New-York daily tribune., 1854-07-10
question va also ssked and explained 10 relation to

question vas also asked and explained 10 relation 10
the testimony and the plesdings as to the steamboat
Juror inquired whether every Juror was not bound
TO say ave or nay in relation to question.
The Judge said il was proper that Juror should
uress bis opinion lin the jury room way or the other
If he had doubt be could express il by dissent.
TT was understood that To ono Of the questions OF
the Jurors declined explaining his vote whether he be-
lieved the party guilty or not.
The Jury about TO retire, when Of the Jurors
rose and asked if he could be protected against the vo-
erce Of the other Jurors tha, he had been abused in
every sbspe told that he had been bbed and every e.
the, of abuse heaped upon him. The Judge replied 10
him that he certainly would be protected and that the
officer would see to II that all should be right.
This was evidently the dissenting Juror. He wa. full
set redfaced maB, and seemed ike that if he had
not been able 10 agree after consultation Of twenty
hours, including whole night that the Jury had been
out and the thermometer at 80, he would no; be likely 10
change, which way his opinion was by stll fur
tier consultation. One Of the other Jurors stnted to 1he
Court that he thought not worth while to send them out
Judge however I thought % be, they he'd better 90 again to
their room and further advise in regard to the matter ana
the jury again retired
charge of the Jury gave em by direction Of the Judge
good supper and good breakfast and an opportunity
in the morning for good hearty sousing with Croton IN
one Of the departments Of the Keeper. he, with Mr.
Brown and the other officers OF the Court Mr. Jarvis the
Clerk and Mr. Herick, The Assistant Clerk, have done
everything possible during the long trial. for the accom-
modetion snJ convenience of the Jury the counsel the
reporters and all others connected with tho case.
The jury kept out for two or three hours longer
room Al 2l they brought in again when the Fore
stated that they had mot agreed, and there
prospect of their doing The Judge said that he would
Keep them then any longer together, aud they
discharged, having been 20 hours session. 1t il said
they stood eleven for plaintih, Mrs. WI and one ibe
Juror above opposed.l
CARD FROM THE JURY.
We have received the follow ng card rom the majority
of The jury:
COURT OF CcMsioN PLEAS FOR THE CITY AND CouNrY
OF NEW YORK.
b. Christian Sloane
sssiEa WiLDEs p. WALKER.
The undersigned Jurors leeven say hey ind for the
plaintiff the whole issue in the p!eadings.
J. MARSH II. 4. CU-HNAN,
ASA # DARLING THOs CHALMERS,
OLINER 4. NARDELL SAMUEL COOPER,
y. CLARK, JOHN :. HADLbY.
ANTON L. BOHLE.
Dated New -Yo1k july 2, 1851 ~ w M1RTiN
The undersigned eeven Jurors in the case Of Catha
1ino +. L. Walker against Wldes r. Walker would
pecy say that, after careful delberaton of the facts
shown on the said trial there Is nothing to show that she
IL anything but hghminded pure and yiruous womnn;
and they deeply synpahzc with her in ,ha. the decpsct
opposition OF The Jurors should deprive her OF hor
just and lswfu rights.
ANDREW d. CLARK JOHN OCDES.
" MARSH OL1N Err T. WARDELb.
TBOs CHALMERS Ill u. tb5HMAS,
SkMTrrj CODPRR ANTON J.. BDHLE.
A w MARTIN, ASA Z. DAZZLING.
Neo I"i, july 3, 1901. JOIN ;. hADLEi'