matter whether the strict meaning was bad or not. If a man use the words "body and life" innocently, he ought not to be convicted because the strict meaning of the word carries guilt with it, With what intention did they use them in this case? We have examined three impartial men upon the signification of these words; do you think they have perverted the truth? Would they perjure themselves? What have they said upon these words? Let us turn to the explanation they have given. The first is Varrin; he says, "these words shew an attachment to a thing, they are used by the most sincere friends to each other in parting, the bride and bridegroom use these expressions towards each other." Upon being asked, if he would understand them as conveying a threat, he answered," by no means, it is an innocent expression-in prayers it is used." Here is the testimony of a gentleman, which, on account of his language and manner is deserving it appears of credit, and what does he say? "The words are not understood in a bad sense." Why, gentlemen, is he not an host of evidence himself? Will the opposite party say, he does not understand the German language? Will they say, he is suborned and has made his words subservient to his will? They cannot say so they cannot say but that he is worthy of the utmost credit. But, gentlemen, is he alone? No-Dr. Helmuth has also been examined; he was called to translate the paragraph. "The literal translation" says he, “should be with body and life-there are two sorts of expression, the one is by adding the preposition "by," as "bey Leib und Leben;" the other is," mit Leib und Leben," as it is here," bey Leib und Leben" refers to the person who is spoken to, and implies a sort of threat, but a threat that the mother to her children will give, who will say, "do not do that by body nor life" sometimes the word body is used alone, sometimes both the words are used-the threat refers to the children," you will suffer for it if you do it mit Leib und Leben is an expression that refers to him that makes it; if there is a threat in it, it falls upon him that speaks-I take it they are used in a lawful sense. 99 The next witness was Doct. Collin, and his explanation agrees with that of those gentlemen; he says, "the words do not imply any thing unlawful; I shall tell my idea;-it is the very same as the strong animated expressions, which we often find in political books, in parliament or in our congress-it signifies this, that we will defend our good cause with our life, if it be necessary; my impression is, that it never could relate to the present affray that happenedit is an expression very general among all people, religious and political."

Then, gentlemen, here are the explanations of three clergymen, respectable men, as to these words; they say, "body and life" is only an innocent expression, does not convey any threat, and is the declaration only of what the defendants would suffer for a good It amounts then to this, it does not mean, that they would take the lives of others, but that rather than the English language should be introduced, they would lose their own lives. very great difference there is.

cause.

And

"By body and life" has the worst meaning; in "mit body and life" there is no threat, it signifies what you yourself would suffer, rather than endure what you deprecate. Would the gentleman on the other side, say, that if these three gentlemen are wrong in their explanation, they do not understand it in the sense which they gave it? And if the defendants did understand it in the sense these three gentlemen did, they did not mean to convey a threat to any others, but merely to say, "so much do we love the German worship, so much do we deprecate the admission of the English worship, that we would suffer any deprivation, rather than it should

be introduced.

I am not astonished, gentlemen, to see, that you are impatient at the unusual length of this trial-I am not surprised at it, I will therefore leave you upon what has been said, and the observations of the gentleman who is to succeed me. Upon the whole, I think it very improbable, that there was ever such an agreement as the prosecution attempt to prove; and if there was, neither by these words," mit Leib und Leben," nor by the acts of the defendants, has it appeared, that they ever intended to carry into effect an im proper purpose by unlawful means. Adjourned.

WILLIAM RAWLE, Esq. for the defendants.

GENTLEMEN of the jury, if I could for a moment suppose that the spirit which instituted this prosecution was likely to be gratified by success, I should feel some anxiety in addressing you. When I hear the counsel for the prosecution tell you, that these defendants are indicted of an infamous crime; when I look into our law books and find, that conspiracy is laid down as such in those books; that the effect of a conviction is fine, imprisonment, and a certain portion of civil infamy as to the person convicted, who cannot be received while under that taint as a witness.

of

I am induced to look on those as not guilty of that crime, who are now brought before you. I see these fellow citizens of mine, yours, the heads of families; men, upon whose daily exertion numbers depend for bread; who in every other situation in life maintain unspotted characters; I see these men in jeopardy, (on the ground industriously sought for the present purpose) of being torn from those families; of having those daily labors suspended; of being put in the work house, as one of the opposite witnesses said; stigmatized, unless a pardon be extended from the executive; rendered incompetent for any judicial purpose; when I see these would be the consequences of a conviction on the proceedings adopted; then I feel a degree of consolation, because I am satisfied as this attempt is attended with so much evil, in proportion as we can trace out its source and discover the motives that lead to it; in proportion as we unravel the whole plot; every step that we proceed, the acquittal of my clients becomes more certain. I wish you, gentlemen, strictly to decide upon the charge laid before you; to take care of confounding the charge in the indictment, with others that are distinct. You are to consider whether the defendants are guilty, if guilty at all, in manner and form as they stand indicted. With this previous impression upon your minds, I feel confident that I may intrust the case to you, with that attention to the evidence you are bound to administer.

If there was a regular charge presented to you, proceeding from a regular and proper source, the administration of the laws of our country, unimpelled by party if such was the case presented to you, in which there was nothing more than the customary form of prosecution; in which you would see the attorney general, as he usually does, stand alone; in which was manifest that his own good judgment carrièd on the prosecution; it would be absurd for me to present this view to you. But, the truth cannot be concealed; this prosecution was instituted by particular persons, to carry into effect particular views; and I can convince you, if not already convinced, that this is not the usual course; and that this prosecution is supported by a party, and not by the commonwealth, as indeed has already appeared in Mr. Binney's argument, when he was under the necessity of representing that they would be injured, unless the members of the German party would be prevented from succeeding in their combination. Why do you see the

attorney general, eminent for ability, not left to act alone; but additional counsel, not paid by the commonwealth, employed; one of the witnesses sitting by one of these assistant counsels, prompting him in questioning, instructing him in fact, and directing him what witnesses to call; attending with the utmost assiduity and earnestness from the beginning to the end of this trial, and rendering every aid for the purpose of carrying the conviction? Why did Mr. Binney think it necessary, to tell you what had been the former practice relative to the German party? Why give a detail, of no kind of consequence as to the question of mere innocence or guilt; but important, to shew to you the existence of a party (which one of these men was so disingenuous as to tell you he knew nothing of) but for the purpose of shewing, that there was an anxiety, warm and continued, not to convict Heckley, Weckerle, Lehr, or any other of the fifty-nine respectable individuals who are brought before you, but because they knew, and are bound and compelled to acknowledge, that Heckley, Weckerle, Mannhardt and every other individual, whose name is to be found on this indictment, stand opposed to their party, to the introduction of the English language in their mode of worship, and are determined to support, so far as their laws will carry them, their German worship? Thus a truth too apparent to be denied-otherwise, permit me to ask, why at the conversation testified by Hyle, in which Busch, who has appeared before you as an unfortunate witness for the commonwealth, and Cope, also a person of the same character and description have they manfully avowed their views, and declared that they have endeavored to convert this petition into conspiracy, that it might terminate in the confinement of these people, and then, says Cope, "we will have the English preaching " And this, Cope has not ventured to contradict. This is the anticipated result. He does not say we wish to pun ish crimes," "that the laws if opposed," must be vindicated, but "then we will have English preaching in the churches." That those who instituted this prosecution have attempted to pervert the purposes of this tribunal, make it subservient to party views, and corrupt its channels, is too plain to be denied. I wish not to address your feelings, but I do wish you to proceed upon the plain and established principles of justice, and to make an application of those principles to my clients, which in any other case, other defendants would be entitled to. There are two rules which deserve the greatest attention; one is that guilt must not be imputed but must be apparent; the other is, that when an act admits of two interpretations, the party accused is entitled to that which is most favorable. And it never was, and never will be I trust in this country tolerated, that the criminal is supposed to have had his guilt established merely because he is accused; and if the prosecufor can bring forward an act, innocent or not innocent, every thing is to be to the prejudice of the prisoner; and every thing is to go against him merely because he is arraigned. There are countries in which to be accused and convicted are nearly the same, and

66

where even the advocate who would undertake to defend the pri soner, is happy to escape from punishment. Here, I thank heaven, the case is different for notwithstanding our present situation, not one of us, not one of you can tell how soon you may be brought forward on a charge like this; to found a conviction you are to satisfy your minds of the fact of guilt; and if a paper be brought forward, that can bear two interpretations, the jury cannot give it both, but are bound to consider it in the light most favorable for the prisoner.

Let us then in the outset, consider the charge, and endeavor to understand the nature, and the leading character of the offence imputed to us. Fifty-nine persons, beginning with Frederick Eberle, and concluding with John Harper, are indicted and charged, that they, on the twenty-sixth of December, conspired, &c. vide indictment) by every means lawful and unlawful, to prevent the introduction of any other language into the church." This is the charge, whether there is sufficient foundation for it, you are to judge; when I was first applied to, I was furnished with a copy of the petition to the vestry; some weeks afterwards when the copy of the indictment was brought to me I was startled-I thought if my clients had bound themselves in the terms imputed to them, by all means lawful and unlawful, &c. I could not support them, anxiously I examined the copy as soon as possible, and I then felt not the same impulse of surprise, for at first my motion was mingled with regret, and afterwards with indignation, that the indictment should introduce words not found in the paper. When we retire and read calmly and with candor, this indictment, it does present an idea, that in this petition is not given and no where exists. If the indictment had been presented on the general ground of conspiring and been manifested by acts, the case would have been different; but there is an insertion of the very words that are in a part of that paper; to wit, that they bound themselves with body and life to support, &c.-and then as it were, pursuing the same spirit as runs throughout that paper, it goes on and represents the defendants as having bound themselves in this manner before their God, and solemnly to each other, by all means lawful and unlawful, to support the German divine worship, &c.-Observe then, gentlemen, this is not to be lightly passed over, keep it in mind, it forms part of the charge upon which this court will have to pass, judgment; it appears to you, that they have combined, not merely to repel with body and life, the introduction of the English worship, but to oppose it by every means, lawful and unlawful. If ever a verdict could come forward to this court, against these defendants, it would be easy for them to appeal to this paper to shew/ none of these words exist, which are charged in the indictment; but we cannot go from the record, and here, if these defendants shall be convicted by a verdict of their fellow-citizens, we can go no further than to compare the verdict with the indictment. After giving this aspect to the case, they go on to give the effect of the