In an interview Chief of Police Ebersold praised the brave and steady

action of the police at the Haymarket, but for quick and active

fighting gave the palm to the six officers who held a mob of two or

three thousand men at bay at the McCormick works the day before the

Haymarket affair. A mob tried to hang Officer Casey to a lamp post,

and he fought hand to hand against great odds until rescued. Vaclav

Dejnek, Frank Broda and a young man named Hess were indicted for this

affair, and Dejnek was sentenced to serve one year in state's prison.

THE ARBEITER ZEITUNG.

The _Arbeiter Zeitung_, which was suppressed the morning after the

riot, was re-issued almost immediately, and in one issue had the

following comments on the trial:

"Has it come to this, in the land of Washington, Franklin and

Jefferson? It is the Iron Must of historic development. Only those

men who are economically independent can be truly free. Where there

are poor and rich political freedom is a wretched lie. Mammon, the

powerful idol, lowers freedom to a kitchen wench. As in Rome at the

time of its decay Prætorian bands of foreigners upheld the rule of the

Cæsars, so now the chief support of the money kings is the police force

of the large American cities, which consists mainly of foreigners.

The downfall of the Republic is nigh. It will fall like all countries

whose foundations crumble away in the course of time. All the weeping

and wailing cannot delay catastrophe. The present is without hope, so

we must strengthen ourselves by looking at the future. A new life will

bloom from the ruins of the present social order. The society of the

future will bridge over the abysses which open to-day before our eyes.

All men will be equal. They will remember with a shudder the time when

Prætorian bands could plot the massacre of thousands. Mammon will be

cast down from his usurped throne, and Freedom will take the place with

conquering power, to dwell with happy humanity forever and ever."

After the verdict was rendered Mr. Grinnell, in behalf of the State,

sent word to the new publishers of the _Arbeiter Zeitung_, that care

must be taken by them that no attacks either on the jury or Judge Gary

should appear in their paper, notifying them that if any such article

should appear, the managers of the paper would be prosecuted for

contempt of court.

The following was the result of the warning:

"OUTRAGEOUS!"

"SEVEN OF THE DEFENDANTS SENTENCED TO DEATH, AND NEEBE

GETS FIFTEEN YEARS."

"A Motion for a New Trial Made!"

"The jury, through Osborne, its foreman, presented their

verdict to Judge Gary this morning. When the result became

known the detectives, who mingled freely with the crowd on

the street, set up a loud cheering, and the judge became very

pale--he did not expect such a demonstration. Grinnell, on the

other hand, evidently expected such a verdict, and presumably

with cause. Marshall Field and men of his stripe have entirely

too much money. What do the people say to this verdict? They

will look upon it as being impossible--incredible. We were not

inclined to believe it at first, but we soon became convinced.

Captain Black instantly made a motion for a new trial, which

Grinnell did not oppose, and Judge Gary will hear this

motion next term. If he overrules the motion, an appeal will

be taken. We are not in a proper frame of mind to say more

to-day."

THE VERDICT

fell like a bolt of lightning into the midst of Socialistic and

Anarchistic circles, believing as they did, that punishment could

only be inflicted upon the perpetrator of the act of hurling the

bomb. No wonder that consternation sat darkly upon each sullen brow

like the pall of impending doom, as slowly from the jury came those

words of fearful import which set them face to face with death, the

verdict was applauded by the foreign and American press. Twenty-five

representatives of reputable labor unions met condemning the action of

the Socialists and thereby endorsing the verdict of the jury.

The Socialists of New York held indignation meetings denouncing the

verdict and expressing sympathy with their unfortunate brethren of

Chicago. Mrs. Black, in a letter dated Sept. 22, prophesied that in

case the sentence was executed widespread revolution and destruction

of property and life would immediately be inaugurated. On the 27th

Capt. Black served a notice upon State's Attorney Grinnell for a new

trial, on the ground that the verdict was not in keeping with the law;

also that the court had allowed improper testimony, and had erred in

his instructions. 1,191 men were called to serve as jurors in the case

before the twelve eligible men were secured, and even then it was

claimed by the defense that only ten of the twelve were competent.

On Friday, Oct. 1st, the Attorneys for the defense began their

arguments for a new trial, drawing largely upon their imaginations

to supply evidence in the case. They endeavored to introduce false

affidavits from one Orrin Blossom, of No. 2,961 Wentworth Avenue, and

A. Love, of La Grange, to impeach the testimony of Gilmer. But the wary

State's Attorney Grinnell had one move to make which blocked their

game. He had counter affidavits from Orrin Blossom and Love proving

that Love was not in the city on the night of the Haymarket riot after

six o'clock, and that he never saw _Harry Gilmer_.

Three days were spent by the defense in arguing their claims for a new

trial, and on October 7th Judge Gary rendered his decision in the case

in the following language:

THE MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL OVERRULED.

Judge Gary said:

"In passing upon this motion for a new trial the case is so

voluminous, there is such a mass of evidence, that it is

impossible, within anything like reasonable limits, to give a

synopsis or epitome. I do not understand that either upon the

trial before the jury or upon the arguments of this motion

before me there have been any arguments tending or intended to

deny that all of the defendants, except Neebe, were parties to

whatever purpose or object there was in view--that the other

seven were combined for some purpose. I, of course, do not

wish to attribute to the defendants' counsel any admissions

which they have not made, but my impression is that there has

been no argument tending or intending to deny that all the

other seven, except Neebe, were engaged in the pursuit of some

object. What it is, the counsel have debated before the jury

and before me. Now, it is important to know what that object

was, whether it was as counsel for defense have stated--merely

to encourage working men to resist, if unlawful attacks were

made upon them--or whether it was something else. There is no

better way to ascertain what the object was, than to read what

they have spoken and written as the object, while the events

were transpiring. Now, from the files of their newspapers,

which go back a good way, a good deal can be taken, which

must of necessity be taken as the truth of what their object

was. I have not had time and opportunity to arrange either the

translations of the _Arbeiter Zeitung_ or the files of the

_Alarm_, and pick out those which in the fullest shape show

what they were proposing to do. These translations from the

_Arbeiter Zeitung_ now come to my hands for the first time. I

have here a translation of the _Arbeiter Zeitung_, January 11,

1885, headed 'To Arms'."

The Court proceeded to read numerous and lengthy extracts from

translations offered in evidence of articles in the _Arbeiter Zeitung_,

in which revolution by force was advised, and the approaching

revolution, it was declared, would be greater than that of the last

century. Among the extracts read were the following:

"Dynamite! Of all stuff, this is the stuff."

"The day draws near when the working people of America, in an outburst

of passion and ungovernable rage, will revolt and demand the total

abolition of the existing state of things which brings to the working

classes so much misery and death. Have you all prepared yourselves with

knives, pistols, guns and dynamite for the unavoidable conflict between

labor and capital?"

"It was decided at the last mass-meeting at No. 54 West

Lake street that the next meeting will be devoted to the

consideration of the military laws and necessity of using

force in the warfare between capital and labor."

"Each working man ought to have been armed long ago. Daggers,

revolvers and explosives are cheap, and can be easily

obtained."

"Those who want to talk to capitalists in earnest must be

prepared to attain their object by killing them. This can only

be accomplished by systematic organization. The time for all

this is short--look out--"

"In addition to all this," continued Judge Gary, "there is

the testimony of witnesses that there was a combination which

was formed as early as 1884, and that combination had for

its purpose the changing of the existing order of things,

the overthrow of government, and the abolition of all law.

There can be no question in the mind of any one who has read

these articles or heard these speeches, which were written

and spoken long before the eight-hour movement was talked of,

that this movement which they advocated was but a means in

their estimation toward the ends which they sought, and that

the movement itself was not primarily any consideration with

them at all. The different papers and speeches furnish direct

contradiction to the arguments of counsel that they proposed

to resort to arms merely to resist any unlawful attacks which

the police might make upon them, because these all show that

their object was this: If, during the eight-hour movement,

strikes occurred, and if the employers chose to employ other

men in the place of those who had struck, then these men

so employed must be prevented by force from going to work,

and if the police then undertook to resist the force so

employed on behalf of the strikers; if the police undertook

to prevent this force from being so employed, then that was

the ground on which the police force was to be destroyed.

There can be no doubt that that was an unlawful combination.

It is impossible to argue that any set of men have the right

to dictate to others whether they should work or not, and

if they chose to work in defiance of their dictation, drive

them away by force, and if the police undertook to prevent

that force, then kill the police. It is impossible for an

instant to support any such principle as that. The members

of this combination publicly announce that they had no hope

of winning the majority over to their side by argument, and

no hope of attaining their object by getting rid of this

majority by violence. There is no doubt that seven of the

defendants were in the combination formed for that purpose. As

to Neebe's part, there is the evidence of witnesses that he

presided at meetings called by the class of people from whom

this combination was drawn, and that he called meetings of the

people who were engaged in the movement. There is evidence

that he marched in the Board of Trade procession, the object

of which was said to be the demolition of that building."

The Court proceeded to discuss all the evidence against Neebe, which

tended to show that he was associated with the rest of the defendants

in the encouragement of the movement which had for its object the

destruction of the government. The Court resumed:

"On the question of the instructions whether these defendants,

or any of them, did anticipate or expect the throwing of the

bomb on the night of the 4th of May, is not a question which

I need to consider, because the instructions did not go upon

that ground. The jury were not instructed to find them guilty

if they believed that they participated in the throwing of the

bomb, or encouraged or advised the throwing of that bomb, or

had knowledge that it was to be thrown, or anything of that

sort. The conviction has not gone upon the ground that they

did have any actual participation in the act which caused the

death of Deegan, but upon the ground, under the instructions,

that they had generally by speech and print advised a large

class to commit murder, and had left the occasion, time

and place to the individual will, whim and caprice of the

individuals so advised, and that in consequence of that

advice, and in pursuance of it, and influenced by it, somebody

not known did throw the bomb that caused Deegan's death.

"There is no example in the law books of a case of this sort.

No such occurrence has ever happened before in the history

of the world. I suppose that in the Lord George Gordon riots

we might find something like this. Lord George Gordon was

indicted for treason, and the government failed in its proof

upon the trial as to what he had done. Very likely they did

not want to prove it very strongly against him; I do not

know; it is none of my business. If the bomb was thrown in

pursuance of the prisoners' advice, the instruction as to

the law of accessories before the fact applied to the case,

and the instruction to the jury was proper. If the radical

Prohibitionists should make up their minds that the only way

to stop the liquor traffic was by destroying the saloons and

killing the saloon-keepers, and if some crank should blow

up a saloon with a bomb for whose manufacture the radicals

had furnished specific directions, and in the explosion a

saloon-keeper was killed, there could be no question but that

the radical temperance men were guilty of murder. But there

was no question that when some one said 'Hang McCormick,' or

'Hang Gould,' the reply was given to make no idle threats, but

when they got ready to do anything, to do it."

The shorthand report of the speeches of Spies, Parsons and Fielden at

the Haymarket meeting was then read, after which the Court said:

"Now, the general advice throughout was to each

individual-man--I mean the general teachings on this subject

of associated revolution--was to each individual-man to do

it himself, without combination; that men working together

in deeds of violence were to be avoided; that they were to

go alone where one man only was required to accomplish the

work, and where more than one man was required, as few as was

necessary should be taken. Now, under these circumstances, in

the inflamed state of the public mind at the time, each of

these orators was still more inflaming the public mind when he

advised the people to use force, and some man--I do not say

identified, but unidentified--some man in that crowd, when the

police approached, with a bomb of Lingg's manufacture, killed

Deegan; all who have advised such action are guilty of his

murder. If anything can be proved by circumstantial evidence,

that is proved; that he threw that bomb in consequence of

the influence of these teachings, this advise by speech and

printing over a course of two years; that the man who threw

that bomb had been educated up to it by the teachings of these

defendants. The case, as I said before, is unprecedented.

There is no example of any such crime having been committed;

there is no precedent of any case like this having become the

subject of judicial investigation; but the principle of law is

well fixed. It is the boast of people who profess to admire

the common law, that it adapts itself to human events, and

that no situation or no new form of industry can arise but the

common law has principles which may be applied."

The prisoners spoke in their own behalf before sentence was passed. The

courtroom was crowded as usual. The police department was represented

by Chief Ebersold, Capt. Schaack, and twenty officers. The prisoners

wore a look of even greater anxiety than at the morning session.

Parsons appeared particularly thoughtful and gloomy. The greater part

of the session he sat with his cheek resting in his hand and taking

less note of the proceedings than usual. Spies was laboring under great

excitement. Before he began his speech Judge Gary repeated the caution

he had before given the auditors to refrain from any demonstration of

approbation or disapprobation during the session. He insisted that

every one in the court should be seated, and seeing two men at the

rear of the room seated on a table he compelled them to take chairs or

sit on the floor. Everything was quiet as the grave when Spies began

his address. During the impassioned passages he raised his voice and

indulged in violent gesticulation. Neebe's utterance was quite rapid,

and he spoke like one at home before an audience. His speech would have

produced an impression on any jury. His voice is clear and resonant,

and he has a better presence than any of the other defendants. Fischer

spoke hesitatingly, and would probably not have spoken at all but for

an uncontrollable desire to express his opinion of the State's Attorney

and all representatives of the law. Lingg's rather handsome face was

flushed, and his eyes flashed as he poured out his denunciation of

Messrs. Grinnell and Bonfield. When he took his seat his face was

covered with perspiration. He made the walls ring, and as each sentence

had to be translated by Prof. Ficke, he had ample opportunity to

deliver each sentence with renewed emphasis. Schwab read his speech in

a clear, resonant voice, and it had been evidently prepared with much

care.

CHAPTER IX.

REASONS WHY THE SENTENCE OF THE LAW SHOULD NOT BE EXECUTED

UPON THEM. SPEECHES BY THE ANARCHISTS.

AUGUST SPIES.

[Illustration: AUG. SPIES.]

"In addressing this Court I speak as the representative of one

class to the representative of another. I will begin with the

words uttered five hundred years ago on a similar occasion by

the Venetian Doge Faliero, who, addressing the court, said:

'My defense is your accusation; the causes of my alleged

crime, your history.' I have been indicted under the charge

of murder as an accomplice or accessory. Upon this indictment

I have been convicted. There was no evidence produced by the

State to show or even indicate that I had any knowledge of the

man who threw the bomb, or that I myself had anything to do

with the throwing of the missile unless, of course, you weigh

the testimony of the accomplices of the State's Attorney and

Bonfield, the testimony of Thompson and Gilmer, by the price

they were paid for it. If there was no evidence to show that I

was legally responsible for the deed, then my conviction and

the execution of the sentence are nothing less than a willful,

malicious and deliberate murder--as foul a murder as may be

found in the annals of religious, political, or any other

sort of persecution. Judicial murders have in many cases been

committed where the representatives of the state were acting

in good faith, believing their victims to be guilty of the

charge or accusation. In this case the representatives of the

state cannot justify themselves by a similar excuse, for

they themselves have fabricated most of the testimony which

was used as a pretense to convict us--convict us by a jury

picked to convict before this Court and before the public,

which is supposed to be the State. I charge the State's

Attorney and Bonfield with a heinous conspiracy to commit

murder.

"I will now state a little incident which will throw light

upon this charge. On the evening on which the Prætorian

cohorts of the Citizens' Association, the Bankers'

Association, the Bar Association, and railroad princes

attacked the meeting of working men at the Haymarket with

murderous intent--on that evening about 8 o'clock, I met a

young man, Legner by name. My brother was with me at the same

time, and never left me on that evening until I jumped from

the wagon a few seconds before the explosion came. Legner

knew that I had not seen Schwab that evening. He knew that I

had no such conversation with anybody, as Marshall Field's

protege, Thompson has testified to. He knew that I did not

jump from the wagon and strike a match and hand it to the

man who threw the bomb. He is not a Socialist. Why didn't we

bring him on the stand? Because the honorable representatives

of the State, Grinnell and Bonfield, spirited him away.

These honorable gentlemen knew everything about Legner. They

knew that his testimony would prove the perjury of Thompson

and Gilmer beyond any reasonable doubt. Legner's name was

on the list of witnesses for the State. He was not called,

however, for obvious reasons. First, as he stated to a number

of friends, he had been offered $500 if he would leave the

city, and threatened with direful things if he should remain

here and appear as a witness for the defense. He replied

that he could neither be bought nor bulldozed to serve such

a foul, damnable, dastardly plot. But when we wanted Legner

he could not be found. Mr. Grinnell said--and Mr. Grinnell

is an honorable man--that he himself had been searching for

the young man, but had not been able to find him. About

three weeks later I learned that the very same young man had

been kidnapped and taken to Buffalo, N. Y., by two of the

illustrious guardians of the law, two Chicago detectives. Let

Mr. Grinnell, let the Citizens' Association, his employer,

let them answer for themselves, and let the people--let the

public--sit in judgment upon these would-be assassins. No, I

reply, the Prosecution has not established our legal guilt,

notwithstanding the purchased and perjured testimony of some,

and notwithstanding the originality of the proceedings of

the trial. And as long as this has not been done, and you

pronounce the sentence of the appointed vigilante committee

acting as a jury, I say that you, the alleged servant and high

priests of the law, are the real and only law-breakers, and

in this case you go to the extent of murder. It is well that

the people know this. And when I speak of the people I do not

mean the few conspirators of Grinnell, the noble patricians

who are murderers of those whom they please to oppress. Those

citizens may constitute the state. They may control the state;

they may have their Grinnells, Bonfields, and their hirelings.

No, when I speak of the people, I speak of the great mass

of working beasts, who unfortunately are not yet conscious

of the rascalities that are perpetrated in the name of the

people--in their name. They condemn the murder of eight men

whose only crime is that they have dared to speak the truth.

This murder may open the eyes of these suffering millions,

may wake them up indeed. I have noticed that our conviction

has worked miracles in this direction already. The class

that clamors for our lives, the good and devout Christians,

have attempted in every way, through their newspapers and

otherwise, to conceal the true and only issue in this case, by

designating the defendants Anarchists and picturing them as a

newly-discovered tribe or species of cannibals, by inventing

shocking and horrifying stories of their conspiracies.

"I believe with Buckle, with Paine, with Jefferson, with

Emerson, with Spencer, and with many other great thinkers

of this century, that the state of caste and classes, the

state where one class dominates and lives upon the labor of

another class and calls it order, should be abolished. Yes,

I believe that this barbaric form of social organization,

with its legalized thunder and murder, is doomed to die and

make room for free society--volunteer associations if you

like--universal brotherhood. You may pronounce your sentence

upon me, honorable judge, but let the world know that in the

year A. D. 1886, in the state of Illinois, eight men were

sentenced to death because they had not lost their faith in

the ultimate victory of liberty and justice. Read the history

of Greece and Rome; read that of Venice. Look over the dark

pages of the church and follow the thorny path of science. No

change! No change!

"You would destroy society and civilization, as ever, upon the

cry of the ruling classes. They are so comfortably situated

under the prevailing system that they naturally abhor and

fear even the slightest changes. Their privileges are as

dear to them as life itself, and every change threatens

these privileges. But civilization is a record whose steps

are monuments of such changes. Without these social changes,

always brought about against the will and against the force

of the ruling classes, there would be no civilization. As to

the destruction of society, which we have been accused of

seeking, it sounds like one of Æsop's fables--like the cunning

of the fox. We, who have jeopardized our lives to save society

from the fiend that has grasped her by the throat, that seeks

her life-blood and devours her substance; we, who would heal

her bleeding wounds, who would free her from the fetters you

have wrought around her, from the misery you have brought upon

her--we are enemies. We have preached dynamite, it is said,

and we have predicted from the lessons history has taught

us, that the ruling class of to-day would no more listen to

the voice of reason than did their predecessors. They would

attempt by brute force to stay the march of progress. Was it

a lie, or was it the truth that we stated? * * * I have been

a citizen of this city fully as long as Mr. Grinnell, and am

probably as good a citizen as Grinnell. At least I should not

wish to be compared to him. Grinnell has appealed time and

again, as has been stated by our attorneys, to the patriotism

of the jury. To that I reply, and I will simply use the words

of an English litterateur, 'Patriotism is the last resort

of the scoundrel.' My friends' agitation in behalf of the

disinherited and disfranchised millions, and my agitation in

this direction, the popularization of the economic teachings

in favor of the education of wage-workers, is declared to be a

conspiracy against society. The word 'society' is here wisely

substituted for state, as represented by the patricians of

to-day. It has always been the opinion of the ruling classes

that the people must be kept in ignorance. They lose their

servility, modesty, and obedience to the arbitrary powers that

be, as their intelligence grows. The education of a blackman,

a quarter of a century ago was a criminal offense. Why?

Because the intelligent slave would throw off his shackles at

whatever cost, my Christian gentlemen. Why is the education

of the working classes to-day looked upon by a certain class

as treason against the State? For the same reason! The State,

however, wisely avoided this point in the prosecution of the

case. From their testimony one would really conclude that

we had in our speeches and publications preached nothing

else but destruction and dynamite. * * * You, gentlemen, are

the revolutionists. You rebel against the effects of social

conditions which have tossed you by fortune's hand into a

magnificent paradise. Without inquiring, you imagine that no

one else has a right in that place. You insist that you are

the chosen ones, the sole proprietors of forces that tossed

you into the paradise. The industrial forces are still at

work. They are growing more active and intense from day to

day. Their tendency is to elevate all mankind to the same

level; to have all humanity share in the paradise you now

monopolize. Can you roll back the incoming tide or angry waves

of old ocean by forbidding it to dash upon the shore? So you

can no more frighten back the rising waves of intelligence

and progress into their unfathomable depths by erecting a few

gallows in the perspective. You, who oppose the natural forces

of things, you are the real revolutionists. You, and you

alone, are the conspirators and destructionists."

ADOLPH FISCHER.

[Illustration: ADOLPH FISCHER.]

"Your Honor, you asked me why the sentence of death should

not be passed upon me. I will not talk much. I will only say

a few words, and that is that I protest against my being

sentenced to death, because I committed no crime. I was tried

here in this room for murder and I was convicted of Anarchy.

I protest against being sentenced to death, because I have not

been found guilty of murder. I have been tried for murder,

but I have been convicted because I am an Anarchist. Although

being one of the parties who were at the Haymarket meeting,

I had no more to do with the throwing of that bomb, I had no

more connection with it than State's Attorney Grinnell had

perhaps.

"As I said, it is a fact, and I do not deny that I was one

of the parties who called at the Haymarket meeting, but that

meeting--(At this point Mr. Salomon stepped up and spoke to

Fischer in a low tone, but Fischer waved him off and said:

Mr. Salomon, be so kind. I know what I am talking about.)

Now, that Haymarket meeting was not called for the purpose of

committing violence and crime. No; but the meeting was called

for the purpose of protesting against the outrages and against

the crimes of the police committed on the day previous out

at McCormick's. The next day I went to Wehrer & Klein and

had twenty-five thousand copies of the handbills printed,

and I invited Spies to speak at Haymarket meeting. It is the

fact, and I don't deny it, in the original of the 'copy' I

had the line 'Working men, arm!' and I had my reasons, too,

for putting those lines in, because I didn't want the working

men to be shot down in that meeting as on other occasions.

But as those circulars were printed and brought over to the

_Arbeiter Zeitung_ office, my comrade, Spies, saw one of those

circulars. I had invited him to speak before that. He showed

the circular and said: 'Well, Fischer, if those circulars are

distributed I won't speak.' And I admitted it would be better

to take those lines out; and Mr. Spies spoke. And that is all

I had to do with that meeting. I feel that I am sentenced, or

will be sentenced to death because I am an Anarchist, and

not because I am a murderer. I have never been a murderer.

I have never committed any crime in my life yet; but I know

a certain man who is on the way to becoming a murderer, an

assassin, and that man is Grinnell--the State's Attorney

Grinnell--because he brought men on the witness stand whom he

knew would swear falsely; and I publicly denounce Mr. Grinnell

as being a murderer and an assassin if I should be executed.

But, if the ruling classes think that by hanging us, hanging a

few Anarchists, they can crush out Anarchy, they will be badly

mistaken, because the Anarchist loves his principles more

than his life. An Anarchist is always ready to die for his

principles."

MICHAEL SCHWAB.

"It is not much I have to say, and I would say nothing at

all if keeping silence did not look like a cowardly approval

of what has been done here. To those, the proceedings of

a trial of justice would be a sneer. Justice has not been

done. More than that, could not be done. If one class is

arraigned against the other class it is idle and hypocritical

to talk about justice and fairness. Anarchy was on trial,

as the State's Attorney put it in his closing speech. A

doctrine, an opinion hostile to brute force, hostile to our

present murderous system of production and distribution.

I am condemned to die for writing newspaper articles and

making speeches. The State's Attorney knows as well as I do

that the alleged conversation between Mr. Spies and me never

took place. He knows a good deal more than that. He knows

all the beautiful works of his organizer, Furthmann. When I

was before the Coroner's jury two or three witnesses swore

very positively to having seen me at the Haymarket when Mr.

Parsons finished his speech. I suppose they wanted at that

time to fix the bomb-throwing on me, for the first dispatches

to Europe said that M. Schwab had thrown several bombs at

the police. Later on they found that would not do, and then

Schnaubelt was the man. Anarchy was on trial. Little did it

matter who the persons were to be honored by the prosecution.

* * *

"As soon as the word is applied to us and to our doctrine

it carries with it a meaning that we Anarchists see fit to

give. 'Anarchy' is Greek, and means, verbatim, that we are

not being ruled. According to our vocabulary Anarchy is a

state of society in which the only government is reason; a

state of society in which all human beings do right for the

simple reason that it is right, and hate wrong because it is

wrong. In such a society no compulsion will be necessary. The

Attorney of the State was wrong when he exclaimed 'Anarchy

is dead!' Anarchy up to the present time existed only as a

doctrine, and Grinnell has not the power to kill any doctrine

whatever. Anarchy, as defined by us, is called an idle dream,

but that dream was called by God a divine blessing. One of the

three great German poets and a celebrated German critic of the

last century has also defined it. If Anarchy was the thing the

State's Attorney makes it out to be, how could it be that such

eminent scholars as Prince Krapotkine should say what he has

said about it? Anarchy is a dream, but only in the present.

It will be realized, for reason will grow in spite of all

obstacles. Who is the man that has the cheek to tell us that

human development has already reached its culminating point?

I know our ideal will not be accomplished this year or next

year, but I know it will be accomplished as soon as possible,

some day in the future. It is entirely wrong to use the word

Anarchy as synonymous with violence. Violence is something,

and Anarchy is another. In the present state of society

violence is used on all sides, and therefore we advocated the

use of violence against violence, but against violence only as

a necessary means of defense. I have never read Herr Most's

book simply because I don't find time to read it; and if I

had read it, what of it? I am an agnostic, but I like to read

the Bible, nevertheless. I have not the slightest idea who

threw the bomb at the Haymarket, and had no knowledge of any

conspiracy to use violence that or any other night."

OSCAR NEEBE.

"Your Honor: I have found out during the last few days what

law is. Before I didn't know it. I did not know that I was

convicted because I knew Spies and Fielden and Parsons. I

have met these gentlemen. I have presided at a meeting, as

the evidence against me shows, in the Turner hall, to which

meeting your Honor was invited. The judges, the preachers, the

newspaper men, and everybody was invited to appear at that

meeting for the purpose of discussing Anarchism and Socialism.

I was at that hall. I am well known among the working men of

the city, and I was the one elected chairman of that meeting.

Nobody appeared to speak, to discuss the question of Labor and

Anarchism or Socialism with laboring men. No, they couldn't

stand it. I was chairman of that meeting; I don't deny it. I

had the honor to be marshal of a labor demonstration in this

city, and I never saw as respectable a lot of men as I saw

that day.

"They marched like soldiers, and I was proud that I was

marshal of those men. They were the toilers and the working

men of this city. The men marched through the city of Chicago

to protest against the wrongs of society, and I was marshal

of them. If that is a crime, I have found out--as a born

American--what I am guilty of. I always thought I had a right

to express my opinion, to be chairman of a peaceable meeting,

and to be marshal of a demonstration. My friends, the labor

agitators, and the marshals of a demonstration--was it a crime

to be marshal of a demonstration? I am convicted of that. I

suppose Grinnell thought after Oscar Neebe was indicted for

murder the _Arbeiter Zeitung_ would go down. But it didn't

happen that way. And Mr. Furthmann, too--he is a scoundrel,

and I can tell it to you to your face. There is only one man

that acted as a lawyer, and he is Mr. Ingham, but you three

fellows have not."

I established the paper and issued it to the working men of

the city of Chicago, and inside of two weeks I had enough

money from the toilers--from hired girls, from men who would

take the last cent out of their pocket to establish the

paper--to buy a press. I could not publish the paper because

the honorable detectives and Mr. Grinnell followed us up,

and no printing house would print our paper, and we had to

have our own press. We published our own paper after we had

a press, bought by the money of the working men of the city.

That is the crime I have committed--getting men to try and

establish a working man's paper that will stand to-day, and

I am proud of it. They have not got one press--they have got

two presses to-day, and they belong to the working men of

this city. When the first issue came out, from that day up to

the day now, your Honor, we have gained 4,000 subscribers.

There are the gentlemen sitting over there from the _Freie

Presse_ and _Staats Zeitung_--they know it. The Germans of

this city are condemning these actions. They would not read

our paper. There is the crime of the Germans. I say it is a

verdict against Germans, and I, as an American, must say that

I never saw anything like that.

"Those are the crimes I have committed after the 4th of May.

Before the 4th of May I committed some crimes. I organized

trades unions. I was for the reduction of the hours of labor

and the education of laboring men and the re-establishment of

the _Arbeiter Zeitung_. There is no evidence to show that I

was connected with the bomb-throwing, that I was near it or

anything of that kind. So I am only sorry, your Honor, if you

can stop it or help it, I will ask you to do it--that is, to

hang me, too; and I think it is more honor to die certainly

than to be killed by inches. I have a family and children, and

if they know their father is dead they will bury him. They can

go to the grave and kneel down in front of it; but they can't

go to Joliet and see their father convicted of a crime that

he hasn't anything to do with. That is all I have got to say.

Your Honor, I am sorry I do not get hung with the rest of the

men."

[Illustration: LOUIS LINGG.]

LOUIS LINGG.

[Translated by Prof. H. H. Fick.]

"Court of Justice: With the same contempt with which I have

tried to live humanely upon this American soil, I am now

granted the privilege to speak. If I do take the word I do

it because injustice and indignities have been heaped upon

me right here. I have been accused of murder. What proofs

have been brought in support of it? It has been proved that

I assisted some man by the name of Seliger in manufacturing

bombs. It has been furthermore stated that with the assistance

of somebody else I have taken those bombs to 58 Clybourn

avenue, but although one of these assistants has been produced

as a State witness it has not been shown that one of these

bombs was taken to the Haymarket. * * * What is Anarchy? * * *

The points that we are driving at have been carefully withheld

by the State. * * * But it has not been said that by their

superior force we are driven to our course. Contempt of court

has been charged against us. We have been treated as opponents

of public order. What is this order? Such order as represented

by police and detectives? On the slightest occasion the

representatives of this public order have forced themselves

into our midst. The same police that aim to give protection

to property embraces thieves in its ranks. * * * I have told

Capt. Schaack that I was at a meeting of carpenters at Zephf's

hall on May 3. He has stated that I admitted to him that I

learned the fabrication of bombs from Most's book, 'Science

of Warfare.' That is perjury. * * * It has been proved that

Grinnell has used Gilmer for his purpose intentionally. There

are points which prove that. * * * I say that these seven

persons here, of which I am one, are murdered purposely by

Grinnell. * * * Grinnell has the courage to call me a coward,

right here in this court of justice, and Grinnell is a person

who has connived with miserable subjects to go against me,

to get testimony against me, to kill me. * * * Is life worth

living? What are their purposes in thus murdering these men?

Low egotism, which finds its reward in a higher position,

and which yields a return of money. * * * But it has been

said that the International association of working men was

in itself a conspiracy, and that I was a member of this

association. My colleague, Spies, has already stated to you

how we were connected. * * * And that is the conspiracy that

has been proved against me, and for that I am to end my life

upon the gallows--an instrument which you consider a disgrace

to me. I declare here openly that I do not acknowledge these

laws, and less so the sentence of the Court. * * * I would

not say a word if I was really guilty according to this

foolish law, but even according to these laws that would not

be respected by a schoolboy, not even these laws have been

carried out to the full extent when I was found guilty. * * *

You smile. You perhaps think I will not use bombs any more,

but I tell you I die gladly upon the gallows in the sure hope

that hundreds and thousands of people to whom I have spoken

will now recognize and make use of dynamite. In this hope I

despise you, and I despise your laws. Hang me for it."

GEORGE ENGEL.

[Translated by Mr. Gauss.]

"When I left Germany in the year 1872 it was by reason of my

recognition of the fact that I could not support myself in the

future as it was the duty of a man to do. I recognized that I

could not make my living in Germany because the machinery and

the guilds of old no longer furnished me a guarantee to live.

I resolved to emigrate from Germany to the United States,

praised by many so highly. When I landed at Philadelphia,

on the 8th of January, 1873, my heart and my bosom expanded

with the expectation of living hereafter in that free country

which had been so often praised to me by so many emigrants,

and I resolved to be a good citizen of this country; and I

congratulated myself on having broken with Germany, where I

could have no longer made my living, and I think that my past

will show that, that which I resolved I intended to keep

faithfully. For the first time I stand before an American

court, and at that to be at once condemned to death. And what

are the causes that have preceded it, and have brought me

into this court? They are the same things that preceded my

leaving Germany, and the same causes that made me leave. I

have seen with my own eyes that in this free country, in this

richest country of the world, so to say, there are existing

proletarians who are pushed out of the order of society."

After explaining how his dissatisfaction with the existing order of

things led him to become a Socialist, Engel continued:

"I resolved to study Socialism with all my power. In the year

1878 I came from Philadelphia to Chicago, and took pains to

eke out my existence here in Chicago, and believed that it

would be an easier task to live here, than in Philadelphia,

where I had previously in vain exerted my powers to live. I

found that, that also was in vain. There was no difference for

a proletariat, whether he lived in New York, or Philadelphia,

or Chicago. * * * To make further investigations I tried to

buy, from the money that I and my family earned, scientific

books on those questions. I bought the works of Ferdinand

Lassalle, Karl Marx and Henry George. After investigating

these works I recognized these reasons why a proletariat

could not exist, even in this country, as free as it is. I

thought about the means by which that could be corrected.

They praised to me this country where every man and every

working man had a right to go to the ballot-box and choose

his own officers. I scarcely believed that any citizen of

the United States could have meant so honestly and well as

I, when I turned my attention to politics, and took part in

them. But even in this regard of freedom of the ballot-box

I found myself mistaken. I learned to see that the working

man was not free in his opinion, that he was not free in

vote. It was in vain that the Socialistic party took pains

in former times, honest pains, to elect honest officers.

After a few vain attempts I found that it was impossible for

a working man to free himself by means of the ballot-box,

and to secure those things which were necessary for his

existence. * * * In this city corruption even entered the

ranks of the Social Democracy. I also obtained the conviction

that through those men who put themselves over us as leaders,

and occupied themselves with compromises, this was brought

about, and then I left the ranks of the Social Democracy

and gave myself over to the International which was then

organizing; and what these men wanted, and what these men

through their exertions sought to bring about was nothing more

or less than the conviction that the freeing of the ruling

classes could only be brought about by force, as have all

revolutions been throughout history. This conviction, before

I went over to those people, was obtained through study of

the history of all lands. The history of all lands showed me

that all advantages in a political, in a religious, and in a

material direction, were always obtained only by the use of

force; and if I confine myself to the history of this country

where I am convicted, I take into consideration that the

first immigrants into this country and the first colonists,

only freed themselves by force from the power of England. I

afterward obtained the conviction that the slavery existing

in this country, to the shame of the Republic, could only be

put aside by force. And what does this history teach us? The

man that spoke against existing slavery in this country was

hanged, as it is intended that we should be hanged, to-day.

In the course of time I became convinced that all those who

spoke in favor of the ruling classes must hang. And what are

the reasons for it? This Republic does not exist through,

and its affairs are not conducted by, those persons who come

into office by an honest ballot. * * * Under these conditions

it is certainly not a wonder that there were men, noble men,

noble scientific men, who have tried to find ways and means

to bring back humanity to its original condition. And this is

the social science to which I confess myself with joy. The

State's Attorney said here 'Anarchism is on trial.' Anarchism

and Socialism are, according to my opinion, as like as one egg

is to another. Only the tactics are different. Anarchism has

abandoned the ways pointed out by Socialism to free mankind,

and has resolved no longer to bear the yoke of slavery, and,

therefore, I say to the working classes, do not believe any

longer in the ballot-box and in those ways and means that

are left open to you; but rather think about ways and means

when the time comes, when the burden of the people becomes

intolerable. And that is our crime. Because we have named

to the people the ways and means by which they could free

themselves in the fight against Capitalism, by reason of that,

Anarchism is hated and persecuted in every state. In spite

of that and again in spite of it Anarchism will exist, and

if not in public it will exist in secret, because the powers

force it to act in secret. If the State's Attorney declares

or thinks that after he has hanged these seven men and sent

the other one to the penitentiary for fifteen years he has

then killed Anarchism, I say, that will not be so. Only the

tactics will be changed, and that will be all. No power in

the world will tear from the working man his knowledge and

his skill or opportunity in making bombs. I am convinced that

Anarchism cannot be routed out,--if that was the case it would

have been routed out in other countries long ago--in the least

by our murdering the Anarchists. That evening when the first

bomb in this country was thrown, I was sitting in my room; did

not know anything about the conspiracy; did not know anything

about that deed; did not know anything about the bomb; did

not know anything about the conspiracy which the State's

Attorney had brought about here. * * * Can you have respect

for a government that only gives rights to the privileged

classes, but to the working men not at all, although there

are conspiracies in all classes and connections of the

capitalistic class. Although we have only recently experienced

that the coal barons came together, put up the price of coal

arbitrarily while they paid less wages to their working men,

and wherever those coal workers, those miners have come

together to consider the bettering their conditions, their

demands have always been very modest on the whole, then the

militia appears at once upon the scene and helps those people,

while they are feeding the miners with powder and lead. For

such a government I have no respect, and can have no respect

in spite of all their followers, in spite of all their police,

in spite of all their spies.

"I am not a man who hates a single capitalist. I am not the

man who at all hates the person of the capitalist. I hate the

system and all privileges, and my greatest desire is that the

working classes will at last recognize who are their friends

and who are their enemies. Against the condemnation of myself

by the capitalistic influence I have no word to say."

[Illustration: SAM'L FIELDEN.]

SAM FIELDEN.

Fielden prefaced his plea by reciting a poem called "Revolution",

written by Freilegrath, a German poet:

"And tho' ye caught your noble prey within your hangman's sordid thrall,

And tho' your captive was led forth beneath your city's rampart wall;

And tho' the grass lies o'er her green, where at the morning's early red

The peasant girl brings funeral wreaths--I tell you still--she is not

dead!"

* * * * *

"You see me only in your cells; ye see me only in the grave;

Ye see me only wandering lone, beside the exile's sullen wave--

Ye fools! Do I not live where you have tried to pierce in vain?

Rests not a nook for me to dwell, in every heart, and every brain?"

* * * * *

"'Tis therefore I will be--and lead the peoples yet your hosts to meet,

And on your necks, your heads, your crowns, will plant my strong,

resistless feet!

It is no boast--it is no threat--thus history's iron law decrees--

The day grows hot, oh, Babylon! 'Tis cool beneath thy willow trees!"

Fielden continued:

"It makes a great deal of difference, perhaps, what kind of a

revolutionist a man is. The men who have been on trial here

for Anarchy have been asked the question on the witness stand

if they were revolutionists. It is not generally considered to

be a crime among intellectual people to be a revolutionist,

but it may be made a crime if a revolutionist happens to be

poor. * * * If I had known that I was being tried for Anarchy

I could have answered that charge. I could have justified

it under the constitutional right of every citizen of this

country, and more than the right which any constitution

can give, the natural right of the human mind to draw its

conclusion from whatever information it can gain, but I had no

opportunities to show why I was an Anarchist. I was told

that I was to be hung for being an Anarchist, after I had got

through defending myself on the charge of murder."

Fielden related that he was born in Lancashire; that his first speech

was made to starving operatives in the streets of his native town; that

it was here he began to hate kings and queens; his first speech was in

support of the operatives of Lancashire as against the sympathizers

with the South in the American rebellion; he came to the United States

in 1868 and was a Methodist exhorter in Ohio, and came to Chicago in

1869. Fielden detailed how he had come to be a Socialist and Anarchist;

reviewing the various speeches he had made at meetings in Chicago;

attacking the veracity of witnesses who had testified against him, and

declaring himself the victim of illegal prosecution. He continued:

"From the time I became a Socialist I learned more and more

what it was. I knew that I had found the right thing; that

I had found the medicine that was calculated to cure the

ills of society. Having found it, I believed it, and I had

a right to advocate it, and I did. The Constitution of the

United States, when it says: 'The right of free speech shall

not be abridged,' gives every man the right to speak. I have

advocated the principles of Socialism and social equality,

and for that and no other reason am I here, and sentence of

death is to be pronounced upon me. What is Socialism? Taking

somebody else's property? That is what Socialism is in the

common acceptation of the term. No; but if I were to answer

it as shortly and as curtly as it is answered by its enemies,

I would say it is preventing somebody else from taking your

property. But Socialism is equality. Socialism recognizes the

fact that no man in society is responsible for what he is;

that all the ills that are in society are the production of

poverty; and scientific Socialism says that you must go to the

root of the evil. There is no criminal statistician in the

world but will acknowledge that all the crime, when traced to

its origin, is the product of poverty. * * * If I am to be

convicted--hanged for telling the truth, the little child that

kneels by its mother's side on the West side to-day and tells

its mother that he wants his papa to come home, and to whom I

had intended as soon as its prattling tongue should begin to

talk, to teach that beautiful sentiment--that child had better

never be taught to read; had better never be taught that

sentiment to love truth. If they are to be convicted of murder

because they dare tell what they think is the truth, then

it would be better that every one of your schoolhouses were

reduced to the ground and one stone not left upon another. If

you teach your children to read they will acquire curiosity

from what they read. They will think, and then will search for

the meaning of this and that. They will arrive at conclusions.

And then if they love the truth, they must tell to each other

what is truth or what they think is the truth. That is the sum

of my offending. * * * The private property system then, in

my opinion, being a system that only subserves the interests

of a few, and can only subserve the interests of the few,

has no mercy. It cannot stop for the consideration of such a

sentiment. Naturally it cannot. So you ought not to have mercy

upon the private property system, because it is well known

that there are many people in the community with prejudices

in their minds. They have grown up under certain social

regulations, and they believe that those social regulations

are right, just as Mr. Grinnell believes that everything in

America is right, because he happened to be born here. And

they have such a prejudice against any one who attacks those

systems. Now, I say they ought not to have any mercy upon

systems that do not subserve their interests. They ought not

to have any respect for them that would interfere with their

abolishing them."

Fielden maintained that the throwing of the bomb at the Haymarket was

a complete surprise to him; that he felt that he would be held in some

respect, at least responsible, yet he resolved not to attempt flight;

continuing:

"I have said here that I thought when the representatives

of the State had inquired by means of their policemen as to

my connection with it, I should have been released. And I

say now, in view of all the authorities that have been read

on the law and accessory, that there is nothing in evidence

that has been introduced to connect me with that affair. * *

* The great Socialist who lived in this world nearly 1,900

years ago, Jesus Christ, has left these words, and there

are no grander words in which the principles of justice and

right are conveyed in any language. He said: 'Better that

ninety-nine guilty men should go unpunished than that one

innocent man should suffer.' Mr. Grinnell, I should judge

from his statements here, is a Christian. I would ask him to

apply that statement of the Great Teacher to the different

testimony that has been given here, and the direct contrary in

other places in the investigation of this case. Your Honor, we

claim that this is a class verdict. We claim that the foulest

criminal that could have been picked up in the slums of any

city in Christendom, or outside of it, would never have been

convicted on such testimony as has been brought in here if he

had not been a dangerous man in the opinion of the privileged

classes. * * * If my life is to be taken for advocating the

principles of Socialism and Anarchy, as I have understood them

and honestly believe them to be in the interests of humanity,

I say to you that I gladly give it up; and the price is very

small for the result that is gained. * * * We claim that so

far as we have been able to find out in trying to find a cure

for the ills of society, we have not found out anything that

has seemed to fit the particular diseases which society in our

opinion is afflicted with to-day, better than the principles

of Socialism. And your Honor, Socialism, when it is thoroughly

understood in this community and in the world, as it is by

us, I believe that the world, which is generally honest,

prejudiced though it may be, will not be slow to adopt its

principles. And it will be a good time, a grand day for the

world; it will be a grand day for humanity; it will never have

taken a step so far onward toward perfection, if it can ever

reach that goal, as it will when it adopts the principles of

Socialism. * * * To-day, as the beautiful autumn sun kisses

with balmy breeze the cheek of every free man, I stand here

never to bathe my head in its rays again. I have loved my

fellow men as I have loved myself. I have hated trickery,

dishonesty and injustice. The nineteenth century commits the

crime of killing its best friend. It will live to repent of

it. But, as I have said before, if it will do any good, I

freely give myself up. I trust the time will come when there

will be a better understanding, more intelligence, and above

the mountains of iniquity, wrong and corruption, I hope the

sun of righteousness and truth and justice will come to bathe

in its balmy light an emancipated world. I thank your Honor

for your attention."

[Illustration: A. R. PARSONS.]

A. R. PARSONS.

Parsons made a speech addressed in the main to working men, starting

out with the recital of a poem by George Heinig, entitled "Bread is

Freedom." He continued:

"Your Honor, if there is one distinguishing characteristic

which has made itself prominent in the conduct of this trial

it has been the passion, the heat, and the anger, the violence

both to sentiment and to feeling, of everything connected

with this case. You ask me why sentence of death should not

be pronounced upon me, or, what is tantamount to the same

thing, you ask me why you should give me a new trial in

order that I might establish my innocence and the ends of

justice be subserved. I answer you, your Honor, and say that

this verdict is the verdict of passion, born in passion,

nurtured in passion, and is the sum totality of the organized

passion of the city of Chicago. For this reason I ask your

suspension of the sentence, and a new trial. This is one

among the many reasons which I hope to present to your Honor

before I conclude. Now, your Honor, what is passion? Passion

is the suspension of reason; in a mob upon the streets, in

the broils of the saloon, in the quarrels on the sidewalk,

where men throw aside their reason and resort to feelings of

exasperation, we have passion. There is a suspension of the

elements of judgment, of calmness, of discrimination requisite

to arrive at the truth and the establishment of justice. I

hold, your Honor, that you cannot dispute the proposition

that I make that this trial has been submerged, immersed in

passion from its inception to its close, and even at this

hour, standing here upon the scaffold as I do with the hangman

awaiting me with his halter, there are those who claim to

represent public sentiment in the city, and I now speak of the

capitalistic press--that vile and infamous organ and monopoly

of hired liars, the people's oppressors." Parsons claimed to

have been for thirty years identified with labor interests,

and said: "And in what I say upon this subject relating to

the labor movement or to myself as connected in this trial

or before this bar, I will speak the truth, though my tongue

should be torn from my mouth and my throat cut from ear to

ear, so help me God." The speaker then went into statistics,

claiming that 9,000,000 out of the 12,000,000 voters in the

United States were actual wage workers. He attacked the

citizens' Association as an organization of millionaires, and

claimed that the Court should stand between the accused and

their persecutors. "Where," he asked, "are the ends of justice

observed, and where is truth found in hurrying seven human

beings at the rate of express speed upon a fast train to the

scaffold, and an ignominious death? Why, if your Honor please,

the very method of our extermination, the deep damnation of

its taking off, appeals to your Honor's sense of justice, of

rectitude, and of honor. A judge may also be an unjust man.

Such things have been known. We have in our histories heard

of Lord Jeffreys. It need not follow that because a man is a

judge he is also just. * * * Now, I hold that our execution,

as the matter stands just now, would be judicial murder, and

judicial murder is far worse than lynch law--far worse. But,

your Honor, bear in mind please, this trial was conducted by

a mob, prosecuted by a mob, by the shrieks and the howls of

a mob, an organized powerful mob. The trial is over. Now,

your Honor, you sit there judicially, calmly, quietly, and it

is now for you to look at this thing from the standpoint of

reason and from common sense. * * * Now, the money-makers, the

business men, those people who deal in stocks and bonds, the

speculators and employers, all that class of men known as the

money-making class, they have no conception of this labor

question; they don't understand what it means. To use the

street parlance, with many of them it is a difficult matter

for them to 'catch onto' it, and they are perverse also; they

will have no knowledge of it. They don't want to know anything

about it, and they won't hear anything about it, and they

propose to club, lock up, and if necessary strangle those who

insist on their hearing this question. Now, your Honor, can

you deny that there is such a thing in the world as the labor

question? I am an Anarchist. Now strike! But hear me before

you strike. What is Socialism, briefly stated? It is the

right of the toiler to the free and equal use of the tools of

production, and the right of the producer to their product.

That is Socialism. The history of mankind is one of growth. It

has been evolutionary and revolutionary."

Parsons went into an explanation of the wage question and the

relations of capital and labor, asserting that employers in owning

capital and leaving nothing to the wage slave but the price of his

work, had produced a conflict which would intensify as the power of

the privileged classes over the non-possession of property classes

increased. He continued:

"We were told by the Prosecution that law is on trial; that

government is on trial. That is what the gentlemen on the

other side have stated to the jury. The law is on trial, and

government is on trial. Well, up to the conclusion of this

trial we, the defendants, supposed that we were indicted and

being tried for murder. Now, if the law is on trial, and the

government is on trial, who has placed it upon trial? And I

leave it to the people of America whether the prosecution in

this case have made out a case; and I charge it here now,

frankly, that in order to bring about this conviction the

Prosecution, the representatives of the State, the sworn

officers of the law--those whose duty it is to the people

to obey the law and preserve order--I charge upon them a

willful, a malicious, a purposed violation of every law which

guarantees every right to every American citizen. They have

violated free speech. In the prosecution of this case they

have violated a free press. They have violated the right of

public assembly. Yea, they have even violated and denounced

the right of self-defense. I charge the crime home to them. *

* * My own deliberate opinion concerning this Haymarket affair

is that the death-dealing missile was the work, the deliberate

work of monopoly--the act of those who themselves charge us

with the deed. I am not alone in this view of this matter.

What are the real facts of that Haymarket tragedy? Mayor

Harrison of Chicago has caused to be published his opinion, in

which he says: 'I did not believe that there was any intention

on the part of Spies and those men to have bombs thrown at

the Haymarket.' He knows more about this thing than the jury

that sat in this room, for he knows--I suspect that the Mayor

knows--of some of the methods by which some of this evidence

and testimony might have been manufactured. I don't charge it,

your Honor, but possibly he has had some intimation of it,

and if he has he knows more about this case and the merits of

this case than did the jury who sat here. * * * Before the

trial began, during its prosecution, and since its close,

a Satanic press has shrieked and howled itself wild, like

ravenous hyenas, for the blood of these eight working men.

Now, this subsidized press, in the pay of the monopoly and of

laborers and slavers, commanded this Court and commanded this

jury and this Prosecution to convict us. As a fitting climax

to this damnable conspiracy against our lives and liberty,

what follows? O hide your eye now! hide it! hide it! As a

fitting climax to this damnable conspiracy against our lives

and liberty some of Chicago's millionaires proposed to raise a

purse of $100,000 and present it to the jury for their verdict

of guilty against us. This was done, as everybody knows, in

the last days of the trial, and since the verdict so far as

anybody knows to the contrary, this blood money has been paid

over to that jury. * * * Condemned to death! Perhaps you

think I do not know what for? Or maybe you think the people

do not understand your motives? You are mistaken. I am here,

standing in this spot awaiting your sentence, because I hate

and loathe authority in every form. I am doomed by you to

suffer an ignominious death because I am the outspoken enemy

of coercion, of privilege, of force, of authority. It is for

this you make me suffer. Think you the people are blind, are

asleep, are indifferent? You deceive yourselves. I tell you,

as a man of the people, and I speak for them, that your every

word and act and thoughts are recorded. You are being weighed

in the balance. The people are conscious of your power--your

stolen power. They know you; that while you masquerade as

their servants you are in reality playing the role of master.

The people--the common working people--know full well that all

your wealth, your ease and splendor, have been stolen from

them by the exercise of your authority in the guise of law

and order. I, a working man, stand here and to your face, in

your stronghold of oppression, and denounce to you your crimes

against humanity. It is for this I die, but my death will not

have been in vain. I guess I have finished. I don't know as I

have anything more to say. Your Honor knows all I know about

this case. I have taken your Honor's time up that I might be

able to lay this thing, the whole thing, before you, reserving

nothing; opening my mind and heart, telling you the truth, the

truth, and the whole truth. I am innocent of this offense. I

had no connection with that Haymarket tragedy. I know nothing

of it. I am not responsible for it. I leave the case in the

hands of your Honor."

SENTENCE PRONOUNCED.

Parsons spoke altogether nearly nine hours, and the addresses of all

the prisoners occupied three days. Thousands of people were turned away

during the closing days, and the scene in the courtroom when sentence

was pronounced was peculiarly impressive. At the close of Parsons'

remarks Judge Gary delivered the following remarks, and pronounced the

death sentence:

"I am quite well aware that what you have said, although

addressed to me, has been said to the world; yet nothing

has been said which weakens the force of the proof or the

conclusions therefrom upon which the verdict is based. You

are all men of intelligence, and know that if the verdict

stands, it must be executed. The reasons why it shall stand I

have already sufficiently stated in deciding the motion for

a new trial. I am sorry beyond any power of expression for

your unhappy condition and for the terrible events that have

brought it about. I shall address to you neither reproaches

nor exhortation. What I shall say, shall be said in the faint

hope that a few words from a place where the people of the

State of Illinois have delegated the authority to declare

the penalty of a violation of their laws, and spoken upon an

occasion solemn and awful as this, may come to the knowledge

of and be heeded by the ignorant, deluded and misguided men

who have listened to your counsels and followed your advice. I

say in the faint hope; for if men are persuaded that because

of business differences, whether about labor or anything else,

they may destroy property and assault and beat other men, and

kill the police, if they, in the discharge of their duty,

interfere to preserve the peace, there is little ground to

hope that they will listen to any warning. It is not the least

among the hardships of the peaceable, frugal and laborious

poor to endure the tyranny of mobs, who, with lawless force,

dictate to them, under penalty of peril to limb and life,

where, when and upon what terms they may earn a livelihood for

themselves and their families. Any government that is worthy

of the name will strenuously endeavor to secure to all within

its jurisdiction freedom to follow the lawful avocations and

safety for their property and their persons, while obeying

the law, and the law is common sense. It holds each man

responsible for the natural and probable consequences of his

own acts. It holds that whoever advises murder is himself

guilty of the murder that is committed pursuant to his advice,

and if men band together for a forcible resistance to the

execution of the law and advise murder as a means of making

such resistance effectual, whether such advice be to one man

to murder another, or to a numerous class to murder men of

another class, all who are so banded together are guilty of

any murder that is committed in pursuance of such advice.

The people of this country love their institutions, they

love their homes, they love their property. They will never

consent, that by violence and murder, those institutions shall

be broken down, their homes despoiled, and their property

destroyed. And the people are strong enough to protect and

sustain their institutions and to punish all offenders against

their laws; and those who threaten danger to civil society,

if the law is enforced, are leading to destruction whoever

may attempt to execute such threats. The existing order of

society can be changed only by the will of the majority. Each

man has the full right to entertain and advocate by speech

and print such opinions as suits himself, and the great body

of the people will usually care little what he says. But if

he proposes murder as a means of enforcing he puts his own

life at stake. And no clamor about free speech or the evils to

be cured or the wrongs to be redressed, will shield him from

the consequences of his crime. His liberty is not a license

to destroy. The toleration that he enjoys he must extend to

others, and not arrogantly assume that the great majority are

wrong and may rightfully be coerced by terror, or removed

by dynamite. It only remains that for the crime you have

committed, and of which you have been convicted after a trial

unexampled in the patience with which an outraged people have

extended to you every protection and privilege of the law

which you derided and defied, that the sentence of that law be

now given. In form and detail that sentence will appear upon

the records of the Court. In substance and effect it is that

the defendant Neebe be imprisoned in the State Penitentiary at

Joliet at hard labor for the term of fifteen years. And that

each of the other defendants, between the hours of ten o'clock

in the forenoon and two o'clock in the afternoon of the third

day of December next, in the manner provided by the statute of

this state, be hung by the neck until he is dead. Remove the

prisoners."

Stay of sentence in the case of Neebe was granted until December 3, the

date set for the execution of the other principles; and the counsel

for the condemned Anarchists announced that they should file a bill

of exceptions before the Illinois Supreme Court, and petition for a

supersedeas.

[Illustration: MRS. PARSONS.]

CHAPTER X.

MISCELLANEOUS MATTER. ARBEITER ZEITUNG. MRS. LUCY PARSONS. HER

ARREST IN OHIO. HER ARREST IN CHICAGO. HERR MOST ENDORSING

THE BOMB-THROWING. THE PANIC HE COULD CREATE IN A BIG CITY

IN THIRTY MINUTES WITH 3000 BOMBS IN THE HANDS OF 500

REVOLUTIONISTS.

As the trial progressed many new and sensational developments were

made. Dr. Ernst Schmidt was constituted chairman of the committee

of an organization, taking charge of matters pertaining to raising

money for the defense. F. Bielefeld became business manager of the

_Arbeiter Zeitung_. In all the important cities meetings were held

in the interests of the condemned men. Mrs. Lucy Parsons, wife of

the condemned anarchist, went on a lecturing tour to replenish the

exchequer of the defendants, but public opinion in many places was

against her, and she found it difficult in many places to obtain halls

in which to speak. At Akron, Ohio, she was arrested for holding a

meeting in defiance of the order of the mayor of that city. She has for

years been an active anarchistic agitator, and her proclivities for

public speech-making has brought her often before the public. She was

arrested September 23 for a violation of the ordinance prohibiting the

distribution of circulars on the street of Chicago. In New York, Herr

Most, through his paper, the _Freiheit_, indorsed the bomb-throwing,

saying: "Its work was thorough. Such bombs can be made by anybody,

without much trouble, of an evening. Think of 500 revolutionists

provided, say, each with six of these things, working in concert, so

that, for example, in the wide range of a great cosmopolitan city

within half an hour the fragments were to go flying in various suitable

places, who will gainsay that by this means such a panic could be

created that a comparatively small number of determined men might get

possession of all commanding points in the place in a giffy? Nobody.

The bomb in Chicago was legally justified, and, in a military sense,

excellent. All honor to him who produced and made use of it."

For this, and similar incendiary utterances, Most was arrested and

sentenced to serve a year in Sing Sing prison. He was living with Lena

Fischer, alias Mary Georges, at 198 Allen street, under the name of

West, and when captured was found in hiding under the woman's bed. The

woman was thought to be a sister of Adolph Fischer, one of the condemned

Chicago anarchists, but this was denied.

[Illustration: Niña Stuart van Zandt-Spies]

MISS NIÑA VAN ZANDT,

who has constituted herself the heroine of Anarchistic notoriety by

developing a tender passion for the notorious Spies, is a young lady of

eighteen years of age, with a fine form and a fair share of personal

attractions; neither a pronounced blonde, nor yet a brunette, but

seemingly occupying the middle ground, between. Niña is the daughter

of the superintendent of the great Kirk soap factory of Chicago, and

the heiress apparent to quite a fortune. She is of a dashing romantic

disposition; fond of flowers, birds and dogs. She fell a victim to

the ardent glances of the humorous editor as the sequence of having

made his acquaintance while inserting an advertisement in the _Zeitung_

to recover her lost pug, to whom she was much attached. Through the

efforts of Spies she recovered her pet canine, and while performing

the duty of expressing her gratitude to the editor she was smitten,

and yielded passively to her fate. She became so infatuated in her

attachment and attentions to Spies that in February, 1887, a marriage

license was procured for the purpose of becoming his wife in the jail,

but the sheriff forbade the ceremony as illegal and unprecedented.

It was then determined that the ceremony should take place by proxy.

Spies' brother became the proxy, and the ceremony took place before

Justice Englehardt in the town of Jefferson. Justice Englehardt made

returns of the marriage to the county clerk, who refused to recognize

the return, pronouncing the ceremony illegal. This wife, in name only,

was placed on exhibition in wax in one of the dime museums, when the

cheeky manager was served with an injunction; but this young would-be

wife compromised the matter, it is thought, on condition that part of

the emoluments went into a fund for the benefit of her condemned lord.

MRS. OSCAR NEEBE

died quite suddenly in March, 1887. Neebe, under guard of Jailor Folz,

visited the bedside of his dying wife and by official clemency remained

some time with his children, and everything was done for the condemned

men that could be done in the name of humanity under the circumstances.

CHAPTER XI.

SUPERSEDEAS GRANTED. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT'S DECISION

SUSTAINING THE ORIGINAL VERDICT. PARSONS' LETTER TO GOVERNOR

OGLESBY. LINGG DEFIANT. THEY REFUSE TO SIGN A PETITION ASKING

FOR EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY. THEIR IMPERTINENT LETTERS TO GOVERNOR

OGLESBY.

THE SUPERSEDEAS GRANTED.

There was no doubt from the beginning that the supersedeas asked for in

behalf of the condemned anarchists would be granted. Capt. W. P. Black

and Hon. Leonard Swett, who had been retained to present the petition

and make the argument for a new trial, met Chief Justice Scott at

Bloomington by appointment, Nov. 25, 1886, and he directed the writ of

error to issue. The only thing of substance which Justice Scott said

at the entering of the order was to call attention to the following

language in Mooney vs. The People, CXI. Illinois, page 388--an opinion

by the full court:

Recognizing to the fullest extent the rule of law that the

jury in their deliberations are judges of the facts and the

weight of the evidence in criminal cases, yet the law has

imposed on the court the solemn and responsible duty to see

to it that no injustice is done by hasty action, passion, or

prejudice, or from any other cause on the part of the jury.

This duty the court may not omit in any case.

[Illustration: RICHARD OGLESBY. _Governor of Illinois._]

It is almost needless to state that the anarchists were well

pleased with their temporary reprieve, and opportunity to have their

able counsel argue for a rehearing of their case. The arguments were

finished March 18, 1887, before the Supreme Court at Ottawa, States

Attorney Grinnell and Attorney General Hunt appearing for the State.

The decision was rendered Wednesday, September 14, before the full

bench of Supreme justices, being read by Judge Magruder, of Chicago. It

will thus be seen that the Supreme Court gave the questions at issue

full and ample consideration during a period of nearly six months. The

courtroom was crowded by an expectant throng, and the announcement of

the decision was foreshadowed by impressive solemnity. In a condensed

review like this it would be manifestly impossible to give a decision

comprising upwards of 60,000 words, and covering every point and detail

of the case. It is sufficient to state that the decision was unanimous

on the part of the justices. Even Justice Mulkey, who was thought to

lean toward a new trial, declared that, after having fully examined the

record and given the questions arising on it his very best thought,

with an earnest and conscientious desire to faithfully discharge

his whole duty, he was fully satisfied that the opinion reached

vindicates the law and does complete justice between the people and the

defendants, fully warranted by the law and evidence.

Chief Justice Sheldon made the following announcement:

"In this case the court orders that the sentence of the

Criminal Court of Cook county on the defendants in the

indictment of August Spies, Michael Schwab, Samuel Fielden,

Albert R. Parsons, Adolph Fischer, George Engel, and Louis

Lingg, be carried into effect by the sheriff of Cook county on

Friday, November 11 next, between the hours of 10 o'clock in

the forenoon and 4 o'clock in the afternoon of that day."

The formal order for the execution of the anarchists was received

by Sheriff Matson, of Cook county, Monday, September 26. The guards

inside and patrol outside the jail had been doubled upon receipt of

the news that the Supreme Court had sustained the verdict. Monday

night Oscar Neebe was quietly removed from the jail in a carriage and

taken to Joliet by train by Deputy Sheriffs Gleason and Spear, Neebe

being handcuffed securely to the latter officer. Neebe's companions

and outside sympathizers did not know of his removal. Neebe said to a

reporter of the _News_ that he had abandoned all hope. He said he would

rather step upon the gallows with his companions than to go to prison;

related what he had accomplished for employees of Chicago breweries and

the grocery clerks, in getting their hours shortened; was unrepentant

of his part in the conspiracy, and said: "What I have done I would do

again, and the time will come when the blood of the martyrs about to be

sacrificed will cry aloud for vengeance, and that cry will be heard,

aye, and that, too, before many years elapse."

EFFORTS TO SAVE THE ANARCHISTS HAD FAILED.

Upon receipt of the news of the affirmation of the sentence by the

Supreme Court, A. R. Parsons sent to the newspapers an appeal, "To the

American People," in which he maintained his innocence; declared that

his speeches were lawful; condemned the evidence of detectives; refused

executive clemency, concluding in the words of Patrick Henry, "I know

not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give

me death."

A. R. Parsons's open letter to the American people in which he

justifies his actions, maintains his innocence, and refuses executive

clemency, ran as follows, under date of September 22, 1887:

"TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE--_Fellow Citizens_: As all the

world knows, I have been convicted and sentenced to die for

the crime of murder, the most heinous offense that can be

committed. Under the form of law two courts--viz: the Criminal

and Supreme courts of the State of Illinois--have sentenced

me to death as an accessory before the fact to the murder of

Officer Degan on May 4, 1886. Nevertheless, I am innocent of

the crime charged, and to a candid and unprejudiced world I

submit the proof:

PARSONS MAINTAINS HIS INNOCENCE.

"In the decision affirming the sentence of death upon me the

Supreme Court of the State of Illinois says: 'It is undisputed

that the bomb was thrown that caused the death of Degan. It

is conceded that no one of the defendants threw the bomb with

his own hands. Plaintiffs in error are charged with being

accessories before the fact.' If I did not throw the bomb

myself it becomes necessary to prove that I aided, encouraged,

and advised the person who did throw it. Is that fact proved?

The Supreme Court says it is. The record says it is not. I

appeal to the American people to judge between them.

"The Supreme Court quotes articles from the _Alarm_, the

paper edited by me, and from my speeches running back three

years before the Haymarket tragedy of May 4, 1886. Upon said

articles and speeches the court affirms my sentence of death

as an accessory. The court says, 'The articles in the _Alarm_

were most of them written by the defendant Parsons, and some

of them by the defendant Spies,' and then proceeds to quote

these articles. I refer to the record to prove that of all the

articles quoted only one was shown to have been written by me.

I wrote, of course, a great many articles for my paper, the

_Alarm_, but the record will show that only one of these many

quoted by the Supreme Court to prove my guilt as an accessory

was written by me. This article appeared in the _Alarm_

December 6, 1884, one year and a half before the Haymarket

meeting. As to Mr. Spies, the record will show that during the

three years I was editor of the _Alarm_ he did not write for

the paper half a dozen articles. For proof as to this I appeal

to the record.

"The _Alarm_ was a labor paper, and, as is well known, a labor

paper is conducted as a medium through which working people

can make known their grievances. The _Alarm_ was no exception

to this rule. I not only did not write 'most of the articles,'

but wrote comparatively few of them. This the record will also

show.

"In referring to my Haymarket speech the court says: 'To the

men then listening to him he had addressed the incendiary

appeals that had been appearing in the _Alarm_ for two years.

The court then quotes the incendiary article which I did

write, and which is as follows: 'One dynamite bomb properly

placed will destroy a regiment of soldiers, a weapon easily

made, and carried with perfect safety in the pockets of one's

clothing.'"

SIMPLY A QUOTATION FROM GENERAL SHERIDAN.

"The record will show by referring to the _Alarm_ that this

is a garbled extract taken from a statement made by Gen.

Philip Sheridan in his annual report to Congress. It was

simply a reiteration of General Sheridan's statement that

dynamite was easily made, perfectly safe to handle, and a

very destructive weapon of warfare. The article in full as

it appeared in the _Alarm_ is as follows: 'Dynamite--The

protection of the poor against the armies of the rich--in

submitting his annual report, November 10, 1884, Gen. Philip

Sheridan, commander of the United States army, says: "This

nation is growing so rapidly that there are signs of other

troubles, which I hope will not occur and which will probably

not come upon us if both capital and labor will only be

conservative. Still, it should be remembered, destructive

explosives are easily made, and that banks, United States

sub-treasuries, and large mercantile houses can be readily

demolished and the commerce of entire cities destroyed by an

infuriated people with means carried with perfect safety to

themselves in the pockets of their clothing."'

"The editorial comment upon the above as it appeared in the

_Alarm_ is as follows: 'A hint to the wise is sufficient'.

Of course General Sheridan is too modest to tell us that

himself and army will be powerless in the coming revolution

between the propertied and the propertyless classes. Only in

foreign wars can the usual weapons of warfare be used to any

advantage. One dynamite bomb properly placed will destroy a

regiment of soldiers; a weapon easily made and carried with

perfect safety in the pockets of one's clothing. The First

regiment may as well disband, for if it should ever level

its guns upon the working men of Chicago it can be totally

annihilated.

"Again the court says: 'He (Parsons) had said to them

(referring to the people assembled at the Haymarket)

Saturday, April 24, 1886, just ten days before May 4, in

the _Alarm_ that had appeared: "Working men, 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. It is supported by the rich classes, and to destroy it

they must be either made work or die. One pound of dynamite

is better than a bushel of ballots! Make your demand for

eight hours with weapons in your hands to meet the capitalist

bloodhounds--police and militia--in the proper manner."'

"The record will show that this article was not written by me,

but was published as a news item. By referring to the columns

of the _Alarm_ the following comment appears, attached to the

above article, viz: 'The above hand bill was sent to us from

Indianapolis, Ind., having been posted all over that city last

week. Our correspondent says that the police tore them down

wherever they found them.'

"The court continuing, says: 'At the close of another article

in the same issue he said: "The social war has come, and

whoever is not with us is against us."' Assistant State's

Attorney Walker read this article to the jury, and at its

conclusion stated that it bore my initials and was my article.

It is a matter within the knowledge of every one present that

I interrupted him and called his attention to the fact that

the article did not bear my initials, and that I was not its

author. Mr. Walker corrected his mistake to the jury.

"Now these are the three articles quoted by the Supreme Court

as proof of my guilt as an accessory in a conspiracy to murder

Officer Degan. The record will prove what I say.

HIS SPEECHES WERE ALL RIGHT.

"Now as to my speeches--all of them, with one exception

purporting to be my utterances at the Haymarket, are given

from the excited imaginations and perverted memories of

newspaper reporters. Mr. English, who alone took shorthand

notes and swore to their correctness, reports me as saying.

'It is time to raise a note of warning. There is nothing in

the eight-hour movement to excite the capitalist. Don't you

know that the militia are under arms and a Gatling gun is

ready to mow you down? Was this Germany, or Russia, or Spain?

[A voice: "It looks like it."] Whenever you make a demand

for eight hours' pay or increase of pay the militia and the

deputy sheriffs and the Pinkerton men are called out and you

are shot and clubbed and murdered in the streets. I am not

here for the purpose of exciting anybody, but to speak out, to

tell the facts as they exist even though it shall cost me my

life before morning!' Mr. English continuing, said: 'There is

another part of it (the speech) right here. It behooves you,

as you love your wife and children, if you don't want to see

them perish with hunger, killed, or cut down like dogs on the

street--Americans, in the interest of your liberty and your

independence, to arms; arm yourselves!'

"This, be it remembered, is a garbled extract, and it is a

matter of record that Reporter English testified that he was

instructed by the proprietor of his paper to report only the

inflammatory portions of the speeches made at the meeting.

THE MAYOR HEARD THE SPEECH.

"Mayor Harrison, who was present and heard this speech,

testified before the jury that it was simply 'a violent and

political harangue' and did not call for his interference as

a peace officer. The speech delivered by me at the Haymarket,

and which I repeated before the jury is a matter of record

and undisputed, and I challenge any one to show therein that

I incited any one to acts of violence. The extract reported

by Mr. English, when taken in connection with what preceded

and what followed, cannot be construed by the wildest

imagination as incitement to violence. Extracts from three

other speeches alleged to have been delivered by me were made

more than one year prior to May 4, 1886, are given. Two of

these speeches were reported from the memory of the Pinkerton

detective Johnson. These are the speeches quoted by the court

as proof of my guilt as accessory to the murder of Degan.

Where, then, is the connection between these speeches and the

murder of Degan? I am bold to declare that such connection

is imperceptible to the eye of a fair and unprejudiced mind.

But the honorable body, the Supreme Court of Illinois, has

condemned me to death for speeches I never made, and for

articles I never wrote. In the affirmation of the death

sentence the court has 'assumed,' 'supposed,' 'guessed,'

'surmised,' and 'presumed' that I can and did 'so and so.'

This the record fully proves.

"The court says: 'Spies, Schwab, Parsons and Engel were

responsible for the articles written and published by them, as

above shown; Spies, Schwab, Fielden, Parsons and Engel were

responsible for the speeches made by them respectively, and

there is evidence in the same record tending to show that the

death of Degan occurred during the prosecution of a conspiracy

planned by the members of the international groups who read

these articles and heard these speeches.'

OBJECTS TO THE PINKERTON MEN.

"Now, I defy any one to show from the record the proof

that I wrote more than one of the many articles alleged to

have been written by me. Yet the Supreme Court says that I

wrote and am responsible for all of them. Again--concerning

the alleged speeches--they were reported by the Pinkerton

detective Johnson, who was, as the record shows, employed by

Lyman Gage, president of the First National Bank, as the agent

of the Citizens' Association, an organization composed of the

millionaire employers of Chicago.

"I submit to a candid world if this hired spy would not make

false reports to earn blood-money. Thus, it is for speeches

I did not make, and articles I did not write I am sentenced

to die, because the court 'assumes' that these articles

influenced some unknown and still unidentified person to throw

the bomb that killed Degan. Is this law? Is this justice?

"The Supreme Court, in affirming the sentence of death upon

me, proceeds to give further reasons, as follows: 'Two

circumstances are to be noted. First, it can hardly be said

that Parsons was absent from the Haymarket meeting when he

went to Zepf's Hall. It has already been stated that the

latter place was only a few steps north of the speakers' wagon

and in sight from it. We do not think that the defendant

Parsons could escape his share of the responsibility for

the explosions at the Haymarket because he stepped into a

neighboring saloon and looked at the explosion through a

window. While he was speaking men stood around him with arms

in their hands. Many of these were members of the armed

sections of the international groups. Among them were men who

belonged to the International Rifles, an armed organization in

which he himself was an officer, and with which he had been

drilling in preparation for the events then transpiring.'

"The records of the trial will show that not one of the

foregoing allegations is true. The facts are these: Zepf's

Hall is on the northeast corner of Lake and Desplaines

streets, just one block north of the speakers' wagon. The

court says 'it was only a few steps north of the speakers'

wagon.' The court says further that 'it can hardly be said

that Parsons was absent from the Haymarket meeting when he

was at Zepf's Hall.' If this is correct logic, then I was at

two different places a block apart at the same instant. Truly

the day of miracles has not yet passed. Again, the record

will show that I did not 'step into a neighboring saloon and

look at the explosion through a window.' It will show that

I went to Zepf's Hall, one block distant, and across Lake

street, accompanied by my wife and another lady, and my two

children (a girl of five and a boy of seven years of age),

they having sat upon a wagon about ten feet from the speakers'

wagon throughout my speech; that it looked like rain; that we

had started home and went into Zepf's Hall to wait for the

meeting to adjourn, and walked home in company with a lot of

friends who lived in that direction. Zepf's building is on

the corner and opens on the street with a triangular door six

feet wide. Myself and ladies and children were just inside the

door. Here, while waiting for our friends and looking toward

the meeting, I had a fair view of the explosion. All this the

record will show.

ABOUT THE BOMB.

"It would seem that, according to circumstances, a block is at

one time 'a few steps' or a 'few steps' is more than a block,

as the case may suit. The logical as well as the imaginative

faculties of the Supreme Court are further illustrated in

a most striking manner by the credence of the court to the

'yarn' of a 'reporter,' who testified that Spies had described

to him the 'Czar' bomb, and the men who were to use them as

follows. 'He spoke of a body of tall, strong men in their

organization who could throw bombs weighing five pounds 150

paces. He stated that the bombs in question were to be used in

case of conflict with the police or the militia.'

"The court gives this sort of testimony as proof of the

existence of a conspiracy to murder Degan. Wonderful

credulity. To throw a five-pound bomb 150 paces or yards is to

throw it 450 feet or a quarter of a mile.

"Gulliver, in his travels among the Brobdingnag race, tells

us of the giants he met, and we have also heard of the giants

of Patagonia. But we did not know until now that they were

mere Lilliputians as compared with the 'anarchist Swedes' of

Chicago.

"The court proceeds to say, 'While he (Parsons) was speaking,

men stood around him with arms in their hands.' The record

as quoted by the court shows that only one man flourished

a pistol, not a number of men. Again, the court says,

'Most of the men were members of the armed sections of the

"International groups,"' thus making it appear that many of

these men (when there was only one who was even alleged to

have exhibited a pistol) were armed.

"The court says: 'Among them were men who belonged to the

"International Rifles," an armed organization in which he

himself was an officer, and in which he had been drilling in

preparation for the events then transpiring.'

"Now I Challenge the Supreme Court or any other honorable

gentleman to prove from the record that there ever existed

such an organization as the armed section of the American

group, known as the 'International Rifles.' It cannot be done.

The record shows that some members of the American group did

organize the 'International Rifles,' which never met but

four or five times; was never armed with rifles or any other

weapons, and was disbanded nearly a year before the 4th of

May, 1886.

"The Pinkerton man Johnson says that dynamite bombs were

exhibited 'in the presence of the "International Rifles."' It

will take corroborative testimony before the American people

will credit the statements of such a man engaged for such a

purpose; and it is well known that Supreme courts have decided

that the testimony of detectives should be taken with great

caution.

HE APPEALS TO THE PEOPLE.

"I appeal to the American people, to their love of justice

and fair play. I submit that the record does not show my guilt

of the crime of murder, but on the contrary it proves my

innocence.

"Against me in this trial all the rules of law and evidence

have been reversed in that I have been held as guilty until I

proved my innocence. I have been tried ostensibly for murder,

but in reality for anarchy. I have been proved guilty of

being an anarchist and condemned to die for that reason. The

State's attorney said in his statement before the court and

jury in the beginning of the trial: 'These defendants were

picked out and indicted by the grand jury. They are no more

guilty than the thousands who follow them. They are picked

out because they are leaders. Convict them and our society is

safe,' and in their last appeal to the jury the prosecution

said: 'Anarchy is on trial. Hang these eight men and save our

institutions. These are the leaders. Make examples of them.'

This is a matter of record.

A WORD FOR HIS COMRADES.

"So far as I have had time to examine the records I find the

same fabrication and perversion of testimony against all my

comrades as exists against myself. I therefore again appeal to

to the American people to avert the crime of judicial murder.

And this appeal I have faith will not be in vain.

"My ancestors partook of all the hardships incident to the

establishment of this Republic. They fought, bled, and some

of them died that the Declaration of Independence might live

and the American flag might wave in triumph over those who

claim the 'divine right of kings to rule.' Shall the flag now,

after a century's triumph, trail in the mire of oppression

and protect the perpetration of outrages and oppressions that

would put the older despotisms of Europe to shame?

"Knowing myself innocent of crime I came forward and gave

myself up for trial. I felt that it was my duty to take my

chances with the rest of my comrades. I sought a fair and

impartial trial before a jury of my peers, and knew that

before any fair-minded jury I could with little difficulty be

cleared. I preferred to be tried and take the chances of an

acquittal with my friends to being hunted as a felon. Have I

had a fair trial?

PARSONS REFUSES EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY.

"The lovers of justice and fair play are assiduously engaged

in an effort to thwart the consummation of judicial murder by

a commutation of sentence to prison. I speak for myself alone

when I say that for this I thank them and appreciate their

efforts. But I am an innocent man. I have violated no law;

I have committed no offense against any one's rights. I am

simply the victim of the malice of those whose anger has been

aroused by the growth, strength and independence of the labor

organizations of America. I am a sacrifice to those who say:

'These men may be innocent. No matter. They are anarchists. We

must hang them anyway.'

"My counsel informs me that every effort will be made to

take this case before the highest tribunal in the land, and

that there is strong hope of a hearing there. But I am also

reliably informed that from three to five years will elapse

before the Supreme Court of the United States can hear and

adjudge the case.

"Since surrendering myself to the authorities, I have been

locked up in close confinement twenty-one hours out of every

twenty-four for six days, and from Saturday afternoon till

Monday morning (thirty-eight hours) each week in a noisome

cell, without a ray of sunlight or a breath of pure air. To

be compelled to bear this for five or even three years would

be to suffer a lingering death, and it is only a matter of

serious consideration with me whether I ought to accept the

verdict as it stands rather than die by inches under such

conditions. I am prepared to die. I am ready, if needs be, to

lay down my life for my rights and the rights of my fellow

men. But I object to being killed on false and unproved

accusations. Therefore I cannot countenance or accept the

efforts of those who would endeavor to procure a commutation

of my sentence to an imprisonment in the penitentiary. Neither

do I approve of any further appeals to the courts of law.

I believe them to be all alike--agency of the privileged

classes to perpetuate their power, to oppress and plunder the

toiling masses. As between capital and its legal rights, and

labor and its legal rights, the courts of law must side with

the capitalistic class. To appeal to them is in vain. It is

the appeal of the wage slave to his capitalistic master for

liberty. The answer is curses, blows, imprisonment, and death.

"If I had never been an anarchist before, my experience with

courts and the laws of the governing class would make an

anarchist of me now. What is anarchy? It is a state of society

without any central or governing power. Upon this subject the

court, in its affirmation of the death sentence, defines the

object of the International Working Peoples' Association as

follows:

"'It is designed to bring about a social revolution. Social

revolution means the destruction of the right of private

ownership of property, or of the right of the individual to

own property. It means of the bringing about of a state of

society in which all property should be held in common.'

HE REFERS TO THE SCRIPTURES.

"If this definition is right, then it is very similar to that

advocated by Jesus Christ, for proof of which I refer to the

fourth and fifth chapters of the Acts of the Apostles; also

Matthew xxi., 10 to 14, and Mark xi., 15 to 19.

"No, I am not guilty. I have not been proved guilty. I leave

it to you to decide from the record itself as to my guilt

or innocence. I cannot, therefore, accept a commutation to

imprisonment. I appeal--not for mercy, but for justice. As

for me, the utterance of Patrick Henry is so apropos that I

cannot do better than let him speak:

"'Is life so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at

the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I

know not what course others may take, but, as for me, give me

liberty or give me death.'"

A. R. PARSONS,

"Prison Cell 29, Chicago, Ill., Sept. 21, 1887."

THE CASE BEFORE THE FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

The anarchists were not lacking in funds to secure every chance of

reprieve or commutation, as contributions had poured into their coffers

swelling the sum total over $50,000. Every opportunity was accorded

to the condemned men to place their case in as favorable a light as

possible before the Federal Court. But the flagrant and far-reaching

character of their crime gave little hope to the unbiased that the

judges composing that honorable body would interfere. Following our

readers will find Attorney Grinnell's argument before the United States

Supreme Court. Also General Butler's defense for the impenitent yet

doomed men.

GRINNELL'S ARGUMENT BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

Mr. Grinnell, addressing the court, said that it had not been his

intention to take part in the oral argument, and that he came here

primarily for the purpose of assisting Mr. Hunt by means of his

familiarity with the record in this case. He thought that by the

presentation of the law and the facts yesterday it was clearly shown

that there was no federal question involved, and that the court was

without jurisdiction to grant the writ of error. The assignments of

error in the lower court, and the parts of the record relating to the

jurors Denker and Sanford had been printed and were in the court's

hands. In all the twenty-eight assignments of error there was no

reference directly or indirectly to the constitution of the United

States or any of its amendments. There were some things, he said, which

were here generally conceded, and one of them was that the constitution

itself confers no rights which need be here considered. It is simply a

limitation of the rights of the legislative power in dealing with the

rights of citizens.

THE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION.

The constitution of the State of Illinois contains almost all the

provisions which are embraced in the constitution of the United States.

This court had settled, he believed, the question of jurisdiction as

far as the first ten amendments are concerned, and also, he thought,

under the fourteenth amendment. The only clause of the latter which

could figure here was that "no State shall deprive any person of life,

liberty, or property without due process of law." Whatever affects

liberty and life is made by this clause to affect also property. If

the court has jurisdiction of this case under this provision of the

amendment then every State question relating to property, such as

special assessments, the condemnation of property, etc., might be

brought to this court for review.

The Chief Justice--"Because they take property without valuation by a

jury."

Mr. Grinnell--"Yes, your honor, in some cases they do, especially in

the matter of drainage, where the proceedings may be before a justice

of the peace."

PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES.

Mr. Grinnell said he thought it to be conceded that a State

Legislature had a right to prescribe how many peremptory challenges

should be allowed in the formation of a jury. The common law of

Illinois had been radically changed in this respect, and both

prosecution and defendant now stood on an equal footing. Each defendant

was entitled to twenty peremptory challenges, and as the eight

defendants in this case acted in concert and were all consulted, each

of them had practically 160 peremptory challenges. The State had a

like number. The defendants exhausted all of their 160 peremptory

challenges before a jury was obtained and the State availed itself of

its privilege to the extent of fifty-two challenges. He maintained,

however, that no federal question would be involved even if the State

allowed only one peremptory challenge to one side and 160 to the other.

It was the State's right. In this case there were 931 men called into

the jury box and examined in order to obtain twelve jurors.

JURORS SANFORD AND DENKER.

No objection was raised to any one of the twelve jurors with the single

exception of Sanford. Denker was challenged for cause after a brief

examination; the challenge was overruled and the defense accepted, but

they then proceeded with a further and more elaborate examination of

him, and it is shown by the record that after this second examination

they desired to keep him, that they did keep him, and that they did

make no further exception. When Denker was taken the defense had

left 142 peremptory challenges and they could have used one of these

challenges to get rid of him if they had been very desirous of so

doing. They had forty-three peremptory challenges left after eleven

jurors had been sworn. These forty-three challenges they frittered

away frivolously for the purpose of taking some possible advantage.

Their peremptory challenges were then exhausted, and they had to either

take a juror or show cause why he should be rejected.

The examination of Sanford, the last juror, clearly demonstrated, Mr.

Grinnell said, that the defense were more ready to take him than the

State was. Not a single juror was put upon the defense to exhaust their

peremptory challenges. Whenever a man said that he had talked with a

witness or any one who was present at the Haymarket meeting, or that he

had attended the coroner's inquest he was rejected for cause.

EULOGIZING THE JURY.

Speaking of the jury as a whole, Mr. Grinnell said: "I wish and am

constrained to pay one tribute to that jury. It exemplified American

citizenship in this country more than any jury that was ever looked

upon. It embraced all walks of life. Three of them earned their living

by manual work. They came from all parts of the country and one of them

was born on foreign soil. They were not a class jury. They were honest

citizens with the solemn duty devolving upon them of determining what

should be done with those men. No judge could look in the faces of that

jury without saying: 'They are intelligent; they represent American

citizenship; they are fit to be trusted with the rights of freemen

under our constitution.' There was not a capitalist on that jury. They

were all common-place small dealers and intelligent men."

Mr. Grinnell said he would challenge any one to show that a single

member of that jury was not a competent juror, not only under the jury

law of Illinois, but under the common law. "Congress," he said, "had

recognized the right of States to make their own jury laws."

Section 800 of the Revised Statutes provides that "jurors to serve

in the courts of the United States in each State respectively shall

have the same qualifications and be entitled to the same exemptions

as jurors of the highest court of law in such State may have and be

entitled to at the time when such jurors for service in the courts of

the United State are summoned."

Almost every State in the North, he said, now had its new jury law, and

these laws have been sustained by the highest State courts.

THE SEIZURE OF SPIES' PAPERS.

Proceeding to the question of "unreasonable search and seizure" in

Spies' office, he said it did not strike him as being any part of this

case. He was not here to offer any apologies for his own conduct. He

then recited at some length the circumstances of the bomb-throwing

in the Haymarket, the search of the _Arbeiter Zeitung_ office, the

prying open of Spies' desk, the finding of dynamite and letters there,

the breaking open of Lingg's domicile, and the finding in his trunk

of dynamite bombs precisely like the one thrown. Mr. Grinnell was

interrupted at this point by General Butler, who said he should want to

cross-examine him if it was competent for him to do so.

Mr. Grinnell--"You shall have that privilege, General."

Mr. Grinnell, resuming, said that such seizure was not a thing which

this court could regulate. It had said in the Ker kidnapping case that

it was not for the court to determine how he (the prisoner) got here.

The court simply said: "You are here." The things seized in the search

of these prisoners' premises "were there," and it was for the court to

determine whether they were legally there. The only question was, "Are

these things testimony?" and that was not an inquiry for the court.

SIMPLY EVIDENCE.

Forgery, murder, and other crimes had to be proved, Mr. Grinnell said,

by such evidence. "The pistol found in the hand of the assassin Guiteau

was forcibly taken from him, and his papers, if I remember rightly,

were overhauled. They were 'there' (that is, in the court), and it was

nobody's business how they got there. That the search and seizure in

this case was an unreasonable search and seizure from the point of view

of the defendants I have no doubt."

In conclusion Mr. Grinnell said: "It strikes us from our standpoint

that the foundation of the constitution is less likely to be impaired

by refusing to grant this writ than by granting it."

THE GENERAL'S INDIVIDUALITY.

After a great deal of rambling talk about the composition of the jury,

dissatisfaction with the record, lack of time for preparation, the

sentencing of the prisoners in their absence and that of their counsel,

the injustice done them by "unreasonable search and seizure," etc.,

General Butler said that if all these things could be done the question

was to be debated whether this government would not be a little better

if it were overturned into an anarchy than if it were to be carried on

in this fashion.

"I have no fear," he said, "of being misunderstood upon this question.

I have the individuality of being the only man in the United States

that condemned and executed men for undertaking to overturn the law.

There were thousands of them. And for that act, please your honors,

a price was set on my head as though I were a wolf, and $25,000 was

offered to any man that could capture me, to murder me, by Jefferson

Davis and his associates, and who, if they were here at your bar,

trying to ascertain whether they should have an honest and a fair

trial for their great crimes, and they called upon me--their lives in

danger--I should hold it to be my duty to stand here and do all that I

might to defend them. That is the chivalry of the law, if I understand

it, and if I don't it is of not much consequence, for I am quite easily

and quickly passing away."

INHERENT RIGHTS OF CITIZENS

After some further talk General Butler said he agreed fully that the

first ten amendments to the constitution were limitations of federal

power and not restrictions of the rights of the States. The "privileges

and immunities" however, claimed by these prisoners were privileges

inherent in each one of the citizens of the several States of the

United States, because in vast majority we were British subjects and

had certain privileges and immunities inherited under the common

law and Magna Charta, and among them, and the most thoroughly known

and defined were the trial by jury for all high crimes, exemption

from search and seizure without warrant of law, protection from

self-accusation when a witness, and not to be deprived of life,

liberty, or property without due process of law. We claim that all the

rights, privileges, and immunities that belonged to a British subject

under Magna Charta belong to each citizen of the United States; and

that as new citizens of the United States were made, not citizens of

States, by naturalization, these rights, privileges, and immunities

came to them as citizens of the United States. The effect of the

fourteenth amendment was to guarantee these rights, privileges, and

immunities to the citizens of all the States.

MEANING OF "DUE PROCESS OF LAW."