The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-03-08
The Alleged WIFE Poisoning.
COURT OF OYER AND TRRMINER.


MARCH THE People Us. James StepAsns-Tho cour.
room was densey crowded this morning by parties either
attracted by interest called by duty TO attend the
trial Of this most extraordinary The prisoner It
will be recollected, Is charged With poisoning his wife,
Sophia Stephens on the 22d September 1857. Her body
was exhumed nearly year subsequent to her demiso
wien the Coroner, after held the husband
to answer for the cause of her death.
The Sheriff (Hon John Kelly In attendance at the
opening Of the court when extra panel of
dred petty jurors was called. Much time was lost in
hearing the Of those who unable or unw
ling to eerve
The prisoner, whose personal appearance has been be-
fore described, looked calm and thoughtful he well
dressed, and conversed freely with his counsel During
the preliminary proceedings affecting incident occur
red Stephens was seated behind the ratings, at the
left hand side of the bench, when his little daughter
child Of some years Of age, from tho centre
OF the court rushed into his and kissed him. The
unhappy accused he Rugged her his and re-
turned her innocent endearments, shed tears and
1t was come time before he became composed. The little
creature continued to SIT beside her father, holding him
by the hand as if fearful that the busy scene around
forebcded some danger TO him.
The panel was recalled, and the attending Jurors
C5t) were fined SIS each.
Mr. n J. Waterbury, District Attorney, said that, as
not be ad, liable commence empanneng Jury until
an extra panel was suhronaed.
INSISTED that they should proceed with the empannelipg
o. the jury frop these who answered TO their
The Juege remarked that the only way he knew of
compelling the attendance Of the jurors 10 call them
on fine, which had already been done.
Tie District Attorney then called on the trial of James
stephens, indicted for poisoning Sophia Stephens his wife,
The first Juror who answered was Charles E. MADDEN
Mr.. Ashmead challenged him for principal He
wered that he knew nothing Of the case nor any Of the
parties.
TO the District Attorney do not know that have any
CONSCIENTIOUS crupes in finding verdict where the Pc
naty is death. Mr.. Hadden was then sworn.
against capital punishment but he die not feel that these
scrups were SO strong as to prevent him from finding
verdict of guilty II the evidence warranted 1t.
The Judge ruled that the juror competent but Mr.
schaer associated with the District Attorney for the pro-
secution, challenged Mr.. Hume peremptorly.
Frederick u Chase, physician, was challenged peremp-
torly by the counsel for the accused.
Abraham Comp, merchant wished 10 be excused, as he
Was German and might not understand the "hard'
words OF the counsel.
Mr. Cushing asked that the juror might be excused rs
here would be much medical testimony aud doctors used
harder words than the lawyers.
Nr. sohaGer said that the counsel restricted in
their language by the code.
The Judge remarked that the code equally unin
.eliigb!e
Mr. Comp was considered competent juror and was
Several Jurors were excused in consequence of having
conscientious sorupes aearst the death penalty six were
CHALLENGED peremptory by the defence, and two BY the
prosecution; four were set aside by consent two being
aliens and two ron residents
The following are the names of the Jurors sworn
!. Charles T. iaaden, Is Troy street, carpenter
2. Alfred Brush Fourth street, railroad superintendent
8. Gaspar TTumpy, Lexington avenue, baker.
4. Henry G. Hall, Forty seventh street, merchant.
5. Abraham Comp Seventh street, merchant
9. Marcus Hunter, Fast Twelfth street, merchant.
Z. Robert Lewis, EldrdRe street. cother.
s. CarrnSton A. Fuller Greenwich street, merchant
2. james N. Marsh, Suffolk street, carman.
10. Augustus J. Gilett, varck street, merchant.
II. ~ man Hayward, Washington Heights, merchant
L. George Alderman, Bethune street. blacksmith.
The District Attorney proceeded to state the case Tor the
he expected to prove by the witnesses
for the people lie said was case in which there could
10 compromise verdict, and that they should either
ind verdict o. guilty or not guilty L. was the duty Of
in Of this kind to show motive for
the and the motive here was that the prisoner was
DESTROYS of getting rid of his wife, who much older
than elf, in order that he might marry woman
bis own years They would prove that the pri-
lad purchased poison some few weeks previous to
L.s wes death, and that he had been to strike
her, and that for some days before her death
she complained of burning pain in her sto-
care she recovering but the prisoner discontinued
the services OF the doctor and continued himself to ad-
minister poison to her TIL she died the next morning.
They would that in one year AFTER when the BODY
was eAhured 1t was found to be thoroughly mbued with
rcison would be proved that when Of the young
ladies' (Iiss BeD of the house in which the prisoner
lived niece Of deceased, about TO be married TO
nost respectable gentleman of this city, the prisoner
wIctc apony letter TO bin, cautoning him against
the marriage stating that shc had had criminal connection
| with the writer.
Or JOSIAH Cadmus the first witness called for the pro-
secucn sworn when, on motion of prisoners coun
| sci. all the other witnesses directed TO withdraw
from thereon until they should be Called Counsel for
the prosecution had objection 10 the medical
| remaining in court.
Mt Gushing said those the very witnesses they
eished exclude. 1t was then agreed that the case
Should be adjourned I'LL Tuesday (tbis) morning, wher
| tic evidence OF this witness will be commenced.
The jury, by consent, permitted TO separate, under
admonion iom Tie Court not TO converse with any
On the subject and we're directed to report TO The
Court the names of party who should attempt to
proach them the subject of the matter investigation
| before them.