Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/574

 THE BARILLAS CASE some modifications in the conclusions of the defense, and offered an amendment in these words: "The deed imputed to Mora and Morales is a political crime and of international character." This amendment was refused by the Judge, and protest noted. Next Lie. Jose" M. Sayago, a quite young but evidently capable advocate, made a brief address on behalf of Mora, asking clemency for his client, and pointing out that if they were executed the sole evidence against the real author of the crime would be destroyed. The notable argument of the defense, on behalf of Morales, was now that of Lie. Francisco M. de Olaguibel, which was a gem of polished oratory and literary and philosophical considerations of the difficult theme of defense which was imposed upon him; he made a gradation of criminality in the scheme of assassination: Morales was the passive instrument of death, Mora the bloody hand that wielded it; General Lima was the arm that impelled the fatal blow; and away yonder, in the shadow, was the guilty mind which conceived the tragic idea. As this the last of the orations was ended, the Judge at once read the interrogatories to be submitted to the jury; these were acceptable to the prosecution, but objected to by the defense, who requested modi fications; these were refused by the Judge, who declared that the interrogatories were in harmony with the conclusions of each party. The Judge then made a lengthy and careful summing up or review of the evidence to the jury; at the end of which, the Judge, jury, and all connected with the trial, stood up while the Judge read impressively to the jury the exhortation required by the Code of Procedure, here tofore quoted. The Judge then delivered to the jury the interrogatories and the record of the instruction, and at nearly

539

half past ten o'clock, p.m., they retired to their room for deliberation. It was 11 :50 when the jury filed again into the court room, and delivered their verdict (the interrogatories, with the record of the vote on each, duly signed and certified) into the hands of the President Judge, who declared the session resumed and read the verdict aloud. It was a unanimous finding in favor of each one of the interrog atories for the prosecution, all those of the defense being rejected. I may remark that a verdict by a majority of the jurors is always sufficient to convict. The Ministerio Publico at once arose and earnestly argued to the Court that the sentence of death should be pronounced; this was as earnestly opposed by the defenders, who pleaded instead for the extreme imprisonment of twenty years, allowed by the law. The Judge declared a further recess and retired to his chambers to prepare the sentence. Upon his prompt return, in a clear tone he ordered all to stand and the gendarmerie to present arms. The scene was very impressive. It was a moment of tense expectation; all strained to hear the words of the fateful sentence: it was that Florencio Morales and Bernado Mora should suffer the pain of death as the murderers of General Don Manuel Lisandro Barillas; that this penalty should be imposed with all the formalities of the law, in the garden yard of the Prison of Beldn; the death penalty in Mexico being by shooting to death. Five days were allowed the accused for appeal, and notice of appeal was at once given by their defenders. The accused, on whom all eyes were focused, remained impassive. Thus ended the most notable criminal trial of late years in Mexico. St. Louis, Mo., July, 1907.