The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1869-09-21

excite considerable attention, the news paper
publication of the testimony goes out to the world
| and every man in the County OF Cumberland sup
posed to be acquainted with the ordinary incidents OF
news ana newspapers will know the whole trial from
beginning to end Now it is suggested to me that to
obtain another jury would be matter of great dit
hculty after the trial of one Of these prisoners had
ceased.
As to the question of introduction of testimony,
cannot see the difficulties attending it, which my
brother Shep'ey Sees understand the matter to be
addressed alone to the discretion of the Conrt as
matter OF right. 1t is a matter which the Court, in
the exercise OF sound discretion, can grant, may
grant. L understand that there should be reason
and cause shown why it should be granted. under
stand that justice to the prisoners at the bar sha
seem to the Court to demand that the tiai should be
separate. understood that no more than my con.
venience can the convenience OF the respondents
counsel be consulted. 1t s question Of justice.
question of right, which the Court are to determine,
whether or justice to the prisoners, the right Of
/ the prisoners demand a separate trial. Now, do
not feel may it please your Honor at the commence
ment of this trial, situated am, to be stringent
about the matter at all. simply ask that the Court
shall be satisfied in the exercise OF ordinary dscre-
| ton that the motion should be granted.
Shepley-I would not have have made this motion,
the truth of what had stated to the Court upon m
honor and upon my oath as a counsellor of this
Court, that do believe in the relation under which
do stand counsel for each of these defendants
and standing in the relation in which they do stand
to each other, and having interests distinct that
their rights require that they should have different
counsel each from the other to look at their respec
! tive interests. say l would not have made this
motion if did not believe thus. And not only
state my opinion on my oath, as counsellor OF this
Court, that do believe sincerely that these defend
ants cannot have fair and impartial trial. to which
they entitled unless that trial should be sepa-
| rate one; but make 1t from convenience to my
self, or to the respective counsel who engaged
and who are associated with me. have every rea-
to desire to be relieved the task of trying
even one case at this time. have such other du-
ties other cases. and other professional engagements
pressing upon me that l would be glad to be re-
leved from trying one cause, and would be relieved
from trying either OF these defendants II this did
not assume what never supposed it would assume,
the form OF trial involving tho lives of these de-
PENDANTS. could not under this aspect of the case
feel 1t within my power to withdraw from the en-
gagement which have undertaken and allowed my.
self to be drawn into.
Now every which the prosecuting officer
suggests against this motion is a reason why 1t
should be granted If it b. true he says that the
time to be occupied in this trial be Short if it be
true that the witnesses are few, much the more
reason why these parties should not for the sake of
combining into short time all the testimony Of
these witnesses have their property their lives
hazarded by joint trial.
do not mean to be understood as saying that the
testimony Of one OF these parties had been taken
under any circumstances with want of regard to
his rights the rights of the public or the cause of
justice. only stated 1 did not know, as 1 never
have known until the Comfy Attorney stated here,
whether he had been cautioned, whether he had
been sworn, what the circumstances were; but the
circumstances are as the County Attorney states
that they are, it seems to be further and stronger
reason why he should stand upon his own state
ments and why the other prisoner should not be az
ected by any such consideration. They are not evil
dence against the other prisoner; they cannot be
claimed to be evidence against the other prisoner
and your Honor knows it requires the educated
mind of a lawyer or judge to make that dstlnc-
ton; that 1t is asking more than ask OF or
binary human nature in the mind of juror not
trained In the habits Of judicial or OF
weighing testimony, to distinguish between that
kind oftestimony that may affect and not affect
another; and 1t is for that that the very state
ments which the Comfy Attorney makes and the very
reason which the Attorney General urges seem to
me to support the position which we assume.
Frye-I desire to say, after conference with the
County Attorney that our objections to o separate
trial are withdrawn.
Couut-I will announce my decision upon the
matter on the coming in of the Court in the after
noon.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Court overruled the motion for . joint trial
and ordered the trial to proceed against one of the
prisoners. The County Attorney having elected to
proceed against Murphy, the case
State W Francis Murphy was taken up.
Webb-I move that the Court order the withhold |
ing of The report of the testimony from the newspa-
pers until the close of the first trial.
This motion was discussed pro and con by Messrs
Webb and Shepley and overruled by the Court,
report OF which will appear hereaf err.
FryeInove that the Clerk be instructed to en-
panel jury in the case of State Frances Murphy;
and ask the ruling the Court with relation TO the
two peremptory challenges provided for the parties
in the Stutute of 1867 whether they should be made
as the jurors called after the panel is COM
pleted.
-Cort-Let the panel be completed, the prisoners
counsel in the meantime exhausting as many Of
their ten peremptory challenges as they please;
then, suppose will be the proper time for the gov
eminent and prisoner to exercise their right of adj
ditonal challenge.
The Clerk-Francis Murphy, you are to be tried
upon your indictment, and these good men whom 1
shall call to pass between the State and you upon
your trial. II you would object to any of them, you
will do 80 as they called and before they are
sworn.
The names of the Jurors summoned having been
placed in the box and thoroughly mixed, the Clerk
proceeded to draw therefrom. The first name drawn
was
Nathaniel CObb.-The Attorney General then put
the following questions: Are you related to the
prisoner or Alexander Shea, indicted with him?
Have you formed or expressed any opinion to the
guilt innocence Of the accused? Are you conscious
o! any bias prejudice for against the prisoner
Have you any conscientious scrupes that would pre-
vent you finding him guilty OF crime punishable
with DEATH If the evidence satisfied you that he was
| guilty of that ermeP To each of these questions
the juror replied in the negative, and he
| The next name drawn was George w Perley, who
| replied to the questions in the negative and was
| sworn. The next was that OF Joseph Seabury, who
replied to the question to whether he had formed
or expressed an opinion, that be had. Hewas there
fore excused. The next was that OF Gordon r. Gar
den, who, on being Intercepted, replied to all the
questions in the negative and was sworn The next
| was Silas Goddard, who replied that be had consci-
| entious scruples against finding man guilty OF
| crime which is punishable with death. Excused
John NJ Elliott answered the interrogatores in the
negative, and was sworn. Charles II. Toothaker
| swered the questions in the negative. Sworn. Ben
| jamin Turkey had formed an opinion as to the guilt
OF innocence Of the accused, and excused. Ben.
jamin Libby the next name drawn. On an
| swering all the questions in the negative, he was
| sworn. William D. Mariner was the next name
drawn, but was challenged by the counsel for the
prisoner. Elias Banks was also challenged persmp.
| torily by the counsel cr the prisoner. David NJ.
| Loring excused for bias. Joseph H. Toothakef
had formed an opinion as to the guilt innocence
| of the accused, and was therefore excused. Will
liam P Hastings was exsused for same cause. Paul
G. Alexander on answering all the Ques ions in the
negative, was sworn. Nathansel Duran answered
the heterogeneous In the negative, and was sworn
Ezra Blcknan had formed an opinion to the pris
oners guilt or innocence. Excused. George r. Fos-
ter was excused for same reason. George H. Crock
| er excused for same reason. Joseph Gooding an
swered the questions in the negative and sworn.
George A. Porter answered the ques ions in the neg
| alive. Sworn. Louis G. Lougee had formed an
opinion to the guilt innocence OF the accused.
Excused, John Robinson, challenged by counsel tor
prisoner. William L. Shurtlef, on answering the
| questions in the negative was sworn. Franklin r.
| Barrett answered the interrogatories in the mega
| tive and was sworn. This completed the panel.
Tho Court appointed Franklin r. Barrett Fore
| man, and the jury as empanced is as follows:
Franklin r. Barrett, Foreman; Nathaniel Cobb,