observe, gentlemen, that the great overshadowing question you must answer now and here is, has this all been in vain? I repeat, through your action in this case, by your verdict here, you say to the country and the world-remember, you can not evade the issue, for if we have no case now, none can ever be made-you say there is no help. You are powerless or you declare that the law can and shall be enforced, and the padrone's occupation must cease now and forever.

I would not forget to so far notice the allusion counsel has frequently made for the past two days to the strong representation of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children at this trial, as to say that it was in kind response to my invitation so to do that the honored President, the Consul, with the efficient officers, Superintendent Jenkins, and Mr. Chiardi, have attended in court, and have rendered the Government very material aid in the marshalling of evidence, and the general conduct of the case, for which they merit, and will doubtless receive the thanks of all good people, no matter what may be the result of this trial. Of course, this makes neither one way or the other with you, gentlemen, for you will decide this case on its merits.

As the Court will instruct you, there are but three simple questions to answer in arriving at your verdict, and I am sure that you will find no difficulty with either.

First. Were these children inveigled or forcibly kidnapped in Italy?

Of course, as you will observe, gentlemen, it is not necessary that the Government should show that the prisoner inveigled or kidnapped the children; these acts may have been committed by another, but the prosecution must satisfy you beyond a reasonable, not an unreasonable doubt, that the accused knew they had been so inveigled and kidnapped. Now, gentlemen, you have heard the sad stories of three of these little boys, Francisco Libonati, eleven years of age; Michele Querino, thirteen, and Giosue Guerrieri, eleven, and it is all fresh in your minds, so that it is unnecessary for me to rehearse. As I have already said, the law of Italy, absolutely

prohibiting the assent of parents, guardians, or children, it follows that the children were inveigled or kidnapped, and it is confidently claimed that they were both inveigled and kidnapped. You remember how this padrone operated to obtain control of these children, and that he effected his object by cunningly holding out different inducements, by resorting to artful persuasions, and by the use of money; yes, gentlemen, strange and revolting as it may seem to us, at this day, these unnatural parents actually sold their offspring into involuntary servitude for a few dollars. This has been conclusively shown, and, therefore, two counts in each of these indictments have been thoroughly sustained, and his conviction must follow.

But further, take the evidence of the boy last on the witness stand, the exceedingly bright little Giosue Guerrieri, only eleven years of age, and when he tells you, through the interpreter, in his simple way, that Ancarola himself had several talks with his parents and the boy, at which Ancarola actually urged them to take him from school to go with him; told them America was a good place to make money, and the boy would soon be sending money home; that he made a written contract for the boy, whereby he was to go to America with Ancarola, and stay with him four years and six months, to play the violin in Chicago, and elsewhere, Ancarola to receive the earnings; that his parents refused to let him go, unless money was paid, and Ancarola then gave them one hundred francs; that no one was present except the boy, his father and mother, and Ancarola; that Ancarola cunningly arranged to have the boy delivered to him outside the Kingdom, and paid his passage over; that he cried at leaving home and friends; that, on the ship, Ancarola told him to say, if any one asked him where he was going, that he was not going with Ancarola, the padrone, but that he was going to an uncle in Montreal; that he had no uncle in Montreal; that he told Ancarola's falsehood at Castel Garden, but on the assurance of the Italian Consul that Ancarola could not harm him, told the true story of his inveiglement and kidnapping from Italy.

I repeat, gentlemen, when he related all this and counsel admitted it to be true, having failed to shake him on cross-examination, did you doubt that this first question must be answered in the affirmative, and that Ancarola himself was guilty of the inveiglement and kidnapping? These padroni are cunning; most cunningly they endeavor to evade the law in the inception of their business, and then, when finally caught, accused and arraigned before the Court, can well afford to employ expensive and sharp counsel to execute their well-planned defense, but, in this instance, the well-laid and oft-tried scheme has miscarried; the padrone, Ancarola, cannot now escape-out of the mouths of these children he stands condemned before you.

The second question, gentlemen, did the prisoner, Ancarola, bring these children into the United States? can be answered in the affirmative without leaving your seats.

Then you will come to the third and last question: Did he intend to hold them to any involuntary service? Now, I apprehend, gentlemen, that the Court will charge you as matter of law, that these children were too young to consent to any service, they cannot voluntarily submit themselves to any service; it must be involuntary on their part, and that the premeditated violation of the Italian law by this padrone, and the character of the employment, may be taken into account in this connection as bearing on his intent. I may, however, erroneously anticipate the direction of the Court in this regard; be that as it may, I am convinced that you cannot find, as you must, if your verdict be that of acquittal here, that he simply brought these boys to America on a pleasure excursion, or to visit friends, and they could return home, if they so desired, by the very next steamer, without any hindrance of the prisoner, but on the contrary, you must conclude on the uncontradicted, unimpeached and unimpeachable evidence, that he intended to hold them to an involuntary service; that is to say, that he purposed employing them under his so-called contract, whether they would be so employed or not. For what purpose did he solicit the boys to

come with him to America in violation of this Italian law? Why did he pay all their expenses to America? Why did he pay their friends money? Why did he secure them to himself for four years and six months to play on the violin and harp? Why was he to receive the money they earned! Why did he put the lie into the mouths of these boys on the passage to America, and why did he conceal himself and try to escape arrest in the City of New York? I ask why did he do these and other things I have not time to call to your immediate attention, if he did not intend to hold them to an involuntary service? No, gentlemen, there is no escape from the conclusion that this was the padrone's intent. He has been frustrated, and now asks you to say that there is no evidence but that he intended the boys should act their own pleasure on their arrival in America. Of course, this is ridiculous beyond comparison, and only finds it parallel in the assertions of counsel made for effect upon you, that there is no proof of maltreatment of these children by the padrone. No, the element of treatment one way or another has never been in the case, therefore, you will only be required to say in order to convict, that he intended to do and carry out the simple terms and conditions of his so-called contracts, the statement of which the accused himself admits to be true. It is idle to argue a proposition where we are all at one. Gentlemen, therefore, I abrubtly halt here, and with its dismissal submit the case to you.

This prosecution being entirely new, there are no decisions of State or Federal Courts directly in point. I have, however, called the Court's attention to all the authorities I have found bearing either directly or indirectly upon the questions raised in this case, as to inveiglement, kidnapping and involuntary service.

Congratulating you, gentlemen of the jury, upon the speedy termination of the trial, and believing your verdict will be both early and just, I close on behalf of the Government.

December 19.

JUDGE BENEDICT. Gentlemen of the Jury: It is difficult, I think, for any thoughtful person to take part in the decision of a criminal case, without a sense of responsibility. The interest of the community in the proper enforcement of the criminal laws is such-the misfortune is so great when an effort to bring an offender to justice miscarries-the misfortune is so great when one innocent is adjudged guilty, that the responsibility attaching to the Judge and to the jury, also, in cases of this description, seldom fails to make itself felt. It cannot fail to be felt in a case like the present, where the prosecution is under a statute now, for the first time, so far as I know, sought to be enforced. The language of the statute is as follows:

"Whoever shall, knowingly and wilfully, bring into the United States, or the territories thereof, any person inveigled or forcibly kidnapped in any other country, with intent to hold such person so inveigled or kidnapped in confinement, or to any involuntary service shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, be imprisoned for a term not exceeding five years, and pay a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars."

The accused is charged with a violation of this statute, in regard to the three children who have given testimony before you. The charge against the accused is not that he, in Italy, inveigled these children, nor is it that he has held these children in confinement, or to an involuntary service in this country. Such acts have not been made offenses by any statute of the United States. The act which the statute makes an offense, is an act done in this country, namely, the act of bringing into the United States a person inveigled in another country, with intent to hold the person so brought in confinement, or to any involuntary service; and the charge against the accused is, that he did this act, namely, that he brought these children into the United States, knowing that they had been inveigled in Italy, with the intent to hold them in confinement, or to involuntary service, as beggars and musicians. You are called on, therefore, to inquire first whether