Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
The Chicago martyrs
Image 166
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
The Chicago martyrs - Image 166. 1899. Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 26, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/scpamp/item/1725/show/1723.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(1899). The Chicago martyrs - Image 166. Socialist and Communist Pamphlets. Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/scpamp/item/1725/show/1723

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

The Chicago martyrs - Image 166, 1899, Socialist and Communist Pamphlets, Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 26, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/scpamp/item/1725/show/1723.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title The Chicago martyrs
Alternative Title The Chicago martyrs: the famous speeches of the eight anarchists in Judge Gary's court, October 7, 8, 9, 1886, and Reasons for pardoning Fielden, Neebe, and Schwab
Contributor (LCNAF)
  • Altgeld, John Peter, 1847-1902
  • Spies, August Vincent Theodore, 1855-1887
Publisher Free Society Publishing Co.
Place of Creation (TGN)
  • San Francisco, California
Date 1899
Subject.Topical (LCSH)
  • Haymarket Square Riot, Chicago, Ill., 1886
  • Anarchists
Subject.Name (LCNAF)
  • Fielden, Samuel, 1847-
  • Neebe, Oscar W., 1850-
  • Schwab, Michael, 1853-
Genre (AAT)
  • pamphlets
Language English
Type (DCMI)
  • Text
Original Item Extent 159 pages; [2] leaves of plates; 1 illustration; 1 portrait; 23 cm.
Original Item Location HX846.C4C43 1899
Original Item URL http://library.uh.edu/record=b8319999~S11
Original Collection Socialist and Communist Pamphlets
Digital Collection Socialist and Communist Pamphlets
Digital Collection URL http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/scpamp
Repository Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries
Repository URL http://libraries.uh.edu/branches/special-collections
Use and Reproduction This item is in the public domain and may be used freely.
File Name index.cpd
Item Description
Title Image 166
Format (IMT)
  • image/jpeg
File Name uhlib_21042507_165.jpg
Transcript 158 u.tgkld's reasons for pardoninc he had ever made any such statement as that mentioned by Mr. Harrison and Mr. Winston ; also that he did believe Neebe guilty; that Mr. Harrison suggested the dismissal of the case as to Neebe; and further, that he would not have been surprised if Mr. Harrison had made a similar suggestion as to othe/s, and then he says : " I said to Mr. Harrison at that time, substantially, that I was afraid that the jury might not think the testimony presented in the case sufficient to convict Neebe, but that it was in their province to pass upon it." NowT, if the statement of Messrs. Harrison and Winston is true, then < irinnell should not have allowed Neebe to be sent to the penitentiary, and even if we assume that both Mr. Harrison and Mr. Winston are mistaken, and that Mr. Grinnell simply used the language he now says he used, then the case must have seemed very weak to him. If, with a jury prejudiced t<> start with, a judge pressing for conviction, and amid the almost irresistible fury with which the trial was conducted, he still wTas afraid the jury might not think the testimony in the case was sufficient to convict Neebe, then the testimony must have seemed very weak to him, no matter what he may now protest about it. When the motion to dismiss the ease as to Neehr- was made, defendants' counsel asked that the jury might be permitted to retire while the motion was being argued, but the court refused to permit this, and kept the jury present where it could hear all that the court had to say; then when the argument on the motion was begun by defendants' counsel, the court did not wait to hear from the attorneys for the State, but at once proceeded to argue the points itself with the attorneys for the defendants, so that while the attorneys for the State made no argument on the motion, twenty-five pages of the record are filled with the colloquy or sparring that took place between the court and the counsel for the defendants, the court in the presence of the jury making insinuations as to what inference might be drawn by the jury from the fact that Neebe owned a little stock in a paper called the Arbeiier-ZeUung and had been seen there, although he took no part in the management until after the Haymarket troubles, it appearing that the Arbeiter-Zeitung had published some very seditious articles, with which, however, Neebe had nothing to do. Finally one of the counsel for the defendants said: "I expected that the representatives of the State might say something, but as your honor saves them that trouble, you will excuse me if I reply briefly to the suggestions you have made." Some other remarks were made by the court, seriously affecting the whole case and prejudicial to the defendants, and then referring to Neebe, the court said : " Whether he had anything to do with the dissemination of advice to commit murder is, I think, a debatable question which the jury ought to pass on." Finally the motion was overruled. Now, with all the eagerness shown by the court to convict Neebe, it must have regarded the evidence against him as very weak, otherwise it wTould not have made this admission, for if it was a debatable question whether the evidence tended to show guilt, then that evidence must have been far from being conclusive upon the question as to whether he was actually guilty ; this being so, the verdict should not have been allowed to stand, because the law requires that a man shall be proven