Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1867-01-03
The meDanieIs Will Case.

Editor Rutland Herald An editorial
article appeared in your daily Issue of
the Sd inst, in which mention is made
OF an order of the County Court grant
ing new trial in the McDaniels VIII
case, accompanied by comments calcu-
lated to place the plaintiff, isaac Nc.
Daniels, in a false position before the
public, and convey an erroneous impress
sion as to the grounds upon which the
new trial was granted. The injustice
complained OF in the article referred to
Is, that Isaac MCDanels Is therein rep
resented TO the community as having
been guilty of unlawful conduct in the
trial Of the cause, by causing converse
tions to be held with and in the presence
Of some of the jurors, by his agents and
emissaries, out Of CoNrt, for the purpose
OF influencing the result in his favor.
At the date Of the Srticle referred to,
nothing was known OK the action o. the
Court beyond an endorsement on the
motion papers, that the new trial was
granted for the second cause therein as
signed. A bill of exceptions has Just
been allowed by the County Court upon
which the case passes 10 the Supreme
Court for It's determination whether
new trial shall be had or not. The fol-
lowing is true statement of the facts
found, and the points decided by the
Court, taken from the Bill of Exceptions
now on Gle in the County Clerks Office,
and signed by Asahel PECK, Presiding
Judge Its publication in your columns
is requested as matter of Justice to Mr..
McDaniels. The motion fora new trial
was argued and submitted to the Court
upon two grounds: First-"That the
Jurors who tried said cause, and rem
"dered said verdict, wholly misunder- |
"stood, Inexperienced ard mscon-
"ceived the charge Of the Court upon |
matters Of law submitted to them for
decision, and were guided and con-
"trolleGt by sOch misunderstanding, mis-
apprehension and miscOnception, in ar
irving at the verdict rendered by them |
Gin said cause" This ground was not
sustained and as to this branch of the |
case the motion for a new trial was |
overruled. The second groEnd was in |
substance, that during the progress Of |
the trial, conversations were had with |
and in the presence Of some OF the jurors |
concerning the cause, and out of Court,
by the agents, emissaries and friends Of
Isaac McDaniels, by whom the Jurors
were solicited and Influenced to find a
verdict In his favor. The Court found
that such conversations were held, and
that they were in violation Of law, and
calculated to influence the Jury For
this reason the new trial was granted.
But the Court say that these converse
lions were held "ecttbOm tbs procurement of
the platntif, and sojthot@ his k,'OVleage."
Concerning the jury, the Bill of Excep-
tiOns states that "the Court did not and
"any corruption or intentional miscon-
"duct in any Of the jurors in their con-
"nection with the cause, or the matters
"stated, nor in the verdict rendered;
"but did find that some of the jurors
"were guilty Of improperly for suffer
cling such conversations with them, or
Gin their presence or hearing" The
Court further say that there was no suf-
ticient reason for disturbing the verdict
aside from such conversations. The
Court thus eXhonerate all the jurors
from any corruption or intentional mis-
conduct in the case, or from any mis-
understanding Of the charge given
therein; and completely vindicate Isaac
McDaniels from any imputation of COM
plicity with the cause for which the new
trial was granted.
HENRY EDGBRToN.
Rutland, Dec. 28th, 1866.