702 FEDERAL lîEPOBTKR. the sole judgeg, and as to what it proves. I liave pointed ont the bearing of the testimony. I will say, further, as to what actually took place, what was actually doue there, there is scarcely asubstantial conflict in the testimony. [Çhe confiict is not so mueh as to what the acts were ; there may be some little as to some points of it. You will recollect what those points are. The conflict is not so much as to what acts were actually performed by the varions parties there,: as it is in regard to the purpose for which those acts were performed. The great conflict is as to whether the purpose is what the defendants, long subsequent to the event and after these lamentable occurrences have taken place, now say was their purpose, or whether that purpose which is indicated by their acts — which is made manifest by their works — was their real purpose; and you are the proper parties to determine whether that purpose which these acts indicate was the real purpose, or whether that which they now say was their purpose, and which they did not in fact accomplish, was the real purpose. Gentlemen, you are the judges of theoredibility of the wit-. nesses, and you are tô take into consideration their situation in reference to this transaction. Many of these witnesses are defendants to this charge, who, under the law as it now stands, and I think wisely, are.permitted to testify; but, gentlemen, you should scrutinize their testimony with care. They are deeply interested in this matter. Seven lives bave been lest in this transaction, and they are now at the bar of justice here charged with the offence of conspiring to resist the United States màrshal, and of having actually resisted him. They stand here subjeot, if found guilty, in the discretion of the court, to imprisonment and fine. Now, what effect this situation may have upon their testimony is a question for you to determine. And so the witnesses on the other side : you are to consider their relation to the transaction, and upon the whole come to such conclusion as you think the evidence justifies, I am free to say that several of these defendants, in my judgment, testified with great fairness. Whether they did or not is a question for you. Some of them, I think, prevari-
