Everybody looked at the prisoner.  Presently the District Attorney moved that Albert Charlton be arraigned.

The Court instructed the clerk, who said, “Albert Charlton, come forward.”

Albert here rose to his feet, and raised his right hand in token of his identity.

The District Attorney said, “This prisoner I have indicted by the grand jury.”

“Shall we waive the reading of the indictment?” asked Charlton’s counsel.

“No,” said Albert, “let it be read,” and he listened intently while the clerk read it.

“Albert Charlton, you have heard the charge.  What say you:  Guilty, or, Not guilty?” Even the rattling and unmeaning voice in which the clerk was accustomed to go through with his perfunctory performances took on some solemnity.

There was dead silence for a moment.  Isa Marlay’s heart stopped beating, and the Poet from Posey County opened his mouth with eager anxiety.  When Charlton spoke, it was in a full, solemn voice, with deliberation and emphasis.

“NOT GUILTY!”

“Thank God!” whispered Isa.

The Poet shut his mouth and heaved a sigh of relief.

The counsel for the defense was electrified.  Up to that moment he had believed that his client was guilty.  But there was so much of solemn truthfulness in the voice that he could not resist its influence.

As for the trial itself, which came off two days later, that was a dull enough affair.  It was easy to prove that Albert had expressed all sorts of bitter feelings toward Mr. Westcott; that he was anxious to leave; that he had every motive for wishing to pre-empt before Westcott did; that the land-warrant numbered so-and-so—­it is of no use being accurate here, they were accurate enough in court—­had been posted in Red Owl on a certain day; that a gentleman who rode with the driver saw him receive the mail at Red Owl, and saw it delivered at Metropolisville; that Charlton pre-empted his claim—­the S.E. qr. of the N.E. qr., and the N. 1/2 of the S.E. qr. of Section 32, T. so-and-so, R. such-and-such—­with this identical land-warrant, as the records of the land-office showed beyond a doubt.

Against all this counsel for defense had nothing whatever to offer.  Nothing but evidence of previous good character, nothing but to urge that there still remained perhaps the shadow of a doubt.  No testimony to show from whom Charlton had received the warrant, not the first particle of rebutting evidence.  The District Attorney only made a little perfunctory speech on the evils brought upon business by theft in the post-office.  The exertions of Charlton’s counsel amounted to nothing; the jury found him guilty without deliberation.