Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1871-01-26

Argument fer . New frial- s.aai Notion 0ref'
rssied-Ercspttoas Noted.

Argument fer . Eew riaI-s.aai Notion 0ref'
rs.ird-SrcsP.ioas Noted.
Tho CRIMINAL Court to-day took mp the
motion for a new trial i'm the case Of james
q ady, who was convicted on Saturday last OF
the murder OF Mrs. Fannie Faulkner, the rea-
sons Tor which motion have already been pub-
lshed in THK STAB. The counsel, Aessrs.
Clark and Browne, in support of their motion,
hled sfidavits stating that it b sd been told that
ts,icn of sentence; that one OF the Jurors during
the trial spoke to one OF the counsel, asking Is
to q psint OF evidence; and also that two Of the
Jurors, having served on juries within the past
TWO years, were not competent.
Mr.. Clark opened the argument, claiming
that the evidence did not warrant the verdict;
that IT was impossible for the accused, drunk as
he was, TO have committed the offence charged;
and he read from several works in support OF
this theory.
Mr.. Browne read the reasons filed, but with
Drew that one reciting that they had newly
Uncovered evidence, with the afidavits referred
10. He read from an act of Congress that no
Juror shall serve more than once in two years.
The Court held that the law did not apply to
this case. He read from billiard on New Trials,
page 2ol, that 3 juror assentiDg TO a verdict on
CO diuon that the governor would pardon the
accused was sufficient ground for a new trial
Mr.. Browne argued that the juror who re-
tnseo % agree to verdict Of guilty until petit
ton was Incompetent.
Assistant District Attorney Harrington de-
clined to argue the case.
Judge Wy I've, after referring 70 the fact that
sympathy Is apt TO be developed for 2 party on
tIsl tor his life, remarked that the trial of the
accused was fair one, and he believed the Jury
rendered proper verdict. He failed to per-
ceive any error OF law in the instructions, or TO
discover that the jury found their verdict with
out evidence. He referred to his Instructions
that II a party, in the commission OF felony
used acts calculated to cause death, and death
resulted although he did not design to take life
tie party WAS responsible As if he intended to
commit murder. If the deceased had been
younger, and death resulted from the commits
sion OF the crime, IL would hardly Justify such
verdict as had been rendered. He thought
the rule he had laid down the correct one.
AS 70 the point that two OF the jurors were
incompetent, because they had served az such
within two years under the act of june, 1870
he held that the act was applicable to the Cir
cult and District Courts of the United States
and lot TO this court.
As to one OF the jurors speaking to one of the
counsel, he said if it should be held that the
speaking to person not on the jury would in
validate verdict, such thing might be done
III every case.
As to the signing of q petition for communication,
the jurors had the right to do so; and he could
see nothing in the conduct OF the jury in this
respect to charge them with.
Mr.. Clark remarked that he had not perceived
the evidence ON which the verdict was founded
Judge Wylie briefly recited the evidence, al
hiding to the testimony of a witness who had
destined to seeing German leaving the house,
saying that his evidence was not believed, and
he was satisfied the jury did not believe it.
MI CLARK remarked that there was 10 proof
that the wounds caused the DEATH
The Judge recited the medical estimony brief
ly, saying 1t was satisfactory and conclusive on
that point How counsel could feel that this
party was innocent was one of the curiosities of
the profession. He could not see that he had
made any errors OF law, and would overrule the
motion.
Mr.. Clark asked for Q suspension of sentence
until he could file exceptions.
Judge Wylie said that to allow him to file ex-
cept1ons WAS more than he was entitled to, but
he would allow him to do So