine, is greasy. The simplest and surest way to explode dyn- 
 amite is in the application of blasting cartridges, obtainable in all large 
 houses dealing in blasting or shooting utensils (description of the cart- 
 ridge given). In important undertakings, procure best quality of fuse, 
 which looks like common twine, which should be guarded against moist- 
 ure by being soaked in tallow or tar, or incased in rubber. When explo- 
 sion is desired from a distance, a wire and electric battery is preferable, 
 but if only a few minutes are desired to get away, six or eight inches of 
 fuse will answer, attached to a piece of touchwood. For a bomb only 
 so much fuse required as can burn in the interval of throwing six or 
 eight inches is enough, determinable by experiment. To explode dyna- 
 mite by fuse and percussion cartridge, the bomb or other vessel should 
 be enclosed on all sides with an opening through which the blasting cart- 
 ridge may be introduced. The cartridge should reach into the explo- 
 sive material two-thirds of its length, but not let the fuse touch, for the
 
 (?44) 
 
 fuse might set fire to the dynamite, and it might escape in flame through 
 the orifice. When the fuse burns to the cartridge it explodes the latter, and 
 that the dynamite. The fulminating cap should be tightly squeezed into 
 the petard, to avoid dislocation. Before introducing the fuse into the cap, 
 
 9 cut it ofi'to make a fresh end. In important undertakings, the greatest 
 care is advisable. The fulminating mercury rests loosely and may fall 
 out of the cartridge, which should therefore be examined before being 
 used. The same rules obtain as to nitro-glycerine, but the latter is a 
 more powerful explosive than dynamite, the latter consisting of seventy- 
 five to eighty per cent, of nitro-glycerine and twenty to twenty-five per 
 cent, of charcoal, sawdust or other proper material. On account of its 
 rapidity, the greatest force of a dynamite explosion is in the direction where 
 it meets greatest resistance. No very heavy or very strong cylinder 
 should be used to demolish a wall, but a simple tin can is preferable. 
 
 10 But where dynamite is proposed to be exploded among a number of per- 
 sons, the stronger the shell, " the more splendid are the results." 
 
 The best shape for a bomb is globular, as furnishing equal resistance 
 and producing the same explosive effect in all directions. Iron shells are 
 the best; obtainable in a foundry. Zinc globes are not to be despised, 
 and can be privately manufactured; but the latter requires obtaining a 
 brass mold from a trustworthy expert. With such a mold, fifty semi- 
 globes of moderate size, can be manufactured in a day, and these can be 
 soldered together. Every bomb must have an opening, about three- 
 quarters of an inch through which to fill, provided with a screw top to 
 be put in after the filling is done, with a hole bored through the top, 
 
 1 1 large enough to pass a detonating cap which is connected with the fuse. 
 After the bomb is filled with dynamite, it is screwed together, and then 
 the fuse can be lighted and the bomb thrown. " A trial of such a bomb 
 has had a most excellent result." 
 
 A zinc globe four inches in diameter, filled with dynamite, was experi- 
 mented with. The explosion was like a cannon shot, bursting a large 
 flagstone into twenty pieces, scattering them ten to fifteen feet, making 
 a hole two foot in the ground, and at thirty to forty feet distance pieces 
 of the shell were found about the size of a revolver ball and very ragged. 
 If this bomb had been placed under the table of a gluttonous dinner party, 
 or if it had been thrown through a window onto the table, what a 
 beautiful effect it would have had. 
 
 Another method a piece of gas or water pipe a few inches long; cut 
 
 12 a screw on each end and cover with a screw cap, and for explosion, pro-
 
 ('45) 
 
 ceed as with the other bomb. Such missiles are easily manufactured, 
 cheap, and against a crowd must produce brilliant effects. No certainty 
 of one bomb being successful may result only in broken windows, etc. 
 Any ordinary house, will resist such explosions, and in operating against 
 houses, a different method must be pursued. Percussion primer bombs, 
 can be provided by making pyramid or other shaped shells with a per- 
 cussion cap on each side, so that when thrown, whichever side strikes 
 will explode the cap; but these, if falling in soft ground, are ineffective. 
 
 13 The cap must be secured tightly so as not to fall off, and the detonating 
 chamber closed at its bottom with fulminating mercury and the space 
 being filled with fine gunpowder, a second explosive cap being placed at 
 the bottom of the vent in the dynamite which is to be used preferably. 
 
 14 A bomb filled with fulminating mercury would have to have a very 
 strong shell to be effective, and filling a bomb with fulminating mercury 
 is dangerous, and the fulminate is more expensive than dynamite. 
 Besides all which the primer bombs described are more expensive and 
 difficult of construction than a globular bomb. We are of opinion that 
 
 15 the fuse construction (with detonating chamber) is more practical and 
 reliable. The best construction for a bomb, that will explode by concus- 
 sion, is one in which is inserted a small glass tube, slightly bent, 
 closed at each end by melting, and then inserted in a shell so that the ends 
 of the tube meet the opposite sides of the chamber; around this inner 
 tube is placed another tube full of a mixture of chlorate of potash and 
 sugar; and around this combined tube the chamber is filed with dyna- 
 mite and the shell closed. When this bomb is thrown, the concussion 
 breaks the glass tube, the sulphuric acid ignites the potash mixture, and 
 
 1 6 the result is an explosion of the dynamite. In practical use, the power of 
 dynamite is illustrated in mining blasts, etc., small quantities producing 
 wonderful results, which are dependent upon the confinement of the dyn- 
 amite. In attacking buildings, unless the dynamite can be introduced 
 into chimneys or other orifices, considerable quantity must be used to 
 shake the building or bring it down. For ordinary buildings, nothing 
 less than ten pounds will do, and 'for massive buildings, barracks, 
 churches, etc., forty or fifty pounds may be required, and even then, will 
 
 17 not be effective unless skillfully placed. The explosives should be placed 
 under or within a foundation or close to the main wall, just above the 
 ground, but not packed in a shell simply in tin cylinders, the length 
 of the cylinder being proportionate to the breadth of the breach desired. 
 Care must be taken not to break the fuse.
 
 1 8 Waterproof fuse may be had ready made. Following are results of 
 experiments by the war department of Austria. Four pounds of dyna- 
 mite in a tin box made a hole two feet by eighteen inches in a one-foot 
 brick wall; seven pounds made a hole thirteen by fifteen inches in a two- 
 foot brick wall; twenty-seven pounds made a hole fifteen feet square in a 
 three-foot brick wall; forty-three pounds knocked down a brick wall 
 three and a half feet thick. Good results were obtained by loading down 
 the dynamite with sandbags of earth. Two pounds at the bottom of 
 a wall sunk in the earth and covered with a foot and a half of ground, 
 shaking down seven feet of a wall eighteen inches thick; fourteen pounds 
 of dynamite in two tin cylinders, each two feet long and three inches in 
 diameter, made a breach in a wall six and one-half feet wide and seven 
 
 19 feet high. In a foundation of a four-foot brick wall three holes were dug, 
 eight feet apart and seven and one-half feet deep, and six pounds of dyn- 
 amite in a tin box placed in each hole and exploded simultaneously by 
 electricity. The result was the demolition of the wall for a distance 
 of twenty-five feet. As compared with dynamite, sixty pounds of gun- 
 powder in tin boxes, exploded against a stone wall, produced no other 
 effect than to blacken it, the damage to the wall being eight to ten times 
 
 20 less, even when confined, than in the case of dynamite. In case of war 
 the destruction of bridges, etc., is important, and here dynamite has been 
 especially effective. As examples: Two pounds of dynamite in a tin 
 box, exploded on a wrought-iron plate, two inches thick, tore a hole 
 through the plate. Twenty-six pounds of dynamite in eight tin boxes, 
 laid one on another, destroyed an iron single track railroad bridge, pipe 
 construction, securely built. Seven pounds of dynamite exploded near 
 a railroad track threw oft" one rail and splintered the second, destroying 
 the nearest tie. A train following immediately, perhaps imperial special, 
 might have " gone to the devil." Other experiments also mentioned. 
 
 21 To thaw dynamite, which freezes very easily, the best plan is to put 
 the dynamite in a waterproof vessel into a larger one containing water. 
 Frozen dynamite is dangerous when ignited, and may fail to explode if 
 special pains are not taken. Failures should be avoided in revolutionary 
 movements. It is cheapest to buy explosives or confiscate them, but in- 
 struction given for manufacture, avoiding technical terms. Advises 
 
 22 processes which we have tried successfully, the principles of operation 
 resting on the method discovered bv Ditmar, the New York dynamite 
 manufacturer, but simpler. 
 
 To manufacture dynamite, there are mixed, first, two parts sulphuric
 
 (47) 
 
 acid with one of nitric acid; second, there is added one-eighth of the 
 whole quantity of glycerine. Scientists have overstated the dangers of 
 this manufacture, with the result that, on the part of revolutionists, less 
 
 23 nitro-glycerine has been manufactured than would otherwise have been. 
 Sulphuric acid of at least forty-five degrees can be had of any wholesale 
 druggist in nine-pound bottles; nitric acid of at least sixty -six degrees in 
 seven-pound bottles. To eighteen pounds of sulphuric acid you need 
 nine pounds of nitric acid and three and one-half pounds of glycerine. 
 Mixing can be done in an iron pot, enameled, or in any porcelain or 
 glazed vessel. In an outer vessel pour water till it reaches three-fourths 
 of the height of the inner vessel, kept cold by the use of ice. Put the 
 sulphuric acid into the inner vessel; add half the quantity of nitric acid, 
 stirring with a glass rod and pouring in slowly. To get rid 
 of the offensive and unhealthy fumes, cover the mouth and 
 the nose by a handkerchief; keep the windows open and mix near 
 or under an open flue. When the mixture is completed, cover with 
 a piece of glass and leave for fifteen to twenty minutes to cool off, the 
 
 24 mixture causing a high degree of heat; then add the glycerine, stirring 
 briskly with the glass rod while pouring. If yellowish red fumes arise, 
 indicating conflagation, stop pouring the glycerine and stir more briskly, 
 and afterwards resume the addition of the glycerine. After completing 
 the mixture, stir for ten minutes or so; then lift out the inner vessel con- 
 taining the mixture, and pour it into the water in the outer vessel slowly. 
 A -yellowish oil will settle to the bottom, which is nitro-glycerine. After 
 some time pour ofFthe water. Then pour the nitro-glycerine for further 
 purification into a bowl filled with good soda lye, stirring briskly, so as 
 to cause all of the nitro-glycerine to come in contact with the lye; let set- 
 tle and pour off the lye, when the nitro-glycerine can be bottled. Nitro- 
 glycerine in a natural state being dangerous from concussion, it is desir- 
 
 25 able to manufacture the dynamite at once. To do this, take sawdust or 
 pulverized charcoal, or a mixture equal parts powder, sugar, dust of 
 saltpetre and wood pulp; put this material into a vessel and pour on the 
 nitro-glycerine, kneading it with a wooden ladle to the consistency of a 
 thick dough; pack in oil paper or tin boxes. Long continued handling 
 of dynamite with the bare hands produces severe headache. 
 
 Gun-cotton is also an explosive, not much inferior to dynamite. To 
 prepare it, take unglued cotton wadding, boil in soda lye, dry carefully, 
 
 26 either in the air or upon hot iron plates or bricks. The cotton is then 
 dipped in the mixture of acids (sulphuric and nitric), and after being left
 
 (148) 
 
 until thoroughly saturated, is taken out, squeezed dry, but not with the 
 hands, and is then put in a vessel with soda lye; after fifteen minutes 
 again taken and squeezed out, which may be done with the hand, and 
 which is repeated two or three times, but each time in new warm water. 
 Then the wadding must be dried by atmosphere, not by hot material. 
 It is not extensively used, because it ignites in warm sunshine. Use im- 
 mediately after manufacture, or keep in water until required, and then 
 dry and use. Unconfined gun-cotton burns without explosion, but is ex- 
 plosive when placed in cylindrical bombs and rammed in securely. It 
 
 27 can be exploded by fire without concussion. It is not to be despised, 
 because it is more easily manufactured than dynamite and has an inno- 
 cent appearance. 
 
 Gun-cotton saturated with nitro-glycerine results in nitro-gelatine, 
 incredibly explosive and far superior to dynamite, but its keeping on 
 hand is dangerous, and the mixture should therefore immediately pre- 
 cede its contemplated use. 
 
 Near Washington the following experiment was recently made: By 
 a dynamite gun bombs were thrown containing eleven pounds nitro-gel- 
 atine two thousand feet against solid rock. One bomb tore a hole six 
 feet deep and twenty-five feet in diameter in the rock, and ten tons of 
 rock were cut loose and thrown in all directions, while stones from ten 
 to twelve pounds were carried about half a mile. The spectators, nearly 
 
 28 all military men from foreign countries, concurred that an ordinary ves- 
 sel would be destroyed by the explosion of a single such bomb, while 
 an iron-clad receiving it in the side would thereby be disabled. Revo- 
 lutionists cannot manufacture dynamite cannon (which are about forty 
 feet long), but they can make bombs and use ordinary slings. " That 
 which Deduces what had been solid rocks into splinters may not have a 
 bad effect in a court or monopolists' ball room." 
 
 Fulminate of mercury is a powerful explosive, consisting of mercury, 
 sulphuric acid and alcohol, equal weights, which must be mixed in a 
 clean glazed vessel, in cold water or ice, the mercury being first put into 
 the vessel and the rest stirred in slowly, the acid being added first, and 
 enough of it to secure the entire solution of the mercury; pour in the 
 
 29 alcohol after cooling. The product, a gray substance, is then spread on 
 tissue paper to dry, and a little potash is added to reduce the danger of 
 explosion. It explodes at a temperature of 150 degrees. Silver may 
 be substituted for mercury, giving a better product, but more expensive. 
 Experimenting should be done with very small quantities to begin with.
 
 ( M9 ) 
 
 Fulminate of mercury explodes under a spark, as, for instance, a gun- 
 cap and bombs charged with this explosive explode by concussion sim- 
 ply.' In filling a bomb great care must be taken, as no ramming or con- 
 cussion is allowed, and the filling is therefore better done while the mix- 
 ture is moist, and when it will settle into shape; but in this event the 
 
 30 shell must be left open until completely dry. In closing the shell care 
 must be taken not to cause any spark or ignition, which would be fol- 
 lowed by an explosion. In modern wars they do not confine themselves 
 10 explosives and weapons of any particular description, but are aimed 
 to weaken the enemy by all means possible. 
 
 A particularly effective weapon is fire. For example, in Moscow, 
 against Napoleon, and by the Prussians in France in 1870-71. There- 
 fore, in a list of revolutionary war utensils, the article serviceable for in- 
 cendiary purposes must not be omitted. A very effective mixture is 
 of phosphorous and bi-sulphide of carbon. Buy yellow phosphor, 
 which is always kept under water, and must never be touched with the 
 
 31 bare hands, but taken from the containing bottle with a fork or stick- 
 put in a porcelain bowl full of water and cut into portions about the 
 size of a bean under water. The phospor must be kept in a bottle with 
 a glass stopper, fitting air-tight. Fill a bottle with bi-sulphide of car- 
 bon, drop in the phospor quickly and close; then shake slowly until dis- 
 solved. The fluid is then ready for use, and if poured on rags will re- 
 sult in spontaneous combustion, after a time. Petroleum added re- 
 tards the combustible action, and may be used when one desires to make 
 good his escape. Experiments with this mixture were made in France 
 by detectives, 
 
 32 Another incendiary article is thus constructed: Take a tin fruit jar, 
 remove the cover; cut a hole in the center of the cover, into which insert 
 a medicine glass; then resolder the cover; pour in benzine; fill the 
 medicine glass with gunpowder, and close with a stopper, passing a fuse 
 through the stopper; light the fuse; the result is, after a time, the 
 explosion of the powder, bursting the can and scattering the benzine 
 blazing in every direction. A hundred men equipped with such imple- 
 ments, scattered through a city, could achieve more than twenty batteries 
 of artillery, and the thing is easily made, and cheap. 
 
 There may be cases in which the revolutionist must abandon .shelter 
 and sacrifice his own life in the warfare against the property-owning 
 
 33 beast of society^ but no revolutionist should unnecessarily endanger his 
 own life. An unknown danger is the more terrible. Therefore, revo- 
 lutionists should act singly or in as small numbers as possible.
 
 Owing to the failure of various attacks, the idea has been suggested 
 to poison weapons used for assault. But this idea has never been car- 
 ried out, owing to the expense and difficulty of procuring suitable 
 
 34 poisons. The best substance for poisoning arms is curari, used by the 
 South American Indians on their arrows. It is absolutely fatal, but is 
 high priced. A dagger red-hot and hardened in a decoction of rose 
 laurel is fatal. Pulverize phosphor mixed with gum arabic and applied 
 to the weapon is also fatal. So with verdigris. So as to cadaver poison 
 and prussic acid, but poisons must always be prepared immediately before 
 use, as they dissolve in the atmosphere and become innocuous. 
 
 35 The successful arming of the people cannot be achieved by one 
 definite procedure, but by utilizing all different circumstances. The 
 best thing would be for organized workingmen throughout the civilized 
 world to provide themselves with muskets and ammunition and to 
 thoroughly drill, but this is almost impossible, as the authorities would 
 interfere with them, and throughout Europe even the purchase of 
 weapons by the common people is made difficulty, while secret purchase 
 
 36 subjects to the charge of " constructive treason." In America every one 
 has the constitutional right to arm, but the carrying of concealed 
 weapons is prohibited, while, if carried openly, that also would soon be 
 prohibited. That is not all. Hardly had a military organization been 
 effected in Illinois, when the legislature passed a law allowing to march 
 and drill only the state organizations. A litigation has resulted which is 
 as yet undetermined. There is evidenced also among legislators, a dis- 
 position to prohibit dynamite except for industrial purposes and national 
 
 37 defense. The workingmen of America cannot arm themselves unless 
 they do it soon. If they arm themselves at once, well; if not, it will 
 soon be difficult or impossible, and " you will find yourselves defenseless 
 and powerless in the face of a mob of murderers in uniform, armed 
 to the teeth." The price of a watch would buy a fine breech- 
 loader. We do not take much stock in the arming of organiza- 
 tions, for several reasons, among others, that it will cause a 
 great pressure upon those who are unwilling to join, which is 
 in violation of the anarchistic principle and dangerous to the existence of 
 the organization. Besides which, it would involve great financial sacri- 
 fice to those who prefer to do nothing for the cause. Labor organizations 
 
 38 should therefore content themselves with allowing arming by those who 
 desire to do so. They may buy arms at wholesale, and retail to those 
 who wish to purchase, on the installment plan, if necessary, at cost, thus
 
 ( 'Si ) 
 
 saving expense without trenching upon the assets of th.e society. Mus- 
 kets are not the only desirable weapons; good revolvers, daggers, poisons 
 and firebrands are destined to be of immense service during a revolution. 
 The modern explosives deserve attention first of all. Quantities of 
 nitro-glycerine and dynamite, numerous hand grenades and blasting 
 cartridges should be at the disposal of the revolutionists, these things 
 acting as the proletariats' substitute for artillery. These are particularly 
 
 39 recommended to European revolutionists, as they cannot buy rifles. 
 " Taken all in all, our motto is: Proletarians of all countries, arm your- 
 selves; arm yourselves, no matter what may happen, the hour of battle 
 draws near." 
 
 Certain precautions should be adopted by the revolutionist if he wishes 
 to address an associate in writing. He should use a fictitious address, 
 which should be frequently changed, and its contents ought to be shaped 
 with a view to the possibility of its falling into the wrong hand. He 
 should never mention the true name of his confederates. Initials or nick- 
 names are preferable. There should never be a communication even to 
 a comrade of a fact which it is not necessary for him to know. Your 
 
 40 right name should never be signed. The use of a cipher is not desirable, 
 because it is a suspicious method and is very liable to detection. If used 
 at all, the key to the cipher should be communicated only to one con- 
 federate. " All letters received, which bear secrets, should always be 
 burned immediately after reading." Revolutionists should never retain 
 things which would lead to detection, and should always be on guard 
 against detectives and police. Neither through friendship, love or family 
 ties should you talk unnecessarily. These rules apply particularly " to 
 all enterprises that are directed against the prevailing disorder and its 
 laws." If a revolutionary deed is proposed, it should not be talked 
 about, but silently pursued. If assistance is indispensable, it may be 
 chosen, but a misstep in this is fatal. The society of suspected persons 
 
 41 should be carefully avoided, thus spies would be rendered harmless. Self- 
 composure in arrest is essential. Only when the arrest can be success- 
 fully resisted should there be resort to it, or when it becomes a question 
 of life and death. But if you are sure that the arrest is on suspicion, 
 you protest energetically and submit quietly. To examinations by a 
 judge, the revolutionist should submit only so far as he can prove an 
 alibi; admit nothing except what is proven. If all means of deliverance 
 are exhausted, then the prisoner should defend his deed from the stand- 
 point of the revolutionist and anarchist, and convert the defendant's seat
 
 into a speaker's stand. Shield your person as long as possible, but when 
 you are irredeemably lost, use your respite for the propogation of your 
 principles. We thus speak because we observe that even expert revolu- 
 tionists violate its plainest rules. 
 
 42 Appendix. 
 
 We have received from a layman an essay presenting another means 
 of preparing fulminate of mercury, which essay reads as follows: Use 
 an ordinary retort; to precipitate the fumes, put the neck of the retort 
 in water, put in five grains of mercury and fifty grains of nitric acid; 
 after this has cooled, add sixty grains of best alcohol in small quantities, 
 shaking the retort well while mixing; upon the neck of the retort put 
 an india rubber tube, thirty or forty centimeters long, passing through a 
 vessel filled with water; light an alcohol flame under the retort until 
 the mixture begins to boil; the fulminate of mercury crystallizes; pour 
 
 43 off the liquid residue; refine the fulminate in cold water several times, 
 and then boil the water; spread on tissue paper to dry, in a high tem- 
 perature; then close carefully to prevent absorbing moisture. Thus 
 writes our correspondent. 
 
 As a substitute for a blasting cartridge, where the latter cannot be 
 conveniently obtained, cut a piece oft" the closed end of a metal pen- 
 holder, say an inch and a half long, and fill this with the caps ordinarily 
 used for toy pistols, stuffing them in, then add a fuse and the cartridge 
 is ready for use. 
 
 44 Pulverized seeds of stramonium, baked in almond or other cake, 
 furnish an effective poison to be used against a spy, informer, minion of 
 the law, or other scoundrel. 
 
 Invisible ink is recommended for revolutionary correspondence. To 
 mislead spies, write an ordinary letter, and then write with the invisible 
 ink between the lines, or on the reverse pages, or send an old book and 
 write on the blank pages, or write on the inside of paper wrappers. 
 There are invisible inks which are developed by heat, but these are not 
 recommended, as heat is always applied to suspicious correspondence by 
 the detectives. The chemical is preferable. If you write with nitfate 
 of cobalt (invisible), it becomes bluish if you spread oxalate of potash 
 over it. Nitrate of copper made legible by spreading cyanide of potas- 
 
 45 sium on. And so if written with hydro-chlorate. There are still other 
 methods, but enough has been suggested. 
 
 We speak now of Sprengel's acid and neutral explosives. Sprengel
 
 (153) 
 
 has found that hydro-carbons, mixed with vehicles, can be exploded by 
 a cap like dynamite. For instance, equal parts of carbolic acid dissolved 
 in nitric acid gives an explosive. By the solution of carbolic in nitric 
 acid, picric acid is produced; in the mixture heating takes place which 
 should be cooled off. Mix the picric acid with nitric acid and an ex- 
 plosive as strong as nitro-glycerine is produced, the proportions being 
 58.3 of picric acid to 41.7 of nitric acid. If instead of carbolic acid, ben- 
 zine is used, the result is nitro-benzole. Add nitric acid in the proportion 
 of 71.92 nitric acid to 28.08 nitric-benzole, and you have an explosive. 
 These various liquids can be utilized by absorbing them into chlorate of 
 potash, moulded into suitable shapes, which can be exploded ordina- 
 
 47 rily by a percussion cap; but these preparations are not as handy as 
 dynamite, and can be used only in glass, stone or iron shells, other shells 
 being affected by the acid, but they are easier to produce than nitro- 
 glycerine. 
 
 Prussic acid may be prepared as follows: Take thirty grains yellow 
 prussiate of potash, twenty grains sulphuric acid and forty grains of 
 water; heat the mixture in a retort and catch the fumes in a well-cooled 
 receiver. It is desirable that the receiver should be bent and furnished 
 with water in its lower portion, through which the fumes must pass, 
 thus aiding condensation. There must be a hollow globe to receive the 
 accumulating prussic acid. It is very volatile, and upon drying up no 
 poisonous substance remains. Avoid the escaping fumes. Proceed 
 
 48 under a well-ventilated flue. Prussic acid is not useful for poisoning 
 arms, but is for liquors looks like water and smells and tastes like bitter 
 almonds. May be preserved in the dark for a long time. 
 
 For combustion, we add the following suggestion: Take blotting 
 paper, saturate it with the phosphor dissolved in carbon, as published 
 recently in the Freiheit, and put it in an unclosed envelope, with pulver- 
 ized chlorate of potash. Close the letter, and in about a quarter of an 
 hour, upon opening it, an explosion and intense blaze will ensue. These 
 letters can be carried around and dropped, and be carried safely in an 
 51 air-tight tin box. For large buildings, such as courts, etc., put the 
 phosphor in a small box that can be carried in the overcoat pocket, fill- 
 ing the lower part with tar and the upper part with shavings, saturate 
 with prepared phosphor, and add potash, nail on a lid carefully, bore a 
 few holes to let in the air, and in the course of three or four hours an 
 explosion will follow, and a fire. 
 
 Phosphor may be used as a fuse for dynamite, keeping it from the air
 
 until the box of dynamite is placed in the proper position, then raise the 
 lid, letting the air to the fuse, and in due time an explosion will follow. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 16. 
 
 Platform International Association of Workingmen, published in the 
 Arbeiter Zeitung during February, March and April, 1886. 
 The Declaration of Independence declares when a long train of abuses 
 and usurpation, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to 
 reduce them (the people) under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is 
 their duty to throw off such government and to provide new guards for 
 their future security. Are we not too much governed, and is it not the 
 time to practice this thought of Jefferson? Is our government anything 
 but a conspiracy of the privileged classes against the people? Fellow- 
 laborers, read the following declaration, which we issue in your interest, 
 for humanity and progress. The present order of society is based upon 
 the spoliation of the non-property by the property owners, the capital- 
 ists buy the labor of the poor for wages, at the mere cost of living, taking 
 all the surplus of labor. By machinery constantly reducing the volume 
 of human labor, produces constantly increasing quantities of goods, 
 whereby the competition of labor is increasing and its price being re- 
 duced. Thus, while the poor are increasingly deprived the opportunities 
 of advancement, the rich grow richer through increasing robbery. Only 
 by rare and accidental opportunities can the poor become rich ; avarice 
 increases with wealth, and capitalists compete for the spoliation of the 
 masses. In this struggle the moderately wealthy succumb, while monop- 
 olists flourish, concentrating in their hands entire branches of industry, 
 trade and commerce. Industrial and commercial crises follow, which 
 force the wretchedness of the non-property owners to the highest point. 
 Statistics of the United States show that after deducting raw material, 
 interest on capital, etc., property owners claim five-eighths, and allow to 
 the laborers but three-eighths of the residue. The result of the present 
 system is recurring over-production, while the increasing elimination of 
 labor from the process of production brings the impoverishment of an 
 increasing percentage on non-property owners, " who are driven into 
 crime, vagabondage, prostitution, suicide, starvation and manifold ruin. 
 This system is unjust, insane and murderous." Therefore those who 
 suffer under it, and do not wish to be responsible for its continuance, 
 ought to strive for its destruction by all means and with their utmost en- 
 ergy. " In its place is to be put the true order of society. This can be
 
 ('55) 
 
 brought about only when all instruments of property all capital pro- 
 duced by labor has been transformed into common property, for thus 
 only is the possibility of spoliation cut off. Only by the impossibility of 
 accumulating private capital can every one be compelled to work who 
 claims the right to live. Neither lordship nor servitude will thereafter 
 exist. This system would result further that no one would need to work 
 more than a few hours a day, and yet every reasonable want of society 
 would be satisfied." In this way, time and opportunity are also given 
 for opening to all the people the possibility of the highest imaginable 
 culture." 
 
 Opposed to such a system are the political organizations of the capital- 
 ists, whether monarchies or republics. States are in the hands of prop- 
 erty owners with no other apparent end than to maintain the disorder of 
 the present day. The laws turn their sharp points against the laboring 
 people, and so far as they seem otherwise, are evaded by the ruling class. 
 The school exists for the offspring of the rich, while the children of the 
 poor receive scarcely an elementary education, and this directed to pro- 
 mote conceit, prejudice, servility, anything but intelligence. By refer- 
 ence to a fictitious heaven, the church seeks to make the masses forget 
 the loss of paradise on earth, while the press takes care to confuse the 
 public mind. These institutions aim to prevent the people from reaching 
 intelligence, being under the sway of the capitalist class. The laborers 
 can look for aid from no outside source in their fight against the existing 
 system, but must achieve deliverance through their own exertions. 
 Hitherto, no privileged class have relinquished tyranny, nor will the capi- 
 talists of to-day forego their privilege and authority without compulsion. 
 This is evidenced by the brutal resistance always manifested by the mid- 
 dle classes against all efforts by the laboring classes for their advance- 
 ment. It is therefore evident that the fight must be of a revolutionary 
 character; that wage conflicts cannot lead to the goal. Every reform 
 in favor of the laboring classes involves a curtailment of the privileges 
 of the rich to which we cannot expect their assent. " The ruling classes 
 will not voluntarily relinquish their prerogatives, and will make no con- 
 cession to us. Under all these circumstances, there is only one remedy 
 left force." Our ancestors of 1776 have taught us that resistance to 
 tyrants is justifiable, and have left us an immortal example. By force, 
 they freed themselves from foreign oppressors, " and through force their 
 descendants must free themselves from domestic oppression." There- 
 fore, it is your right and duty to arm, says Jefferson. Agitation to or-
 
 ganize, organizations for the purpose of rebellion, this is the course if 
 the workingmen would rid themselves of their chains. And, since all 
 governments combine in their policy of oppression, it is evident that the 
 victory of the laboring population can be confidently expected only when 
 the wage-workers along the whole line of capitalistic society inaugurate 
 the decisive combats simultaneously. Hence the necessity for interna- 
 tional affiliation and the organization of the International Association of 
 Workingmen. 
 Our platform is simple and clear: 
 
 1. Destruction of existing class domination, through inexonorable 
 revolution and international activity. 
 
 2. The building of a free society on communistic organizations or 
 production. 
 
 3. Free exchange of equivalent products through the productive or- 
 ganization without jobbing and profit making. 
 
 4. Organization of the educational system upon non-religious and 
 scientific and equal basis for both sexes. 
 
 5. Equal rights for all, without distinction of sex or race. 
 
 6. The regulation of public affairs through agreements between the 
 independent communes and confederacies. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 18. From the Alarm of October 4, 1884. 
 
 " A word to tramps." A word to the thirty thousand now tramping the 
 streets in enforced idleness without enough to purchase food. A word with 
 you and the hundreds of thousands situated like you. You have worked 
 hard, toiled long in producing wealth, and through your years of drudg- 
 ery have produced much which you have no part in. While laboring 
 with machinery during your hours of service, you received of the results 
 produced only enough for your bare subsistence. For rest you had to 
 wait till Sunday; while with all economy you are able to accumulate 
 scarcely.any thing; and at the caprice of your employer, you have at 
 times been turned upon the highway by a lockout, hungry arid in rags. 
 No one cared for your tears or heartaches as you turned from your 
 family and tramped the road in search of employment, and to be de- 
 nounced as a vagrant. "Can you not see that it is the industrial system, 
 and not the boss, which must be changed?" When following a summer 
 and autumn without employment and without savings, the winter comes 
 upon you, do not listen to the hypocrite who says it is ordained of God, 
 that the poor ye have always; or to the robber who will say, you drank
 
 your wages, and who will drive you from them, and shoot you if you 
 are persistent in your petition. But listen, when next winter you surfer 
 with cold, with insufficient clothing, with hunger and all wretchedness 
 centered upon you and life a burden and a mockery and you face 
 suicide and are ready to seek the embrace of the lake, rather than suffer, 
 halt! Can you do nothing to insure those whom you are about to orphan 
 against alike fate? The waves will mock your act; but stroll down the 
 avenues, look in the voluptuous homes and discover there the robbers 
 who have despoiled you. Here let your tragedy be enacted and send 
 forth your petition that will never be heeded except when read in the 
 glare of conflagration, or when handed to your oppressors upon the 
 point of the sword. You need no organization that would be a detri- 
 ment, but avail yourselves of the methods of warfare which science has 
 placed in the hands of the poor. Learn the use of explosives. "Dedi- 
 cated to the tramps by Lucy E. Parsons." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 19. The Alarm, November i, 1884. 
 
 This exhibit is the international workingmen's proclamation and 
 declaration of principles, substantially the same as the translation there- 
 of published in the Arbeiter Zeitung and before extracted, but closes as 
 follows: 
 
 Whoever agrees with this idea, let him grasp our outstretched 
 brother hands. 
 
 Proletarians of all countries, unite. 
 
 Fellow workmen, all we need for the achievement of this great end is 
 organization and unity. 
 
 There exists now no great obstacle to that unify. The work of peace- 
 ful education and revolutionary conspiracy will, can and ought to run in 
 parallel lines. 
 
 The day has come for solidarity. Join our ranks! Let the drum beat 
 defiantly the roll of battle; workingmen of all lands, unite! You have 
 nothing to lose but your chains; you have a world to win. Tremble, 
 oppressors of the world! Not far beyond your purblind slight there 
 dawns the scarlet and sable lights of the judgment day! 
 
 Issued by the Pittsburgh Congress of International Workingpeople's 
 Association on October 16, 1883. 
 
 Published by the bureau of information.
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 20. Alarm, October n, 1884. 
 
 " Take care." At a meeting of the international, No. 54 West Lake 
 street, last week, J. P. Uucey said the unemployed should attack the 
 lives and property of those who have robbed them and then turned them 
 adrift to starve. The Daily News, grown rich on working people's 
 pennies, says of Mr. Ducey he should be nipped in the bud of his mis- 
 chief making. If he don't like the way this country is run, the authori- 
 ties should transport him to some land " where such creatures are given 
 their deserts at the end of a rope." The Daily News man fears an at- 
 tack upon the principle that " the thief doth take each bush to be an 
 officer." Some fine day every wage-worker will become a communist 
 and the Daily News representative of capitalistic robbers will dangle in- 
 stead of Ducey. Have patience and your curses will come home to 
 roost. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 21. 'The Alarm of October 18, 1884. 
 
 " The Anarchist." The Daily Inter Ocean closes a lengthy article 
 thus: There are anarchists in America, Germany, France and England 
 whose rabies are like those of the Russian nihilist; in India it is thugism. 
 There is nothing republican or socialistic in it socialism proposing to 
 make the powers of the state all comprehensive. It is announced that 
 the parliamentary buildings at Quebec have been blown up by dynamite. 
 This is anarchic nihilism. The Cleveland fires perhaps the same. 
 Anarchists will discover that an American militia is more prompt and 
 merciless than an imperial army, and the American people will be more 
 condign and vengeful against anarchism. If the public become certain 
 that anarchism means malicious and deadly force, anarchists will find 
 Russian despotism less effective for their suppression than American law. 
 
 The Inter-Ocean man has overlooked the fact that one man with a dyn- 
 amite bomb is equal to a regiment of militia. The method of warfare 
 has been revolutionized by the discoveries of modern science, and will 
 use explosives in the coming conflict. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 22. The Alarm, October 25, 1884. 
 
 Miners in Ohio are organizing companies of sharpshooters, proposing 
 to try force. " The necessity which has heretofore compelled them to 
 submit to the employers' terms they now intend to get rid of by removing 
 those who created that necessity."
 
 ('59) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 23. The Alarm, October 25, 1884. 
 
 " The Socialists." Socialists are falsely accused of being blood- 
 thirsty. Once competition ground down so slowly as to be unnoticed, 
 but now, with free schools, free press, etc., its course is observed, and 
 when anything is moving against the rights of the majority, it will be 
 stopped. Whether bloodshed will be required depends upon how old 
 the principle is, and how interested its supporters are in keeping it up; 
 and second, upon the determination of the opposition. An opposition 
 known to be sufficiently strong for certain victory will command and ob- 
 tain a bloodless surrender. This is why the anarchist urges scientific 
 study and the construction of explosives, to make themselves too strong 
 to be opposed with deadly weapons, which alone can insure against blood- 
 shed. Bloodshed being useless and injustice defenceless, people can be 
 forced to deal justly and generously with each other. The ridiculous 
 situation that requires men to freeze because there is too much coal, 
 starve because there is too much bread, go naked because there is too 
 much clothing, and lie out-doors because there are too many houses, can- 
 not continue, especially when that evil, is known to be increasing. The 
 only remedy is make common property and let all partake of the earn- 
 ings; allow none to hoard or carry off. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 24. The Alarm, November i, 1885. 
 
 " The Useless Classes." Who does no good to humanity is useless. 
 There is a vast amount of useless work going on, by reason of which the 
 workers have lost sight of the pleasure of work. The selfish, infernal 
 scheme, called " the right of property," has created useless work and 
 useless workers the capitalists and their allies, including jailers and po- 
 lice, bankers, brokers, judges, peddlers, etc., and the end of the right of 
 property is to constitute a class of paupers, thieves, vagabonds, hypo- 
 crites, etc. Destroy the right of property and you set these useless 
 workers at useful work, thereby reducing the hours of labor of the pres- 
 ent laborers, and doing away with poverty and filth. 
 
 This can be done by making ourselves masters of the use of dynamite, 
 then declaring against private ownership and punishing its assertion. Let 
 us not strike when our numbers are too small, and to avoid unnecessary 
 bloodshed, etc., we must strike together and know our purpose and be 
 prepared. " Our war is not against men, but against systems." We can 
 expect few converts among the rich, and it will be better for our cause 
 if they strike first.
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 25. The Alarm, November i, 1884. 
 
 Socialists are accused of advocating the destruction of property. Their 
 plan is to make property common, to supply all needs, but prevent de- 
 struction or waste, only destroying to prevent recapture. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 26. The Alarm, November i, 1884. 
 
 "Anarchism." " The anarchist believes in peace, but not at the expense 
 of liberty. He believes that political laws are enacted to force men to do 
 those things they would not naturally or if left untrammeled. Therefore 
 he considers all political laws as violations of the laws of nature and the 
 rights of man. He believes if each man held all laws within himself, he 
 would be held to a just execution of them by every other man. There- 
 fore, that he can only hope for justice and liberty through the abolition 
 of statutes and governments. He has no faith in the laws of man; but 
 all faith in the laws of nature. 
 
 "He believes that, under any government, the more a man is governed 
 the less he is free. Therefore, as the least government the better, none 
 at all is best that all governments become despotisms; that evil in man 
 results from the violation of natural right, and that most laws are in- 
 tended to advantage one class at the expense of another. He therefore 
 demands the abolition of all political laws and the restoration of the rights 
 of man as nature has provided." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 27. The Alarm, November 15, 1885. 
 
 " The Butchers of Men." What Gen. Phil/Sheridan says in his 
 annual report upon the subject of capital and labor. 
 
 November loth last, Gen. Phil Sheridan in his annual report says that 
 latterly much attention has been given to rifle practice, developing great 
 skill in long-distance shooting. Approves the state militia, and thinks Con- 
 gress ought to determine the number of troops in each state and provide 
 arms, equipage, etc. 'Urges sea coast fortification, and then says: There are 
 other signs of trouble. Destructive explosives are easily made, and that 
 large buildings can be easily demolished and commerce destroyed by an 
 infuriated people, with means carried safely in their pocket. Militarism 
 is capitalism embodied in force, and the instruments of tyrants its only 
 occupation " to protect the sacred rights of property." The right of 
 property enslaves, plunders and destroys the propertyless class. " Dy- 
 namite is the emancipator. In the hands of the enslaved it cries aloud, 
 justice or annihilation." The workingmen will use it until " property
 
 rights are destroyed and a free society and justice becomes the rule 
 of government among men. " 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 28. The Alarm, November 22, 1884. 
 
 " This paper." This paper is owned by the International Working- 
 people's Association; published by the working people for the public 
 good. We ask a little from those interested to increase its circulation 
 and its size. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 29. The Alarm, November 28, 1884. 
 
 " The Black Flag." The emblem of hunger unfolded by the porletari- 
 ans of Chicago. The red flag, borne aloft by thousands of workingmen 
 on Thanksgiving day. The poverty of the poor is created by the rob- 
 bery of the rich. Speeches, resolutions and a grand demonstration of the 
 unemployed, the tramps and miserables of the city. Significant incidents. 
 Shortly before Thanksgiving day some of the working people, after con- 
 sultation, issued the following circular to wage-workers and tramps: The 
 governor has ordained next Thursday for Thanksgiving. You are to 
 give thanks because your masters refuse you employment; because you 
 are hungry and without home or shelter, and your masters have taken 
 away what you have created and arranged to shoot you by the police or 
 militia if you refuse to die in your hovel, in due observation of " L,aw 
 and Order." You must give thanks that you face the blizzards without 
 an overcoat; .without fit shoes and clothes, while abundant clothing made 
 by you spoils in the storehouses; that you suffer hunger while millions 
 of bushels of grain rot in the elevators; for this purpose a thanksgiving 
 meeting will be held on Market square at 2:30 o'clock, to be followed by 
 a demonstration to express our thanks to our " Christian brothers on 
 Michigan avenue." Every one that feels the mockery of this Thanks- 
 giving order should be present. Signed, the Committee of the Grateful 
 Workingpeople's International Association. 
 
 Thursday opened with sleet and rain, cold and miserable. At 2:30 
 over three thousand people assembled on Market street, under the unpity- 
 ing rain and sleet. A stranger said, " What you want is guns; you don't 
 want to be heard talking." He was stopped for the regular arrange- 
 ments. The meeting being called to order, A. R. Parsons said: " We 
 assemble as representatives of the disinherited, to speak in the name of 
 forty thousand unemployed workingmen of Chicago, two millions in the 
 United States and fifteen millions in the civilized world." He compared
 
 ( '62 ) 
 
 the Thanksgiving feast to that of Belshazzar, and said the champagne 
 wrung from the blood of the poor ought to strangle the rich. He then 
 read as follows: " St. James, chapter 5, says, ' Go to now, ye rich men, 
 weep and howl for your miseries which are to come upon you. Your 
 riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and 
 silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, 
 and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasures to- 
 gether for the last days. Behold the hire of the laborers who have 
 reaped down your fields, which ye have kept back by fraud, crieth: Woe 
 to them that bring about iniquity by law.' The prophet Habakkuk says: 
 ' Woe to him that buildeth a town by blood, and establisheth a city by in- 
 iquity.' The prophet Amos says: 'Hear this, O ye that swallow up 
 the needy, even to make the poor to fail from the land, that I may buy 
 the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes.' The prophet 
 Isaiah says: ' Woe unto them that chain house to house, and lay field to 
 field, till there is no place, that they may be alone in the midst of the 
 earth.' Solomon says: 'There is a generation that are pure in their own 
 eves, and yet is not washed of their filthiness; a generation, Oh, how lifted 
 are their eyes, and how their eyelids are lifted up: A generation whose 
 teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor 
 from off the earth, and the needy from among men.' ' 
 
 And concluding, he said: We did not intend to wait for a future exist- 
 ence, but to do something for ourselves in this. 
 
 He introduced S. S. Griffin, who said this was an international 
 assembly in the interests of humanity, having no quarrel with each other 
 and objecting to being set at work by governmental scheme. Don't 
 believe that any government or system should be allowed to pit man 
 against man, for any cause; and to get at the root of these evils, we 
 must go to the foundation of property rights and the wage system. The 
 old system could not meet the demands of our present civilization. The 
 present cry is against over-production, because it operates against hu- 
 manity. Over-production, glutting the market, causes a lockout, de- 
 priving the wage class of the means of purchasing. Vacant houses stop 
 the building industry, and results in throwing builders out of employ- 
 ment; ragged because of a surplus of clothing; homeless because of too 
 many houses; hungry because there is too much bread; freezing because 
 too much coal is produced. The system must be changed. Man can 
 wear but one suit of clothes at a time and can consume only about so 
 much. The genius of our age is inventing and increasing the productive
 
 ('63) 
 
 / 
 
 power. A system that in effect tells the working classes that the more 
 they produce the less they will have to enjoy is a check on human 
 progress and cannot continue. Everything must be made free. No 
 man should control what he has no personal use for. 
 
 Upon Mr. Parsons' call the resolutions were read as follows: 
 
 WHEREAS, We have outlived wage and property system; and whereas, 
 the right of property requires more effort to adjust it between man and 
 man than to produce and distribute it, 
 
 Resolved, That property rights should no longer be maintained or 
 respected, and that all useless workers should be deprived of useless em- 
 ployment and required to engage in productive industry; and as this is 
 impossible under the payment system, 
 
 Resolved, That no man shall pay for anything, or receive pay for any- 
 thing, or deprive himself of what he may desire, that he finds out of use 
 or vacant. 
 
 Resolved, That whoever refuses to devote a reasonable amount of 
 energy to the production or distribution of necessaries is the enemy of 
 mankind and ought to be so treated; and so of the willful waster. 
 
 As this system cannot be introduced as against existing ignorance and 
 selfishness without force, Resolved that when, introduced, the good of 
 mankind and the saving of blood requires that forcible opposition shall 
 be dealt with summarily; but that no one should be harmed for holding 
 opposite opinions. 
 
 Resolved that our policy is wise, humane and practical and ought to 
 be enforced at the earliest possible moment. 
 
 As an expression of thankfulness, Resolved that we are thankful we 
 have learned the true cause of poverty and the remedies, and can only 
 be more thankful when the remedy is applied. 
 
 The next speaker was Samuel Fielden. He denounced the hypocrisy 
 of calling upon people to thank God for prosperity, while providing no 
 changes for the better, when so many were in actual want in the midst 
 of abundance. That when he was a boy, his mother taught him to say, 
 " Our Father who art in Heaven;" but so far as he knew God had re- 
 mained there and would not come here until things were better arranged. 
 Our motto is, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, embracing all men. 
 Our international movement is to unite all countries and to do away with 
 the robber class. 
 
 August Spies spoke. Pointing to the black flag, he said it was the 
 first time the emblem of hunger and starvation had been unfurled on
 
 (i6 4 ) 
 
 American soil. He said we had got to strike down these robbers who 
 were robbing the working people. 
 
 In answer to a call from the Germans, Mr. Schwab spoke in German 
 a few minutes. A stranger said, " Get your guns out and go for them. 
 That is all I have got to say." Three cheers were given for the social 
 revolution. The audience then formed a procession three thousand 
 strong and marched headed by the band playing the Marsellaise, carry- 
 ing two large flags, one black and the other red, and about midway of 
 the procession two more. Various transparencies were borne along. 
 Among them: " Workmen, organize. Liberty without equality is a lie." 
 " Private capital is the reward of robbery." " All workmen have iden- 
 tical interests." " Privilege is injustice." " No greater crime in our 
 day than poverty." " Down with wage slavery," etc. When the pro- 
 cession reached the Arbeiter Zeitung building, Mr. Parsons spoke from 
 the window, congratulating the crowd upon the success of the demon- 
 stration, introduced Fielden, who made a brief and eloquent speech and 
 said they had given fair warning. He urged them to organize and pre- 
 pare for the inevitable conflict which the capitalistic class would force 
 upon them. He said that " All nationalities and creeds were swallowed 
 up in the international, which made of all mankind a band of brothers, 
 and by securing justice to each, would bring, peace, prosperity and hap- 
 piness to all." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 30. The Alarm, November 29, 1884. 
 
 " The Property Power." So long as property is protected by law, each 
 person will use his accumulations as a weapon against the unfortunate. The 
 property power is a lever that meanness alone can acquire, inhumanity 
 alone will use. " If we would but stop to think of the real depravity of 
 the crime of withholding from the hardworking needy, and especially 
 from their little ones, we would thoroughly damn ourselves for allowing 
 it to continue." The deprivation of the poor is for the aggrandizement 
 of the rich. If there was a shadow of truth in the statement that the 
 freely giving of food, shelter and clothing to all would, in the least, take 
 away the present comforts of robbers of the so-called upper class, then 
 people could more patiently tolerate the present wickedness. 
 
 When the people wake up to the enormity of the crime of property 
 holding and propert}- manipulating, then dynamite will not be too power- 
 ful or too quick to express their hatred for those who uphold it. There 
 's no just reason why three-fourths of the world's energy should be
 
 wasted in stealing, guarding and manipulating the comforts and neces- 
 saries of life. It is no credit to a men that he spends his energies he 
 does it because he has to, is so created and cannot help it; and not to do 
 so would be pain; therefore, no man should be paid for what he pro- 
 duces, and, in justice to humanity, he who will not produce should be 
 killed. Down with this infernal nonsense that we must surely live by 
 money! We have no just use for money, or banks, brokers or insurers, 
 jailers, or any other hoodlum class who are wickedly wasting the 
 energy of their lives. No rascality or stupidity is sacred because it is 
 old. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 31. The Alarm, December 6, 1884. 
 
 " Dynamite, the protection of the poor against the armies of the rich." 
 The article again quotes from Gen. Sheridan's report of November 
 10,. 1884, as to the ease of constructing and carrying explosives, and 
 further says, a hint to the wise is sufficient. One dynamite bomb prop- 
 erly placed will destroy a regiment of soldiers. Their First regiment 
 may as well disband, for if it should ever level its guns upon the work- 
 men of Chicago, it can be annihilated. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 32. Translation of " Anarchist." 
 
 Motto: All government we hate. Organ of the autonomous group 
 of the I. A. A. Volume i. Chicago, January i, 1886. No. i. Com- 
 plaints should be sent to G. Engel, 286 Milwaukee avenue. Call. 
 Workingmen and fellows: We recognize it our duty to contend against 
 existing rule, but he who would war successfully must equip himself 
 with all implements adapted to destroy his opponents and secure victory. 
 In consideration thereof we have resolved to publish the Anarchist, as a 
 line in the fight for the disinherited. It is necessary to disseminate an- 
 archistic doctrine. As we strive for freedom from government we 
 advocate the principle of autonomy, in this sense: We strive towards the 
 overthrow of the existing order, that an end may be put to the "abhor- 
 rent work of destruction on the part of mankind, and fratricide may be 
 done away." The equality of all, without distinction of race, color or 
 nationality, is our fundamental principle, thus ending rule and servitude. 
 We reject reformatory endeavors as useless play, adding to the miserable 
 derision and oppression of the workingmen. Against the never-to-be- 
 satisfied ferocity of the capital we recommend the radical means of the 
 present age. All endeavors of the working classes not aiming at the 
 overthrow of existing conditions of ownership and at complete self-gov-
 
 (i66) 
 
 ernment are to us reactionary. The idea of the absence of authority 
 warrants that we will always carry on a fight of principles only. 
 
 Motto, second page: " For liberty we strive." 
 
 Third page. Conclusion of German prospectus, " Liberty, equality 
 and brotherhood can only be established by anarchy." Signed " F'g," 
 showing who the writer is. 
 
 On the third page, " For equality we fight. New Year's Greeting." 
 The poem is one of eight verses, of eight lines each, presenting the in- 
 equalities between poverty and wealth, and calling upon the working- 
 men to gird them for the rebuilding of the world. 
 
 On the third page of the same paper is the following: "The right to 
 live." No one can deny that man brings with him into the world the 
 right to live. But this is denied him by the property beast. He who 
 has the whip of power will brandish it over the poor. What does the 
 world offer to the poor who are compelled to carry on a mere struggle 
 for existence? Patented machinery, combined with capital and other 
 means of preservation, denies work to the workmen on account of the 
 excessive offer of working powers. Workingmen should therefore enter 
 the ranks of those who propose to set aside the present system of in- 
 equality and build up a system of equality and freedom. Let every one 
 join the International Workingmen's Association, and arm himself with 
 the best weapons of modern tfmes. 
 
 Page 3 of the same paper: " Beginnings of a reaction in America." 
 The authorities in America have hitherto refused to prosecute anarchists 
 as the European powers do, not because of hatred to despotism, but 
 from fear that the American people might be driven into anarchism. As 
 anarchists increase, however, it is intended to do away with them by 
 slow degrees. To this end a bill was introduced in Congress refusing 
 to and revoking citizenship of such. Yet the anarchist declines citizen- 
 ship because he regards himself as cosmopolitan. We hope for more 
 foolish things to open the eyes of American vvorkingmen. 
 
 From page 4 of the same paper: " Reflections of an anarchist at the 
 grave of Leiske-" After the workingman becomes a journeyman he 
 feels free, casts a glance into the world it is glorious, beautiful. He 
 thinks there is happiness for him somewhere. He proposes logo abroad, 
 but a terrible cry falls upon his ears, the outcry of a tormented people. 
 He inquires, have the pariahs of to-day a right to live? and answers yes. 
 Why otherwise born if suffered to die with hunger? And hunger and 
 poverty are the results of the stealings of the rich. Having thus con-
 
 eluded, he swears to help in the work of liberation, " In the great struggle 
 of mankind for a better condition"; to take vengeance upon those re- 
 sponsible for this misery. In his investigations he learns the utter vile- 
 ness of the police power, and a policeman is killed. Whereupon the 
 workman is arrested, charged with the murder of Rumpf and killed after 
 nearly a year of most devilish torture. With what contempt Leiske 
 met his executioners and with what heroism he went unto his death is 
 known to our fellows, and he shall be avenged. Signed, Sen - - k. 
 
 Motto on fourth page: "Thus we conquer or die." Meetings ad- 
 vertised: The south-west side group at 6n Throop street, every Satur- 
 day evening; the north-west side group every Thursday evening at 636 
 Milwaukee avenue; the Lehr und Wehr Verein, third company in Work- 
 ingmen's Hall, West i2th street, every Thursday evening, and the 
 school of discussion of the anarchists at 713 West 2Oth street, every 
 Monday evening. 
 
 Below that, anarchistic periodicals advertised: 
 
 Freiheit, John Mueller, 167 William street, New York; the Alarm, 
 107 5th avenue; Parole, 112^ South 7th street, St. Louis; Budocnost, 
 396 West iSth street; Anarchist, 585 Center avenue, Chicago; Arbeiter 
 Zeitung, Flackel, Verbote, 107 5th avenue; Proleter, 550 i6th street, 
 New York. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 33. The Alarm, December 13, 1884. 
 
 " The seat of war." The industrial war between the rich and poor is 
 daily broadening and intensifying. During the past week government 
 has resorted to military force on four occasions: At Des Moines, to 
 suppress the workingmen on a strike; at Norwalk, Conn., Straitsville, 
 Ohio, and Port Huron, Ontario, same. The property class always fall 
 back on force. To arms, fellowmen! 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 34. The Alarm, January 13, 1885: 
 
 " Force the only defense against injustice and oppression ." Because the 
 socialists advocate resistance, they are accused of brutality and want of wis- 
 dom. All men agree that themselves should not be trampled upon by others. 
 If you can compel a man to agree to allow others to exercise control over 
 him, you will find that the soldier will soon claim all you have acquired 
 for yourselves. This only teaches that it is dangerous for the wicked to 
 teach war; not so with justice. Justice can never create opposition to itself. 
 Therefore "justice is always safe in accumulating force, while injustice
 
 ( '68) 
 
 can only accumulate force at its peril." We are told force is cruel, but 
 this is only true when the opposition is less cruel. If the opposition is 
 relentless power, starving, freezing, etc., and the application of force will 
 require less suffering, then force is humane. Therefore we say that 
 dynamite is both humane and economical. It will, at the expense of less 
 suffering, prevent more. It is not humane to compel ten persons to starve 
 to death, when the execution of five persons would prevent it. " A system 
 that is starving and freezing tens of thousands of little children, in the 
 midst of a world of plenty, cannot be defended against dynamiters on 
 the ground of humanity." " If every child that starved to death in the 
 United States was retaliated for by the execution of a rich man in his 
 own parlor, the brutal system of wage property would not last six 
 weeks." " It is a wonder that a father, after his vain search for bread, 
 see his little ones starve or freeze, without striking that vengeful, just 
 and bloody blow at the cause that would prevent other little ones suffer- 
 ing a similar fate. It is not probable that men will always endure this 
 cruel, relentless process of monopoly and competition." 
 
 " The privileged class use force to perpetuate their power, and the 
 despoiled workers must use force to prevent it." Signed C. S. G. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 35. The Alarm, Jannuary 24, 1885. 
 
 " Wage workers." Michael Schwab spoke in German, that the gap 
 between the rich and the poor was growing wider, therefore socialism 
 had arisen. The poor had to labor too long to properly educate himself. 
 He spoke of Reinsdorff as a martyr to the cause, whose death was 
 avenged by the killing of Rumpf. 
 
 " It was no wonder that socialism should prosper, when people learned 
 how cruel capital was." That murder was forced on manv through 
 misery and want, produced by the tyranny of capital. That freedom in 
 this country was unknown, both political parties being corrupt, and that 
 what was needed was a bloody revolution which would right their 
 wrongs. 
 
 August Spies spoke in German and advised immediate revolt. Wage 
 slaver}' could only be abolished through powder and ball. No reform 
 could be secured through the medium of the ballot, which was a mere 
 game of cards, in which a cold deck was wrung in on the innocent voter 
 by the capitalistic class. The ballot was a humbug and a fraud so far as 
 accomplishing reform for the workingman was concerned. He alluded 
 to the tyranny of capital as shown in the Hocking Valley and at South
 
 (:6 9 ) 
 
 Bend, where they charged that men were robbed and compelled to starve 
 en masse, and when they demurred, were shot down like dogs. They 
 should bring about the reform by force. They should inform themselves 
 and bring about emancipation of the wage slaves. 
 
 Spies offered a resolution, which was adopted, applauding the slaying 
 of Rumpf as a spy. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 36. The Alarm, February 7, 1885. 
 
 " Notice." Hereafter articles in the Alarm will be signed by the ini- 
 tials of the author. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 37. The Alarm, February 7, 1885. 
 
 " The war cry." A poem of five verses, signed Gorsuch. Describes 
 briefly the contest between wage-workers and capital and speaks of 
 dynamite as a delivering power. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 38. The Alarm, February 21, 1885. 
 
 " The dynamite terror." There is first quoted a passage from Swin- 
 ton's paper, claiming that the ballot furnishes the remedy for all political 
 evils in this country; then expresses surprise at the idea, and proceeds: 
 " America is not a free country. A wage slave is a slave everywhere. 
 How can the industrially enslaved be politically free? Only the hand 
 which holds the bread can wield the ballot. Political changes do not 
 bring deliverance to the wage slaves nor changes in the personnel of the 
 office-holders. The poor have no votes; wealth alone can vote. The 
 poor are deprived of the means of existence, opportunity to acquire 
 knowledge and culture and refinement; and for the perpetuation of these 
 evils they have to thank the government, the ballot-box and the politi- 
 cians, and these are the results of the wage-slavery system." "The 
 deep-rooted, malignant evil which compels the wealth-producers to be- 
 come the defendant hirelings of a few capitalistic czars, cannot be reached 
 by means of the ballot." Slaves can only revolt. Here, as elsewhere, 
 the worker is held in economic bondage by force, and force only can 
 emancipate it. P. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 39. The Alarm, February 21, 1881. 
 
 " Dynamite." Dynamite is the good stuff"; in giving it to the down- 
 trodden millions, science has done its best work. It can be carried about 
 in the pocket without danger, while it is a formidable weapon against
 
 (170) 
 
 force, which would stifle the cry for justice which comes forth from the 
 plundered slaves not ornamental, but useful. It is a boon for the dis- 
 inherited, while it brings terror to the robbers, but it brings terror only 
 to the guilty. You cannot prohibit its manufacture successfully. A 
 pound of this good stuff beats a bushel of bullets. "It takes more just- 
 ice and right than is contained in laws to quiet the sprit of unrest." The 
 sledge to shatter every link is dynamite. 
 
 INDIANAPOL T S, IND. T. LIZIUS. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 40. From the Alarm, March 7, 1885. 
 
 " Our Agitators." The agitation trips of Comrades Gorsuch, Fielclen 
 and Griffin during the past two weeks, was prolific of good results. 
 Twelve American groups were organized in different cities, and those 
 united with the international are working " to bring into the ranks of the 
 revolutionary army the proletariats of the contiguous districts. The 
 Workingpeople's International Association now embraces eighty groups, 
 scattered all over the United States, mainly in centers of industry, from 
 which the propagandism radiates everywhere, the membership being 
 many thousands. In Chicago, with thousands of members, five newspa- 
 pers, with increasing circulations, are published. The good work goes 
 bravely on, and exertions should be redoubled. 
 
 " Agitation for the purpose of organization; organization for the pur- 
 pose of rebellion against wage slavery, is the duty of the hour." 
 Signed " P." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 41. From the Alarm, March 21, 1885. 
 
 " How to make dynamite." The next issue of the Alarm will begin 
 the publication of a series of articles on the manufacture and use of 
 dynamite, of bombs, etc. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 42, from the Alarm of April 18, 1885. 
 
 " Assassination." " Assassination is stigmatized as barbarous and 
 cowardly, which is sometimes true, but there are instances in which it is 
 brave, humane and wise. Governments cannot be abolished by accepted 
 methods, because it requires an organized government for the contest. 
 The abolition of government suggests the picture of diverse petty gov- 
 ernments resulting and contending with one another. This fact sug- 
 gests the destruction of government in such manner as to prevent the 
 organization of other governments. This can only be done by assassi-
 
 nating the heads of governments, and thus preventing such organization. 
 Such is the policy of the nihilist of Russia. Governments least offensive 
 should be destroyed last. All governments exist by the abridgment of 
 human liberty. Domineering powers should be treated as enemies. 
 Assassination will remove the evil. Man will always need officers, 
 teachers, leaders, but not bosses, jailers or drivers. Man's leader is his 
 friend, his driver, his enemy. Assassination, properly applied, is wise, 
 humane and brave. For freedom all things are just." Signed " G." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT, 43. From the Alarm of April 18, 1885. 
 
 " Explosives." " The power of dynamite, as illustrated by blasting 
 exercises. (Translated from Freiheit by A. A.)" 
 
 The translation is substantially the same as a portion of the contents of 
 Most's book, presenting the results of the experiments by the Austrian 
 government, etc., etc. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 44. From the Alarm of May 2, 1885. 
 
 " Bombs." The manufacture and use of the deadly dynamite bomb 
 made easy. The weapon of the social revolutionists falls within the 
 reach of all. The terror of tyrants. (Translation from Freiheit by 
 A. A.)" 
 
 This exhibit, we believe, is substantially the same as that portion of 
 Most's book treating upon the manufacture of different styles of dyna- 
 mite bombs. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 45. From the Alarm of June 27, 1885. 
 
 " Dynamite." Instructions regarding its use and operations. 
 
 " Though every one speaks of dynamite, few know its character. To 
 those who will sooner or later be forced to employ its destructive quali- 
 ties for their rights, as men and for their preservation, a few hints may 
 not be of out place." With proper care dynamite may be safely handled. 
 It is known in the market as giant powder, and is a mixture of nitro- 
 glycerine with clay or sawdust. The mixture requires a chemist, being 
 dangerous. Revolutionists should buy dynamite ready made. It is 
 cheap and can be purchased from any large powder concern. It explodes 
 at a temperature of 180 degrees Fahrenheit, and from violent concussion. 
 It ought not to be exposed to the rays of the sun or placed near a stove. 
 The best storage is, wrap in oil paper, place in a box of sawdust and 
 bury where it cannot be touched. Do not thaw frozen dynamite, and be
 
 (I 7 2) 
 
 careful not to get any of the dynamite upon your lips or skin, as it will 
 give a headache. In filling bombs use a rubber mitten and tie a hand- 
 kerchief over the mouth to prevent inhaling dangerous gases. Never 
 be careless. Keep pure and avoid sand. The revolutionst should prac- 
 tice throwing bombs. For further information, address A. S., Alarm, 
 
 107 5th avenue, Chicago. 
 
 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 46. From the Alarm of May 30, 1885. 
 
 " War with all means." (Translation from Freiheit.) Substantially 
 the same as that portion of Most's book in reference to the use of com- 
 bustibles, found on pages 30 to 32 of People's Exhibit 15. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 47. From the Alarm, June 13, 1885. 
 
 " Explosives." " Recent experiments have greatly increased the ex- 
 plosive power of gun-cotton. The following from Johnson Turner's 
 work of chemistry will prove valuable. After washing the gun-cotton 
 in light soda lye and rinsing in clean water, soak in a solution of chlorate 
 of potash before drying. This will make its explosive power equal to 
 dynamite. Signed A. A," 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 48. From the Alarm, July 25, 1885. 
 
 " Street fighting." How to meet the enemy. Some valuable hints 
 for the revolutionary soldiers. What an officer of the United States 
 army has to say. The following letter, published in the San Francisco 
 Truth some time ago, will be read with interest. The letter is quoted 
 as follows, in substance: "I am an officer in the army of the United 
 States, and know whereof I write. John Upton said to me, with great 
 earnestness, that the day of armies is passing away. I believe this. 
 This introduces my subject. I desire to place the details of the science 
 of butchery before the people; to point out its weak points, so that in 
 future uprisings the people may stand some chance of winning. They 
 have for the past twenty years been overcome only because of their own 
 ignorance. They have been slaughtered and subdued because of a lack 
 of coolness, want of knowledge, and adht j rence to what is called ' hu- 
 manity,' ' honorable warfare,' etc. I assume that my readers agree with 
 me that against tyrants all means are legitimate, and that in war that 
 course is best, though bloodiest, which soonest ends the contest. My 
 purpose is to persuade the people to add a little common sense in future 
 to their gallant heroism, and thus insure success.
 
 United States and state regiments are organized on the unit of fours, 
 which permits the most rapid and effective change of front that can be 
 devised. The art of war consists in making soldiers fight. The line of 
 retreat must be kept open to avoid capture. In future revolts the peo- 
 ple shall assume the aggressive. Army officers have wasted years of 
 study over the problem of street fighting, unavailingly. The plan below 
 shows a method now adopted as best. The troops are formed on the 
 street in two bodies in column of four, headed by a gatling gun. On 
 the sidewalk a line of skirmishers and sharpshooters, whose duty it is to 
 fire into the houses, the whole advancing cautiously. When a cross 
 street is reached, a company is left to hold it, in order to keep open the 
 avenue of retreat. Military knowledge has become popularized since 
 1877, and now, in almost any contest, it would be easy to find some fair 
 leaders of the people who would devise some means of meeting such an 
 advance, as indicated by the following diagram. The diagram repre- 
 sents a street corner. The plan is, at the street crossing to have bodies 
 of revolutionists with movable barracks placed obliquely on the cross 
 street, and who from there will fire vigorously upon the advancing col- 
 umn. They have supporters also in the building, also at the corner, 
 whose duty it is to throw dynamite upon the troops. If the position is 
 carried, the party defending escape through the cross street. The rear 
 of the column can also be attacked from the cross streets. " If the men 
 in the barricades are armed with the new international dynamite rifle 
 (which I am told exists in the hands of the revolutionists), I give it as a 
 careful technical opinion, that, pursuing these tactics under brave and 
 able leaders, fifty men can hold at bay and finally destroy in any of your 
 cities an attacking force of five thousand troops." Signed " R. S. S." 
 Alcatraz Island, December 8. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 49. From the Alarm of August 22, 1885. 
 
 " Wage slavery." " The private property system has doomed mill- 
 ions to enforced idleness and slow starvation in the United States. These 
 unemployed wage slaves, more wretched than the chattel slave, can find 
 no master willing to give them work or bread. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT No. 50. The Alarm, September 5th, 1885. 
 
 " Eight Hours." Our Reply. Will the rich help to bring it about, 
 or oppose it with starvation, prisons and cold steel? Will increasing 
 machinery increase the number of unemployed? Shortening the hours
 
 (^74) 
 
 of labor is no real remedy. It still leaves wage slavery, and there can- 
 not be any peace under that master and servant system. The power to 
 accumulate is not equally bestowed, and as no man has made himself, no 
 one is to blame for a want of this power; nor is it a virtue in him who 
 possesses it. " A man gets rich by meanness and remains poor because 
 he is generous." How long can we endure a system that rewards mean- 
 ness and starves generosity? Can you shorten the hours? Will they 
 help to bring about a condition where there are no unemployed men, to 
 be called upon by them in their effort to force down wages by the pro- 
 cess of competition? Private property makes competition necessary, and 
 monopoly results. We must strike at the root of the evil, and all short 
 of this is useless patchwork. It is foolish to quarrel about the odds and 
 ends of a bad system, but we must have patience with the humble 
 minded. 
 
 The Alarm does not antagonize the eight-hour movement. It simply 
 says that it will be inefficient. In England the shortening of the hours of 
 labor was immediately followed by a general increase of machines and a 
 subsequent discharge of a proportionate number of employes, whereby 
 the exploitation of those at work was intensified, they now performing 
 more labor than before. The eight-hour system would result in further 
 breaking down small manufacturers and increasing the larger establish- 
 ments, while over-production would still remain. It is said that capital 
 is rightfully a servant of labor, and when it oversteps its bounds becomes 
 a trespasser. But capital is not the servant of labor, but of its possessor. 
 
 " In regard to the proposed strike next spring, a few practical words. 
 There are eight hundred thousand organized workers in the country, and 
 about two million unemployed men. When the demand is made, it will 
 be denied, and the employers will draw from this army of the unem- 
 ployed. The strikers will attempt to stop them. Then comes the 
 police and the militia. Say, workingmen, are you prepared to meet the 
 latter? are you armed?" Signed " A." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 51. The Alarm, October 17, 1885. 
 
 " Eight Hours. Trades unions gather in mass meeting at Turner 
 Hall. They prepare for the inauguration of the eight-hour working day. 
 Resolutions to arm and defend themselves against the starvation, prisons 
 and cold steel of capitalists." 
 
 Samuel Fielden, the first speaker, reviewed the conditions existing 
 between capital and labor, as evidenced by strikes, etc., dwelt upon the
 
 grinding tyrrany of capital, referred to the St. Louis strike, and the 
 policy pursued by the owners of the Pullman car works to prevent 
 organization of skilled labor, although the capitalists themselves organ- 
 ize and band together. The Saginaw lumber owners asked their em- 
 ployes to agree even not to appeal to the law. The capitalist can destroy 
 the satisfactory working of the eight-hour law. The real remedy is the 
 abolition of the right of private property. The eight-hour law on the 
 statute books of Illinois is a dead-letter. These things show that the 
 wage-worker must look, not to the law, but to themselves to assert their 
 rights. August Spies introduced resolutions, reciting that, whereas, it 
 was believed that the capitalists would oppose the eight-hour movement, 
 calling to their assistance the Pinkerton's police and state militia; there- 
 fore, resolved, that wage-workers be urged to prepare to meet their 
 enemies with their own argument, force. That while skeptical as to the 
 results of an eight-hour day, they yet pledged themselves to co-operate 
 to bring it to pass, and to combine with their brethren in the class 
 struggle against the aristocratic class: the brutal murderers of comrades 
 in St. Louis, Lemont, Philadelphia, Chicago and elsewhere, and that 
 our war-cry may be " Death to the enemy of the human race, our de- 
 stroyers." Mr. Spies said that with nine million people in this country 
 in industrial trades, only one million of them organized, and with two 
 million unemployed people, the movement to be made successful must 
 be revolutionary. " Don't let us," he exclaimed, " forget the most forci- 
 ble argument of all the gun and dynamite." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 52. From the Alarm, May 2, 1885. 
 
 " Our Vampires." At the conclusion of Mr. Fielden's speech, Mr. 
 Parsons said: At 5 o'clock this morning one hundred thousand wage- 
 workers in Chicago rose, and after their frugal breakfast went to their 
 factories, where they gave from ten to sixteen hours for wages barely 
 sufficient for subsistence. Twenty thousand able-bodied men, unem- 
 ployed, tramped the streets, unable to find employment. To-night the 
 robbers of labor's product are dedicating a temple to the God of Mam- 
 mon, to be used to plunder the people. We have met, as anarchists and 
 communists, to protest against the methods and practices of the existing 
 society. The board of trade is an institution devoted to making the 
 food of the people dear and scarce dedicated to chicanery and legalized 
 theft. It runs corners and manipulates prices. There is not a stone in 
 the building that has not been carved out of the flesh and blood of labor
 
 (i 7 6) 
 
 and cemented by the tears of the women and children of toil. The 
 practices of these men send our little ones supperless to bed and bring 
 wretchedness where peace and plenty should prevail. Is not our natural 
 right to life, liberty and happiness equal to any one else's? But the 
 present private property system creates classes and inequalities, " con- 
 ferring upon the holders of property the power to live upon the labor 
 product of the propertyless. Whoever owns our bread owns our bal- 
 lots, for a man who must sell his labor or starve must sell his vote when 
 the same alternative is presented." This conspiracy is maintained by 
 statute law and enforced by military arms. If we would achieve our 
 liberties, we must arm ourselves, then raise the standard of revolt, the 
 scarlet banner of liberty, fraternity and equality, and strike down every 
 tyrant. Therefore, agitate for the purpose of organization, organize for 
 the purpose of rebellion, for wage slaves have nothing to lose but their 
 
 chains; they have a world of freedom and happiness to win. 
 
 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 54. 
 
 The following advertisement, contained in the Alarm, from August 
 17, 1885, to its last issue: " The armed section of the American group 
 meets every Monday night at 54 West Lake street." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 54. From the Alarm, December 26, 1865. 
 
 " (A free translation from the German.) Bakunin's groundwork for 
 the social revolution. A revolutionist's duty to himself." 
 
 1. The revolutionist is self-offered; has no personal interest, but is 
 absorbed by the one passion, the revolution. 
 
 2. He is at war with the existing order of society and lives to 
 destroy it. 
 
 3. He despises society in its present form and leaves its reorganiza- 
 tion to the future, himself knowing only the science of destruction. He 
 studies mathematics, chemistry, etc., for this purpose. The 'quick and 
 sure overthrow of the present unreasonable order is his object. 
 
 4. He despises public sentiment and acknowledges as moral whatever 
 favors the revolution; as criminal whatever opposes it. 
 
 5. He is consecrated; he will not spare, nor does he expect mercy. 
 Between him and society reigns the war of death or life. 
 
 6. Stringent with himself, he must be stringent with others. All 
 sentiment must be suppressed by his passion for the revolutionary work. 
 He must be ready to die and to kill.
 
 (i77) 
 
 7. He excludes romance and sentiment and also personal hatred and 
 revenge; never obeying his personal inclinations, but his revolutionary 
 duty. 
 
 TOWARD HIS COMRADES. 
 
 8. His friendship is only for his comrade, and is measured by that 
 comrade's usefulness in the practical work in the revolution. 
 
 9. As to important affairs, he must consult with his comrades, but in 
 execution depend upon himself. Each must be self-operating, and must 
 ask help only when imperatively necessary. 
 
 10. He shall use himself and his subordinates as capital to be used 
 for the work of the revolution, but no part of which can he dispose of 
 without the consent of the persons involved. 
 
 11. If a comrade is in danger, he shall not consider his personal feel- 
 ings, but the interest of the cause. 
 
 HIS DUTY TOWARD SOCIETY. 
 
 12. A new candidate can be taken into the company only after proof 
 of his merit, and upon unanimous consent. 
 
 13. He lives in the so-called civilized world because he believes- 
 in its speedy destruction. He clings to nothing as it now is, and 
 does not hesitate to destroy any institution. He is no revolutionist if ar- 
 rested by personal ties. 
 
 14. He must obtain entrance everywhere, even in the detective 
 agency and the emperor's palace. 
 
 15. The present society should be divided into categories, the first in- 
 cluding those sentenced to immediate death, the others classifying the de- 
 linquents according to their rascality. 
 
 1 6. The lists are not to be influenced by personal considerations, but 
 those are to be first destroyed whose death can terrify governments and 
 deprive them of their most intelligent agents. 
 
 17. The second category embraces those permitted to live, but whose 
 evil deeds will drive the people to open revolt. | 
 
 18. The third category embraces the dissolute rich whose secrets 
 must be discovered in order to control their resources. 
 
 19. The fourth category consists of ambitious officials and liberals 
 whose purposes we must discover so as to prevent their withdrawing 
 from our cause. 
 
 20. The fifth category consists of doctrinaire conspirators; they must 
 be urged to action.
 
 (178) 
 
 2i. The sixth category is the women, who are divided into three 
 classes: First, the brainless and heartless; second, the passionate and 
 qualified; and, third, the wholly consecrated, who are to be guarded as 
 the most valuable part of the revolutionary treasures. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 55. From the Alarm, February 6, 1886. 
 
 Capt. Bonfield has written that but for his interference and clubbing 
 in the July carmen's strike, many an American sovereign would now be 
 in a felon's grave. " Paste this in your hats, American sovereigns." 
 That a felon's cell or grave awaits you as soon -as you try to exercise 
 your rights. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 56. From the Alarm of January 9th, 1885. 
 
 " Bureau of information," designated to act for the ensuing year, con- 
 sisting of Joseph Back, B. Rau, August Spies, A. R. Parsons and 
 Hirschberger. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 57. From the Alarm, March 20, 1886. Note on third 
 
 page. 
 
 Argument is useless unless you can compel your antagonist to listen. 
 When he refuses, force becomes necessary. 
 
 PEOPLES' EXHIBIT 58. From the Alarm of April 3, 1886. 
 
 " American group," etc. " Mr. Parsons thought the organization 
 of the vast body of unskilled and unorganized laboring men 
 and women a necessity, in order that they formulate their demands and 
 make an effective defense of their right. He thought the 
 attempt to inaugurate the eight-hour system would break down the 
 capitalistic system, and bring about such disorder and hardship that the 
 social revolution would become a necessity. As all roads in ancient 
 times led to Rome, so now all labor movements of whatever character 
 inevitably lead to socialism." The unskilled laborers' eight-hour league 
 was then organized, thirty joining. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 59. From the Alarm of April 24, 1886. 
 
 " Workingmen, to Arms." " War to the palace, peace to the cottage 
 and death to luxurious idleness. The wage system is the only cause of 
 the world's misery. 
 
 " One pound of dynamite is better than a bushel of bullets. Make
 
 your demand for eight hours with weapons in your hands to meet the 
 capitalistic blood-hounds, police and militia in proper manner." 
 
 Above handbill, sent from Indianapolis, Indiana, as posted all over 
 that city last week. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 60. From the Alarm April 24, 1886. 
 Same as People's Exhibit 56. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 6oA. 
 
 The sensible laboring man, in the eye of the extortionist, is a fellow 
 who lets his family starve to please his boss; a coward who crawls 
 when men are needed; a ragamuffin who kisses the rod. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 61. From the Alarm, April 24, 1886. 
 
 " Knaves or fools." In the contest between labor and capital now in 
 progress, pretended leaders deprecate the use by the toiling masses of 
 the only weapons which they possess against capitalistic conspiracy, and 
 organized murder, starvation and wage slavery. These creatures de- 
 sire place for themselves, or are tickled by being quoted as leaders. 
 They play the role of harmonizers and peacemakers between wage 
 slaves and their despoilers. The toiling masses never authorized Mr. 
 Powderly to issue a proclamation against the eight-hour movement, nor 
 to forbid strikes or boycots. " The social war has come, and whoever 
 is not with us is against us." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 61 A. 
 
 Refers to the Haymarket meeting, and calls upon the people to be 
 present. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 62. 
 
 Same as page 32 of Herr Most's book. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 63. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of May 4th 
 
 (local column). 
 
 " Blood." " Lead and powder as a cure for dissatisfied workinginen. 
 About six laborers mortally, and four times that number slightly, 
 wounded. Thus are the eight-hour men intimidated! This is law and 
 order! Brave girls parading the city! The law and order beasts frighten 
 the hungry children away with clubs. General news." 
 
 Six months ago, when the eight-hour movement began, representa-
 
 (,8o) 
 
 lives of the I. A. A. called upon workmen to arm if they would enforce 
 their demand. Would the occurrence of yesterday have been possible 
 had that advice been followed? Yesterday, at McCormick's factory, so 
 far as can now be ascertained, four workmen were killed and twenty- 
 five more or less seriously wounded. " If members who defended them- 
 selves with stones (a few of them had little snappers in the shape of re- 
 volvers), had been provided with good weapons and one single dynamite 
 bomb, not one of the murderers would have escaped his well-merited 
 fate." This massacre was to fill the workmen of this city with fear. 
 Will it succeed? 
 
 A meeting of the' lumber employes was held yesterday at the Black 
 road to appoint a committee to wait on the committee of the owners 
 and present the demands agreed upon. It was an immense meeting. 
 Several speeches were made in English, German and Polish. Finally 
 Mr. Spies was introduced, when a Pole cried, " That is a socialist," and 
 great disapprobation was expressed, but the speaker continued telling them 
 that they must realize their strength, and must not recede from their de- 
 mands; that the issue lay in their hands, and needed only resolution upon 
 their part. 
 
 At this point some one cried, " On to McCormick's. Let us drive oft 
 the scabs," and about two hundred ran towards McCormick's. The 
 speaker, not knowing what occurred, continued his speech, and was ap- 
 pointed afterwards a member of the committee to notify the bosses of 
 the action. 
 
 Then a Pole spoke, when a patrol wagon rushed up to McCormick's, 
 and the crowd began to break up. Shortly shots were heard near Mc- 
 Cormick's factory, and about seventy-five well-fed, large and strong 
 murderers, under the command of a fat police lieutenant, marched by, 
 followed by three more patrol wagons full of law and order beasts. Two 
 hundred police were there in less than ten minutes, " firing on fleeing work- 
 ingmen and women." The writer hastened to the factory, while a com- 
 rade urged the assembly to rescue their brothers, unavailingly. A young , 
 
 Irishman said to the writer: " What miserable ( ) are those who 
 
 will not turn a hand while their brothers are being shot down in cold 
 blood! We have dragged away two. I think they are dead. If you 
 have any influence with the people, for Heaven's sake, run back and 
 urge them to follow you." The writer did so in vain. The revolvers 
 were still cracking; fresh policemen arriving; and the battle was lost. 
 It was about half-past 3 that the little crowd from the meeting reached
 
 McCormick's factory. Policeman West tried to hold them back with . 
 his revolver, but was put to flight with a shower of stones and roughly 
 handled. The crowd bombarded the factory windows with stones and 
 demolished the guard house. The scabs were in mortal terror when the 
 Hinman street patrol wagon arrived. They were about to attack the 
 crowd with their clubs when a shower of stones was thrown, followed 
 the next minute by the firing by the police upon the strikers. It was 
 pretended subsequently that they fired over their heads. The strikers 
 had a few revolvers and returned the fire. Meantime, more police ar- 
 rived and then the whole band opened fire on the people. The people 
 fought with stones, and are said to have disabled four policemen. The 
 gang, as always, fired upon the fleeing, while women and men carried 
 away the severly wounded. How many were injured cannot be told. 
 A dying boy, Joseph Doebick, was brought home on an express wagon by 
 two policemen. The crowd threatened to lynch the officer, but were 
 prevented by a patrol wagon. Various strikers were arrested. Mc- 
 Cormick said that August Spies made a speech to a few thousand an- 
 archists and then put himself at the head of a crowd and attacked our 
 works. Our workmen fled and meantime the police came and sent a 
 lot of anarchists away with bleeding heads. 
 
 Last night thousands of copies of the following circular were dis- 
 tributed in all parts of the city. 
 
 Then follows a translation of the German part of the Revenge circular, 
 as follows: 
 
 "Revenge! Revenge! Workmen to arms! 
 
 " Men of labor, this afternoon the blood-hounds of your oppressors 
 murdered six of your brothers at McCormick's. Why did they murder 
 them? Because they dared to be dissatisfied with the lot which your 
 oppressors have assigned to them. They demanded bread, and they 
 gave them lead for an answer, mindful of the fact that thus people are 
 most effectually silenced. You have for many years endured every hu- 
 miliation without protest, have drudged from early in the morning until 
 late at night, have suffered all sorts of privations, have even sacrificed 
 your children. You have done everything to fill the coffers of your 
 masters everything for them! And now, when vou approach them 
 and implore them to make your burden a little lighter, as a reward for 
 your sacrifices, they send their blood-hounds, the police, at you, in order 
 to cure you with bullets of your dissatisfaction. Slaves, we ask and 
 conjure you, by all that is sacred and dear to you, avenge the atrocious
 
 (182) 
 
 murder that has been committed upon your brothers to-day and which 
 will likely be committed upon you to-morrow. Laboring men, Hercules, 
 you have arrived at the crossway. Which way will you decide? 
 For slavery and hunger or for freedom and bread? If you decide for 
 the latter, then do not delay a moment; then; people, to arms! Annihi- 
 lation to the beasts in human form who call themselves rulers! Un- 
 compromising annihilation to them! This must be your motto. Think 
 of the heroes whose blood has fertilized the road to progress, liberty and 
 humanity, and strive to become worthy of them! 
 
 "Youa BROTHERS." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 63 A. Arbeiter Zeitung, May i. 
 
 " Bravely forward." The conflict has begun. An arm}' of wage la- 
 borers are idle. Capitalism conceals its tiger claws behind the ramparts 
 of order. Workmen, let your watchword be: No compromise! Cow- 
 ards to the rear! Men, to the front. The die is cast. The ist of May 
 has come. For twenty years the working people have been begging 
 extortioners to introduce the eight-hour system, but have been put oft 
 with promises. Two years ago they resolved that the eight-hour system 
 should be introduced in the United States on the first day of May, 1886. 
 The reasonableness of this demand was conceded on all hands. Every- 
 body, apparently, was in favor of shortening the hours, but as the time 
 approached a change became apparent. That which was in theory 
 modest and reasonable became insolent and unreasonable. It became 
 apparent at last that the eight-hour hymn had only been struck up to 
 keep the labor dunces from socialism. 
 
 That the laborers might energetically insist upon the eight-hour move- 
 ment never occurred to the employers. And it is proposed again to put 
 them off with promises. -We are not afraid of the masses of laborers, 
 but of their pretended leaders. Workmen, insist upon the eight-hour 
 movement. "To all appearances it will not pass off" smoothly." The 
 extortioners are determined to bring their laborers back to servitude 
 by starvation. It is a question whether the workmen will submit or will 
 impart to their would-be murderers an appreciation of modern views. 
 We hope the latter. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 24. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, May 4, 1886. 
 
 Heroes of the club with their cudgels in a brutal manner yesterday dis- 
 persed a crowd of girls. Many of them had scarcely outgrown their
 
 baby-shoes. Whose blood does not rush quicker when he hears of this 
 atrocity? Men, to the front! 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 64A- From Verbote of May 5. 
 
 " To Arms." As we go to press the law-and-order rabble are shoot- 
 ing down our brothers in the vicinity of McCormick's factory. Details 
 are wanted. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 65. From the editorial notices Arbeiter Zeitung, 
 
 May 4, 1866. 
 
 The reports of the capitalistic press were dictated by the police. The 
 reporters skedaddled at McCormick's. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 66. From the editorial notices Arbeiter Zeitung, 
 
 May 4. 
 
 The armory is guarded by militia tramps. As long as the youngsters 
 stay in their barracks they will probably not be molested, but if they ap- 
 pear on the streets it might be otherwise. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 67. 
 
 Milwaukee was yesterday the scene of labor riots. " You will never 
 bring about the eight-hour system in your Sunday clothes and by parad- 
 ing the streets." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 68. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, local column, May 3. 
 
 "A Hot Conflict. The determination of the radical elements brings 
 the extortioners in numerous instances to terms. The capitalistic press 
 has good grounds for abusing the Reds. Without them no agitation." 
 
 The general situation at noon to-day, encouraging. A number of cap- 
 italists have capitulated and others are looked for. The freight-handlers 
 are marching from depot to depot and the police are entrenched in the 
 armory. The laborers in the stone-yards have formed a union, and went 
 on a strike upon the refusal of their demand of nine hours' pay for eight 
 hour's work. A strike will probably lake place in the lumber districts, 
 etc. 
 
 Courage, courage is our cry. Don't forget the words of Herways: 
 " The host of the oppressors grows pale, when thou, weary of thy 
 burden, in the corner puttest the plow; when thou sayest 'it is 
 enough.' ''
 
 ( '84 ) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 69. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, April 28, 1886. 
 
 Editorial on the second page. 
 
 " In quiet times the shackles of law were forged, to apply them in tem- 
 pestuous times. An effort is made to build a wall against the stream of 
 the laborers' movement, by using their musty law books. We will break 
 these. The power of associate manufacturers must be met by labor 
 associations. The police and soldiers who fight for that power must be 
 met bv armed bodies of workingmen. Stones and sticks will not avail 
 against the assassins of the extortionists. It is time to arm yourselves 
 by firearms. The eight-hour movement is modest, yet the capitalists 
 rage and threaten with their police and militia. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 70. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of April 2pth. Edi- 
 torial notice, first page. 
 
 " When legitimate means are exhausted the extortioners resort to force. 
 A wage slave, not utterly demoralized, should have a breach-loader and 
 ammunition." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 71. From the Arbeiter Zeitung local column, 
 
 April 3oth. 
 
 "' What will the ist of May bring? The workingmen bold and deter- 
 mined.' The decisive day has arrived. The workingman, inspired by 
 the justice of his cause, demands ah alleviation of his lot, a lessening of 
 his burden. The answer, as always is: ' Insolent rabble! Do you mean 
 to dictate to us? That you will do to your sorrow. Hunger will soon 
 rid you of your desire for any notions of liberty. Police, executioners 
 and militia will give their aid.' Men of labor, so long as you acknowledge 
 the gracious kicks of your oppressors with words of gratitude, so long 
 you are faithful dogs. Have your skulls been penetrated by a ray of 
 light, or does hunger drive you to shake off your servile nature, you 
 offend your extortioners. They are enraged, and will attempt, through 
 hired murderers, to do away with you like mad dogs. In this grand 
 struggle for existence on the part of the people, it is claimed that the 
 whole movement is instigated by a few German communists. They do 
 not deserve the compliment. It is true that the intellectual thought under- 
 lying the modern labor movement is socialism, and that communists have 
 a hand in the game, but it is the people who in their obscure aspiration 
 follow on the ladder of historical development, conscious of the true 
 way. The masses simply act under the law of necessity."
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 72. From Die Fackel of May 2d. 
 
 " Now or never. The mortal enemies cross swords. The most 
 modest demands of the bees of labor insolently refused by the drones. 
 Numerous strikes." 
 
 Let us review the situation of the contending forces. Fanatics have 
 said that the modest eight-hour demand would meet no serious opposi- 
 tion. But, as we always predicted, the proprietor class make no conces- 
 sions it only yields to force. The exception does not change the rule. 
 Even where workmen propose to accept a corresponding reduction of 
 wages, their appeal for a reduction of hours is denied. In the face of 
 these facts, it is treacherous to warn workmen against energetic measures. 
 Everything depends upon quick and immediate action. The tactics of 
 the strikers must be to grant no time. The battle must be won imme- 
 diately or not at all. To accept the nine hours is to defeat the eight- 
 hour system. The feeling among' radical labor organizations is en- 
 couraging. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 73. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, May 4. Editorial. 
 
 " Blood has flown." It happened as it had to. The militia have not 
 been drilling in vain. It is historical that private property had its origin 
 in violence. The war of classes has come. Yesterday, in front of Mc- 
 Cormick's factory, workmen were shot down whose blood cries for ven- 
 geance. In the past countless victims have been offered on the altars of the 
 golden calf amid the shouts of capitalistic robbers. One has only to think 
 of East St. Louis, Chicago and other places, to recognize the tactics of 
 the extortioners. The while terror will be answered with the red, for 
 the workmen are not asleep. They modestly asked for eight hours. The 
 answer was to drill the police force and militia, and browbeat those ad- 
 vocating the change. And yesterday blood flowed the reply of these 
 devils to this modest petition of their slaves. Death rather than a life of 
 wretchedness. The capitalistic tiger lies ready for the jump, his eyes 
 sparkling, eager for murder, and his clutches drawn tight. Self-defense 
 cries, " To arms, to arms." If you do not defend yourselves you will be 
 ground by the animal's teeth. 
 
 The powers hostile to the workingmen have made common cause, and 
 our differences must be subordinated to the common purpose. The state- 
 ment of the capitalistic press, that the workmen yesterday fired first, is a 
 bold, barefaced lie. 
 
 In the poor shanty miserably clad women and children are weeping
 
 (,86) 
 
 for husband and father. In the palace they touch glasses filled with 
 costly wine and drink to the happiness of the bloody bandits of law and 
 order. Dry your tears, ye poor and wretched; take heart, ye slaves; 
 arise in your might and overthrow the system of robbery. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 74. 
 
 An outbreak was expected in the south-west side this morning, and the 
 entire force was held ready. Stir, free workmen, if you want to be shot 
 down. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 75. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, October 8, 1885. 
 
 All organized workingmen should engage in a general prosecution of 
 Pinkerton's secret police. Every day somewhere one of their carcasses 
 should be found. This should be kept up until nobody would consent to 
 become the blood-hound of these assassins. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 76. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, October 5, 1885. 
 
 Second page, editorial. 
 
 In Milwaukee, as in England, the work of persecuting socialists goes 
 on, but here they use the whip of hunger, blacklisting every agitator. 
 This, in the Hocking valley, in the lumber regions of Michigan, and else- 
 where. The worst of this is that nearly every such man has a little 
 home or cottage, representing the savings of a life-time, and which is 
 valueless to him if he loses employment where he is. The question is 
 whether this kind of treatment will be tolerated. Every man who is op- 
 posed to it should at once join the revolutionary army. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 77. November 17, 1885. Fourth page. 
 
 At a meeting of the north-west side group of the I. A. A., 58 Cly- 
 bourn avenue, it was resolved to drill every Sunday in their hall, and 
 that workingmen should be invited who, on the ist of May, want to 
 come to the front for an eight-hour day. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 78. Arbeiter Zeitung, fourth page, November 
 
 27th, 1885. 
 
 " Letter-box." " S. Steel and iron are not on hand, but tin two or 
 three inches in diameter; the price is cheap. It does not amount to fifty 
 cents apiece.
 
 (i8 7 ) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 79. Arbeiter Zeitung, November 27th, 1885. 
 
 Fourth page. 
 
 Report of meeting on Market square, Thanksgiving. Speakers: 
 Parsons, who presided, Holmes and Spies. Parsons said: The president 
 of the United States has asked this people to be thankful. This is so 
 good a joke that Hendricks couldn't stand it, and died. To whom should 
 they be thankful, and for what? That all the workingmen in the Hock- 
 ing Valley have not died of hunger? That more workingmen have not 
 been murdered through the avarice of manufacturers and miners? and 
 that the three hundred new policemen of Chicago have not killed all 
 our citizens? The speaker showed that machinery more and more de- 
 prives workingmen of employment; that everything points to the coming 
 revolution; that the capitalist sees this and prepares for it, evidenced by 
 the milita drilling on the lake shore for the purpose of cutting down the 
 rebellious people. Workingmen must also prepare; must arm them- 
 selves with all means of warfare. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT So. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of December 28th, 
 1885, second page, editorial. 
 
 Chicago at last has its dynamite sensation. A little can found on the 
 door of Lambert Tree's palace. Evidently the dynamiter proposed to 
 explode into the moon this stone palace with a quarter of a pound of 
 dynamite. It is a clumsy humbug. The half-burnt fuse proves this, 
 for a fuse lighted in a dry night never goes out of itself. Clearly, the 
 can was put there by the Pinkertons a business trick to secure the 
 employment of their force of guards. We caution capitalists that a true 
 dynamiter don't joke in such matters. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 81. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, December 29, 1885, 
 
 fourth page. 
 
 Report of meeting of north-side group at 58 Clybourn avenue. A 
 resolution was adopted that the group pledges itself to work for the 
 eight-hour day, beginning May 1st, but cautions the workingmen not to 
 meet the enemy unarmed. It urges workingmen to eliminate from their 
 meetings demagogues and slanderers.
 
 (:88) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 82. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of December 29111, 
 
 1885, repeated in the numbers issued during December, 1885, and 
 January, February and March, 1886. 
 
 Workingmen willing to drill every Sunday invited to attend at 58 
 Clybourn avenue. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 83. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of December 31, 
 
 1885, fourth page. 
 
 Report of meeting of north side group in L/ouff's Hall, 519 .Larrabee 
 street, on the eight-hour question. Schwab said : It is only four months 
 until the ist of May. Little has been said to insure the success of the 
 eight-hour movement. " The workingmen should arm before the ist 
 day of May to meet Pinkerton's scoundrels, the police and the militia." 
 The lessons of the past should serve as a warning. Anarchists armed 
 themselves because they are workingmen, and they preach arming that 
 the workingmen may be able to liberate themselves. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 84. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of January 6, 1886, 
 
 editorial. 
 
 " A new militia law." After the adoption of the militia law the Lehr 
 und Wehr Verein gradually disappeared. The lesson of 1877 has been 
 forgotten. It ceased to pay to be a socialist and the party dwindled, but 
 what was left was effective. Where, six years ago, a thousand men 
 were armed with muskets, to-day we have a power which cannot be 
 fought by law or force an invisible network of righting groups. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 85. From the Arbeiter Zeitung January 22, 1884, 
 fourth page; from a letter signed R. B., dated January 21, 1866. 
 
 The writer states that he is not a member of any organization or 
 association; that the eight-hour question should not be the end of the 
 present organization; that in the opinion of the writer it is impossible to 
 enforce the eight-hour day otherwise than with armed force. That only 
 if prepared to meet the militia with dynamite and bombs, can they 
 expect success of the eight-hour movement. And closes : " Therefore, 
 workingmen, I call upon you, arm yourselves." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 86. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of February 15, 
 
 1886, fourth page, letter signed August Kiesling, about the eight- 
 hour movement. 
 
 The writer states that the workingmen feel that something must be
 
 done. That a great mass is without means of subsistence, and growing 
 poorer and poorer. And calls upon his associates in misery not to treat 
 peaceably with their deadly enemies on the ist of May. That the capi- 
 talists will have the working people's skulls crushed. And concludes : 
 " Therefore, comrades, arm to the teeth. We want to demand our 
 rights on the ist of May; in the other case there are only blows of the 
 club for you." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 87. From the Arbeiler Zeitung of February 15, 
 
 1886, fourth page. 
 
 Report of a mass meeting in the i2th street Turner Hall in regard to 
 the London riots; Oscar Neebe presiding; Fielden and Schwab 
 speaking. 
 
 Fielden said, in substance, that in former times the rich were accustomed 
 in London to visit the proletarian quarters and sneer at the poverty and 
 filth about them; but last week the proletarian visited the rich quarter 
 and showed his invincible power. That the rioters showed their unwis- 
 dom by appealing to the government, which cannot and will not do any- 
 thing for the poor. That the 'people must rely upon their own power, 
 and the lesson of the hour is that the poor should arm themselves. 
 
 Schwab said, in substance, after comparing the workingmen in Lon- 
 don and America, and describing the socialistic movement in England: 
 " We greet the London events as the announcement of the near approach 
 of the social revolution." 
 
 Resolutions were adopted declaring the meeting in harmony with the 
 rioters of England, and calling upon the workingmen to rally around the 
 red flag of revolution. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 88. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, February 
 
 Editorial on second page. 
 
 In France, during strikes, etc., a new method is lately adopted. The 
 workingmen barricade themselves in the factories with provisions, taking 
 possession of the property which the manufacturers desire to preserve, 
 and will only resort to force for their ejection in the most extreme case. 
 The conflict between capitalism and workingmen is growing constantly 
 sharper, and the indication is that force will bring about decisive results 
 in the battle for liberty.
 
 (ipo) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 89. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, April 2Oth. Editorial, 
 
 second page. 
 
 Unless the people in the kitchen of life are satisfied with the smell of 
 the roast, so long is the glutton for liberty. Does not the coal-miner 
 come voluntarily to the coal baron for employment, and are they not 
 content with wages from three to four dollars per week? Don't the idle 
 workingmen wear out their shoes to obtain employment at small wages? 
 Yes, and the laborer often buvs from the stores of his extortioners, in spite 
 of prohibition of the law. What law ordains that the head of a family 
 shall send his wife and children into the factory to labor? Is this liberty? 
 And yet they say the working people are free as the bird in the air. If 
 the workingman proposes to disturb this liberty, militia, police, deputy 
 sheriffs and United States troops are put in motion. Sneered at 
 and despised, the workingman will be as long as. he omits to arm. 
 . Every trade union should make it obligatory upon every member to keep 
 a good gun and ammunition at home. The demand of the capitalistic 
 classes are by muskets and galling guns. The workingman should follow 
 their example. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 90. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, April 21, editorial 
 
 second page. 
 
 He who submits to the present order of things has no right to com- 
 plain about capitalistic extortion, for order means sustaining that. He 
 who rebels is a rebel, and a rebel who puts himself opposite the cannon's 
 mouth with empty fist is a fool. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 91. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, April 22d. 
 
 editorial notice, first page. 
 
 Refers to the New York street car strikes and the strikes in the 
 Brooklyn sugar refineries. Also to the rumor that the strikers intend 
 to burn the house of the street car superintendent, stating that this is 
 characteristic of the feeling of the working circles. " The month of 
 May may bring many a thing about which nobody dreams of to-day." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 92. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of April 26th. 
 From a report of a mass meeting on the lake shore. 
 
 Speakers, Parsons, Schwab, Randa and Spies. Schwab said: 
 " This is Easter; our forefathers celebrated on this day the 
 resurrection of nature. To-day the workingmen celebrate their
 
 ('9') 
 
 resurrection from laziness and indifference. From May ist, we will 
 work eight hours a day. No force is able to withstand the power of 
 labor. Let us be united, and we will succeed. Everywhere police are 
 murderers. Arm yourselves. After the ist of May eight hours and 
 not a minute more. 
 
 Spies said, after speaking of the struggle between the workingmen 
 and the capitalists, in effect: Be men now. Break down the doors of 
 your extortioners instead of timidly knocking on them. Conquer the 
 lost manhood. " Onward" is the motto in the march of triumph until 
 the last stone of the labor bastile is removed and enslaved humanity 
 is free. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 93. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of April 3Oth 
 editorial notice, first page. 
 
 We are advised that the police are ordered to be ready for a conflict 
 upon Saturday of next week. The capitalists are thirsting for the blood 
 of workingmen. The workingmen refuse to be tortured and treated 
 like dogs any more, and for this opposition, the capitalists cry for blood. 
 Perhaps they may have it, and lose some of their own. To the work- 
 ingmen we again say: " Arm yourselves, but conceal your arms unless 
 they be stolen from you." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 94. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, May ist, first 
 
 page, editorial. 
 
 Away with all rolls of membership and minute books. Clean your 
 guns; complete your ammunition. The police and militia are ready to 
 murder. No workingman should leave his house with empty pockets. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 95. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of March 15, 1886. 
 
 Letter box; a concussion primer is necessary to explode a dynamite 
 cartridge. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 96. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, March 19, 1886, 
 
 fourth page. 
 
 A correspondent writes that the oppressed prepare to demand the 
 eight-hour day is a good sign, but the eight-hour day is not relief enough 
 in view of the increase in the power of producction and the surplus on 
 hand. The present industrial system ruins the middle class. The only 
 business which flourishes is that of the capitalist. The only aim of the
 
 (I 9 2) 
 
 workingman should be the liberation of mankind from the shackles of 
 wage slavery. Here in America, where the workingman possesses the 
 freedom of meeting, of speech and of the press, the most should be done 
 for the emancipation of mankind, but the tendency in the press and with 
 the teachings of to-day is to degrade mankind, and if we do not soon 
 bestir ourselves for a bloody revolution we cannot leave anything to our 
 children but poverty and slavery. Therefore, prepare in all quietness 
 for the revolution. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 97. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, March 24, 1886, 
 
 first page, editorial. 
 
 The capitalists are apprehensive of a concerted movement of the K. of 
 L. in connection with the Gould-South-western fight. To the organized 
 laborers we call, " Keep your powder dry." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 98. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Friday, January 
 2, 1884, editorial, second page. 
 
 Behind us the past; before us the new year. Backward our glance 
 sweeps over endless shores of human misery. The column points to idle 
 factories and mines, the cold huts of starving laborers, with freezing 
 women and children. We see also the incendiarism of the business 
 man who burns his building to get his insurance, a smart 
 business trick, and because he succeeds he is respected. We 
 look on another picture and see a poor man who shot his em- 
 ployer because that employer desired to cheat him of his earnings. 
 Nothing can save him from punishment. He who sheds blood, his blood 
 shall be shed. Again, we see another picture: In the temple presided 
 over by the Goddess of Justice a man being tried who killed an employe 
 because he demanded his wages, but this time justice reaches out her 
 hands and says, " He who kills his servant is no criminal. Thou art free." 
 Indignation wakes in us, and the world playing around us becomes a 
 horror. 
 
 Deep in the background appears a group of men whose faces express 
 courage and power of action. They unfurl the red flag, and the motto 
 shows " Death to tyrants," " Death to deception and lies." Our con- 
 fidence in humanity returns, for we see from the faces of these men that 
 they not only have the will, but the power to act and to free 
 the race from the marsh of rottenness and the chains of despotism. 
 They dig a mine here and there, are arrested by the minions of order
 
 (^93) 
 
 and hurried to execution where they joyfully sacrifice their life blood 
 with a malediction upon their executioners and a prophecy that the 
 avengers will arise. 
 
 We turn our backs upon the past and look to the future. All is misty 
 before us and indistinct. We discover in the picture presented that the 
 prediction is fulfilled, that the avenger has risen. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 99. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of January 4th, 
 
 eighth page. 
 
 Nitro-glycerine. The article says that a letter signed K., requesting 
 simple directions as to the manufacture of nitro-glycerine, had been re- 
 ceived. The editorial answer proceeds: The most simple method is as 
 follows: Take one part nitric acid (1.52 specific weight) and two parts 
 strongest sulphuric acid (1.83 specific weight). Make this mixture 
 in a cooler surrounded by ice, and, when well cooled, add fifteen and a 
 half grains of pure glycerine, pouring as quickly as possible into a larger 
 quantity of cold water. Nitro-glycerine is then precipitated to the 
 bottom, from which the fluid is poured off and the nitro-glycerine is 
 carefully washed in fresh water several times, and then with a weak 
 solution of soda. A layman ought not to venture the experiment, but 
 only an experienced man. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 100. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, January 5th, 1885. 
 
 Under the head of socialistic meeting, the paper quotes comrade 
 Spies to have said at 52 West Lake street, on the afternoon of the 4th: 
 " When we resort to murder we only follow the law of necessity and the 
 force of self-preservation. We murder to put an end to general murder. 
 We put murderers out of the way." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 101. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, January 18, 1885. 
 
 Notice signed " Committee " calling a meeting in the interest of arm- 
 ing for Saturday, the 241!!, at 8 o'clock, at Steinmueller's Hall. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 102, report that at Mueller's Hall, January i8th, 
 
 Comrade Schwab spoke thus: Nothing is to be expected of the 
 present political parties. If they had meant their promises they would 
 have fulfilled them, and because we know that the working class will 
 make no concessions we have severed all connection with it and prepared 
 for a revolution by force. Spies said that he was accused by a little 
 paper to have advised workingmen to commit criminal acts. What is
 
 crime? " When the workingman was putting himself in the possession 
 of the fruits of his labor stolen from him, that was called a crime. The 
 emancipation of the laborer from the ballot was impossible; it was serv- 
 ing only as a cover for capitalistic tyranny." He spoke of the miserable 
 condition of the coal miners in the Hocking Valley, and concluded by 
 advising his hearers to inform thevvselves. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 103. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of January 24, 1885, 
 
 editorial notices. 
 
 The police claim that Funk was a socialist, and has spoken at social- 
 istic meetings. This is untrue. A socialist he may be. It is a pity he 
 did not blow up the Arson gang. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 104. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, January 29, 1885. 
 
 Announcement: Group Jefferson No. r, agitation meeting, Saturday, 
 January 3ist, at 600 Milwaukee avenue, at 8 P. M. Order of the day: 
 One, essay on the theme, Civilization and Murder. 
 
 Second, free discussion of this theme and other business. New 
 members will be initiated. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 105. From^the Arbeiter Zeitung, Thursday, Feb- 
 ruary 1 2th, editorial. 
 
 The sardonic judge Bailey, in a recent decision in the case of Standard 
 against the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul railway, setting aside the 
 verdict of the jury, gave this decision: "It is true it has been proven 
 that the locomotive which caused the injury to the plaintiff was in a dan- 
 gerous condition, but as he, the plaintiff, had also been informed thereof 
 and notwithstanding continued that work, then he alone has to bear the 
 consequences of his risk." Whether the plaintiff had knowledge was im- 
 material. The road knew the engine was in a dangerous condition, and 
 the employe had to use it because commanded by the management; but, 
 it is asked, could he not have refused? Certainly, but at the same time 
 he would have had to look for another master. This alternative was as 
 dangerous as the risk on the engine. The choice was between death by 
 starvation and cold on one side and clanger from the engine on the other. 
 The liberty of the plaintiff was to choose his method of destruction. 
 Perhaps the proletarians will sometimes be courageous enough to accord 
 to the judge the freedom of choice between a hemp necktie and a nitro- 
 glycerine pill."
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 106. Editorial, Arbeiter Zeitung, Monday, Febru- 
 ary 23d. 
 
 We believe the present struggle will not end without a mighty storm, 
 bringing terror and blessing, destruction and freedom. The approach- 
 ing revolution promises to be grander and more terrible than any in his- 
 tory it will be general and will make itself felt everywhere. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 107. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Monday, March 
 
 2, 1885. Editorial. 
 
 One who uselessly exposes himself unarmed to a vicious dog again and 
 again has only himself to blame for the consequences. We censure 
 those dirty souls who carry on the business of quieting the working 
 classes under idle promises of reform in the near future. What has re- 
 cently occurred in Philadelphia could not have occurred here without 
 the hanging of a dozen policemen on the telegraph poles and house cor- 
 nices, and this is due to the revolutionary propaganda carried on here. 
 Let the workingmen in other cities take a lesson from this and supply 
 themselves with weapons, dynamite and prussic acid. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 108. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Wednesday, 
 
 March n, 1885. 
 
 Soon the people must choose, either the police must be and the com- 
 munity cease, or the community must be and the police cease. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 109. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Monday, March 
 15, 1885, About revolutionary deeds. An article signed Z. 
 
 The life of humanity bears an analogy to a sea, usually clear and 
 even, but sometimes wrought by storms into fury, and then sinking into 
 peace. The daily occupations of men usually absorb most of their time. 
 But when the race approaches a time of transmission to a higher civiliza- 
 tion, gigantic forms rise above the level of the common daily life, and 
 the enthusiasm, the storm of deeds, communicates itself more and more 
 mightily until the heart of the whole world throbs with an excited beat. 
 We now live in such an epoch. The blood of noble champions has 
 flowed, which, like the dragon teeth, will bring forth Spartans. In all 
 revolutionary actions three epochs are to be distinguished. First, the 
 time for preparation, then the moment of action, and finally the period 
 which follows the deed. First, the revolutionist should study to save 
 combatants, to avoid danger of discovery. It is easy to be seen that the
 
 (i 9 6) 
 
 danger of discovery is increased by the number of actors and vice versa. 
 Therefore, in the commission of a deed, a comrade not living in the local- 
 ity should be chosen for the act. And, again, if one comrade is able to 
 perform the deed alone, he should call no one to his assistance. 
 
 The forming of special groups of action is a necessity. Especially 
 should publicity be avoided in a country like America. In the formation 
 of a group of action the greatest care should be exercised to select men 
 whose heads and hearts are in the right spot. When an action is re- 
 solved upon, it must be executed as speedily as possible, to prevent the 
 dangers of delay. In the action one must be upon the spot. When the 
 action is completed the group scatters. If this rule is acted upon the 
 danger of discovery is greatly reduced. Because of the neglect of these 
 precautions, most of the failures of the past have occurred. The com- 
 plete success of an action is the best possible impulse to a new deed. 
 Already this small warfare has commenced at many points. Finally 
 will come an early rising en masse. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT no. From the Arbeiter-Zeitung, Friday, March 
 
 20, 1885. 
 
 Frank Bridges, one of our wise law-givers, has kicked the bucket of 
 his own accord, and therefore saved a shot. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT in. From Die Fackel of March 22, 1885. 
 
 Account of the meeting at north side Turner Hall, the day previous. 
 First Mr. Fielden praised the love of sacrifice, the heroic courage of 
 those who shed their blood upon the barricades, the altar of the people, 
 during the commune of Paris. He denounced the present civilization as 
 a lie, and called upon those present t^ join in the effort for the overthrow 
 of the present system. He was followed by Comrade Holmes. Both 
 speakers were applauded. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 112. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Monday, March 
 
 23, 1885. Editorial. 
 
 We characterize as criminal the continued suggestion that the question 
 of arming ought not to be considered, while every day brings news of 
 collisions between the murdering serfs of the bourgeoise and the unarmed 
 crowds of the people. Every workingman ought to have armed long 
 ago, and ought to arm now. Daggers and revolvers are easily to be got- 
 ten, hand grenades cheaply procured, and explosives can be obtained. The 
 demand is that we should not enter upon the struggle with empty hands.
 
 (^97) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 113. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Monday, 
 February 22, 1886. 
 
 An effort is made to bring dissension among the locked-out wage 
 slaves of McCormick's by the capitalistic press, by attacking the anarch- 
 ists, who are charged to have instigated the wage slaves to rise against 
 their friend McCormick. Perhaps the trio Averill, Butler and McCor- 
 mick will be taken to account sooner than they anticipate. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 114. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, Tuesday, March 
 
 2, 1886. 
 
 Yesterday morning the order scoundrels, with the aid of their natural 
 allies, the professional cut-throats, otherwise called detectives, succeeded in 
 taking some of the scabs to the factory, and this morning the number 
 was materially increased. This report shows for what purpose the police 
 exist to protect the workingman if he works for starvation wages and 
 is obedient, and to club him if he refuse. Force only gives way to force. 
 Who would attack capitalism in earnest, must be prepared to kill if he 
 does not want to be killed. " The time up to the ist of May is short 
 look out." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 114. Article on nitro-glycerine in the Arbeiter Zei- 
 tung of March 24, 1885. 
 
 Substantially the same as the passage upon that subject in Most's 
 book. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 115, from the Arbeiter Zeitung of Tuesday, March 
 
 26, 1885. 
 
 Notice of the Reinsdorf pamphlet recently published by Johann Most, 
 containing the biography of Reinsdorf and letters. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 116, from the Arbeiter Zeitung, Wednesday, April 
 8, 1885, among the editorial notices. 
 
 Something worth hearing. Yesterday some Quincy strikers fired on 
 their bosses, and not on the scabs. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 117, from the Arbeiter Zeitung, Sunday issue, April 
 
 12, 1885. 
 
 McCormick capitulates. He surrenders without conditions, and the 
 workingmen secure the acceptation of all their demands. The order po- 
 lice had no inclination to take up the fight with fifteen hundred armed
 
 (i 9 8) 
 
 workingmen, and the strikers will return to their work Monday. Now, 
 that it is over, we want to say that not only the strikers were well armed 
 with revolvers, but that the stronger laxatives were not wanting. And 
 now, let it be understood that the captured rifles, revolvers, etc., are in 
 safe hands, and will be held on the principle that to the victors belong the 
 spoils. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 118, from the Arbeiter Zeitung, Friday April 24, 
 
 1885. 
 
 The board of trade gambling hell is proposed to be dedicated on 
 Tuesday next, at 8 o'clock. The workingmen propose to celebrate this 
 by a meeting on Market square, followed by a serenade of the members 
 in the hall. All the workingmen of the city are invited to participate. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 119, from the the Arbeiter Zeitung, Saturday, April 
 
 25, 1885. 
 
 The local commercial paper reports that Rosenberger's orchesta will 
 furnish the music at the dedication of the new board of trade, and E. A. 
 Storrs will conduct the dedication. The rest will be attended to by the 
 anarchists. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 120, from the Arbeiter Zeitung, Tuesday, April 28, 
 
 1885. 
 
 Everybody should attend the board of trade demonstration to-night. 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 121, from the Arbeiter Zeitung, April 2,9 1885. 
 
 From a report of the demonstration on the preceding night, under title, 
 "Thieves in League." The march formed, headed by a company of the 
 Bohemian groups, splendid looking fellows; next, three female comrades 
 with two red flags and one black. Then the procession, which could 
 not be kept in good order, a matter much to be regretted. Behind 
 these, a strong company of well-armed comrades of various groups, in 
 which the nitro-glycerine pills were not missing. They were prepared 
 for a probable attack, and had a collision come there would have been 
 pieces. The procession, which was stopped some distance from the 
 brightly-lighted place, sang the Marseillaise. About five hundred 
 policemen were stationed around the building, who accepted quietly 
 many derisive utterances. The procession returned to 5th avenue, where 
 Parsons, Spies and Fielden spoke from the window of the Arbeiter 
 Zeitung building.
 
 ( '99) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 122. From the Arbeiler Zeitung, Tuesday, May 5, 
 
 1885. 
 
 " When, anywhere, a small party of workingmen dare to speak of 
 rights and privileges, the ' Order ' draws together the murdering scound- 
 rels 'from all about, and the entire government is ever ready to suppress 
 every petty demonstration by force. The workingmen ought to take 
 aim at every member of the militia, and to do with him as one would do 
 with some one of whom it is known that he is after taking one's life. 
 It might then sooner become difficult to obtain murdering tools." 
 " Workingmen, arm yourselves. Let the butchery of La Monte be a 
 lesson to you." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 123. From the same issue, at the close of an ed- 
 itorial. 
 
 " Before you lies this blissful Eden; the road to it lies through the 
 smoking ruins of the old world. Your passport to it is that banner 
 which calls to you in flaming lines the word ' Anarchy.' ' 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 124. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, May 9, 1885. 
 
 Last night valuable fixtures and machines in the quarry of Singer & 
 Talcott were destroyed bv fire. That is something. Singer was. the 
 instigator of the La Monte butchery. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 125. From the Arbeiter Zeitung, June 19, 1885. 
 Conclusion of an article headed " Contribution to the Question of 
 Arming. " 
 
 To attempt to meet the serfs of order with empty hands is insane, and 
 one should arm as soon as possible. Workingmen, arm yourselves with 
 the most effectual means. The better you do this and the quicker the 
 fight, the sooner the victory is won. Signed " Z." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 126. Continuation in the issue of June 20, 1885, of 
 the last mentioned article, by the same author. 
 
 Advises the formation of groups, who, by small regular contributions, 
 may accumulate funds to buy arms. Suggests that dynamite bears in 
 America the name of Hercules and giant powder. He refers to the 
 fables of Romulus and Remus, and calls upon the workingmen to found 
 and establish " the temple of the noble Goddess of Liberty upon the 
 whole face of the globe," concluding, " But to this end you must be 
 wolves, and as such ye need sharp teeth. Workingmen, arm yourselves."
 
 ( 2OO ) 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 127. From the Arbeiter Zeitung of June 24, 1885. 
 Editorial headed " Delusive Imaginations," closing as follows: 
 
 "Fellow-Agitators! Dark, threatening economical storm clouds have 
 arisen in the United States; they become thicker above our heads; they 
 will discharge themselves and bring a flood of inexpressible misery upon 
 us. A terrible crisis is coming. Let us close our ranks, and do not let 
 us pierce our own flesh, but that of capital. The time is too serious. 
 Let us rather see in every comrade a welcome fellow-confidant. Let us 
 do this, and then the day of liberation, which will be celebrated here in 
 a short time, and which celebration must seem to us as derisive laughter of 
 hell, will soon be followed by the true and real day of liberation. That 
 is our most earnest desire." 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 128. From the Alarm, January 9, 1885. 
 
 A notice that in the absence of the editor and the assistant, their work 
 devolved upon August Spies. 
 
 " The right to bear arms." 
 
 After the conspiracy of the workingmen, the working classes in 1877, 
 the breaking up of the meeting on Market square, the brutal assault 
 upon a gathering of furniture workers in Vorwart's Turner Hall, the 
 murder of Tessmann, and the general clubbing and shooting down of 
 peaceably inclined wage workers, the proletarians organized the Lehr 
 und Wehr Verein, which in about a year and a half had grown to a mem- 
 bership of one thousand. This was regarded by the capitalists as a men- 
 ace, and they procured the passage of the militia law, under which it 
 became an offense for any body of men, other than those authorized by 
 the governor, to assemble with arms, drill or parade the streets. The 
 members of the Lehr und Wehr Verein, mostly socialists, who believed 
 in the ballot, made up a test case to determine the constitutionality of this 
 act, rejecting the counsel of the extremists. Judge Barnutn held the law 
 to be unconstitutional an appeal was taken and the Supreme court 
 upset this decision and held the law constitutional. Thereupon the 
 Lehr und Wehr Verein applied to the Supreme court of the United 
 Stales, which within a few days affirmed the decision of the Supreme 
 court of the state. Do we need to comment on this? 
 
 That militia law has had its uses. Where there was before a military 
 body publicly organized, whose strength could be easily ascertained, now 
 there exists an organization whose members cannot be estimated,- and a

 
 ( 201 ) 
 
 network of destructive agencies of modern military character that will 
 defy suppression. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBITS 129 and 130. Four photographic views of a globu- 
 lar bomb shell. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 131. Two photographic views of an inflammable 
 bomb. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 132. Photograph of ladel and can referred to in 
 testimony. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 133. Two photographic views of a galvanized iron 
 construction, delivered by Engel to the police and described by Inspector 
 Bonfield. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 134. Photographic view of four supposed gas pipe 
 bombs. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 135. Photographic view of four short pieces of gas 
 pipe. 
 
 PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 136. Same. 
 
 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT i. Call for the Hay market meeting as issued, 
 omitting altogether the line " Workingmen, arm yourselves and appear in 
 full force." 
 
 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 2. From the Alarm of June 13, 1885, " Victor 
 Hugo, his memorable address to the rich and poor. His most precious 
 legacy to humanity. One message to the rich, the other to the poor. 
 The sum of human wisdom read and reflect." 
 
 DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 2. 
 
 Victor Hugo's address to the rich and poor, from the Alarm of 
 June 13, 1885. 
 
 Amongst other things in the address the writer says: " To the rich. 
 What is the father of privilege? Chance. What is his son? Abuse. 
 Neither chance nor abuse is nature. They have both of them an evil 
 to-morrow. I come to warn you. I come to denounce to you your own 
 bliss. It is made out of the ills of every one. Your paradise is made 
 out of the hell of the poor. * 
 
 Abandoned, an orphan, alone in boundless creation, I made this entry 
 into this gloom that you call society. The first thing I saw was law 
 under the form of a gibbet. The second was wealth it is your 
 wealth under the form of a woman dead of cold and hunger. The 
 third was luxury under the shape of a hunted man chained to prison

 
 ( 202 ) 
 
 walls; the fourth was your palaces beneath the shadow of which cowered 
 the tramp. The human race has been made by you slaves and convicts. 
 You have made of this earth a dungeon. Light is wanting. Air is 
 wanting; virtue is wanting. 
 
 " The workers of this world whose efforts you enjoy live in death. 
 There are little girls who begin at eight by prostitution and who end at 
 twenty by old age. Who among you have been at Newcastle-on-Tyne? 
 There are men in the mines who chew coal to fill the stomach and cheat 
 hunger. Look you in Lancashire, misery everywhere. Are you aware 
 that the Harlem fishermen eat grass when the fishery fails? Are you 
 aware that at Burton La Zess there are still certain lepers driven in the 
 woods who are fired at if they come out of their dens? In Peckridge 
 there are no beds in the hovels, and holes are dug in the ground for little 
 children to sleep in, so that in the place of beginning with the cradle they 
 begin with the tomb. Mercy, have mercy for the poor! Oh, I conjure 
 you, have pity! But no, you will not. I know ye all, devils bred in hell 
 and dogs with hearts of stone. Upward to your golden thrones for ages 
 has gone the cry of misery, the groan of hunger and the sob of despair, 
 and ye heeded it not. What mercy thou hast given shall be meted out 
 to you in turn. Bear in mind that the series of kings armed with the 
 sword was interrupted by Cromwell with the ax. Tremble, the incor- 
 ruptible dissolutions draw near. The clipped talons push out again. The 
 torn-out tongues become tongues of flame scattered to the wings of 
 darkness, and they howl in the infinite. They who are hungry show 
 their idle teeth. Paradise is built over hell's totter. There is suffering. 
 There is suffering; and that which is above leans over, and that which is 
 below gapes opens. The^shadow becomes light; the damned discuss the 
 elect. It is the people who are oncoming. I tell you it is man who 
 ascends. It is the end that is beginning. It is the red dawn of catastrophe. 
 
 " Oh, this society is false. One day, and soon, the true society will 
 come. Then there will be no more lords; there will be free, living men. 
 There will be no more wealth; there will be abundance for the poor. 
 There will be no more masters, but there will be brothers. They that 
 toil shall have. This is the future. No more prostration, no more abase- 
 ment, no more ignorance, no more wealth, no more beasts of burden, no 
 more courtiers, no more kings but light."
 
 (20 3 ) 
 
 EXHIBIT 3. 
 
 From the Alarm of 22, 1885. " Anarchy v. Government." 
 
 " Anarchy, from the Greek, meaning no government, is the denial of 
 the right of coercion the abrogation of statute law, a constitution by 
 means of which man governs his fellow man. In behalf of government 
 it is argued that man is wicked and must be restrained, and therefore gov- 
 ernment is necessary. The free society which anarchy would establish 
 proceeds upon the theory that under natural law men could not but act 
 right, since none would be protected in wrong-doing. 
 
 " Under government we see the standard of right and wrong regulated 
 by enactments. One portion of society dictating to the other and exact- 
 ing service. Anarchy teaches that law is to be discovered, not manu- 
 factured; and that conformity to natural law means happiness; disregard 
 thereof, misery. The form of government is material. Anarchy denies 
 the right of one man to rule another, and to the shibboleth, ' The great- 
 est good to the greatest number ' answers ' The greatest good to all.'' 
 Under anarchy, arbitration would take the place of courts; asylums, of 
 prisons; voluntary co-operation, of wage-slavery. Exchange of equiva- 
 lents would take the place of the system of competition and modern 
 commerce. The workshops would belong to the workers, the tools to 
 the toilers, the product to the producers, while the means of existence 
 would become the heritage of the race. Occupation and use would be 
 the sole title. But under government natural law is set aside by 
 statutory enactment. Natural law is self-enforcing statutory law re- 
 quires the paraphernalia of courts, jail, police and armies to its enforce- 
 ment." Signed P." 
 
 DEFENDANTS' EXHIBIT 4. 
 From the Alarm of June 2, 18857. 
 
 John Stuart Mill says: " If, therefore, the choice were to be made between 
 communism, with all its chances, and the present state of society, with all 
 its sufferings and injustice: if the institution of private property necessarily 
 carries with it as a consequence that the produce of labor should be ap- 
 portioned, as we now see it, almost in an inversed ratio to the labor 
 the largest portion to those whose work is almost nominal, and so on, in 
 a descending scale, the remuneration dwindling as the work grows harder 
 and more disagreeable, until the most fatiguing and exhausting bodily

 
 (20 4 ) 
 
 labor cannot count with certainty on being able to earn the necessaries 
 of life; if this or communism were the alternative, all the difficulties, 
 great or small, of communism would be as dust in the balance." 
 
 DEFENDANTS' EXHIBIT 5. 
 From the Alarm of September 5, 1885. Title, Forcible Gospel. 
 
 At a meeting held by the Sociological society of New York, re- 
 cently, the Rev. Dr. Rylance spoke, and among other things said: 
 " Patronizing talk was of no use as a remedy for existing evils. Work- 
 ingmen were not to be won over by mere potent eloquence. It was no 
 use telling a man that if he was industrious and saved his money he might 
 become a capitalist himself, when, in many cases, the amount he received 
 as wages was barely sufficient for a mere existence. The tyranny of 
 capital was fast becoming as bad as European despotism. He contrasted 
 the squalid tenements and crowded neighborhoods in which the working 
 people were huddled together with the stately residences of those who 
 lived in luxury from the results of labor, and maintained that poverty was 
 not the result of ignorance, and that wealth was the result of the co- 
 operation of labor and capital. The present condition of capital was 
 founded on force and not on knowledge."
 
 03 
 
 si 
 
 $3 
 
 03 ^ 
 
 r TJ 
 
 o ' 
 
 -** 
 
 M > 
 
 z n 
 
 I 
 
 I N 
 
 * M 
 
 TJ O3 
 
 E i" 1 
 
 R 
 
 f! 
 
 IP 
 
 s 
 
 S3 
 
 3 
 
 09 
 P 
 
 O 
 
 s 
 
 p- 
 
 n> 
 o 
 
 o_ 
 
 fD 
 O 
 
 rr 
 
 CD 
 
 6J 
 
 f? 
 o 
 
 ! 9 
 
 E 
 (A 
 
 C/3 | E 
 
 re 
 
 z 
 
 s & 
 
 
 
 O r^ 
 
 i i a 
 
 o O 
 
 3 2 
 o 
 
 p 
 
 S
 
 KF 
 
 aa 
 
 5" 
 
 v/,/