New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-02-27
THE COURTS.
THE TRIAL OF JAMES C. KING.
THREE JURORS oBTAINED-NsANITY THE GRoU
pEErNsp


THREE JURORS oBTAINED-NsANITy TIE GROUND
OF DEFENSE.
The murder OF Anthony F. O'Neill, for which
c. King brought before the yesterday, IN
the Court OF Oyer and Terminer, before Judge Brady
committed Nov. IS, 1872, and grew out Of q
divorce suit instituted by his wife, Anna T. King King
and his wife, during Summer residence IN the country
had been visited by O'Nc Two divorce suits were In
sttuted by King and other by his Wife for cruel
1t was in the latter suit that hearing before
the referee exJudge Sutherland at No a Pinest had
been had on the day OF the murder and testimony show
ing Kings cruelty to his wife had been elected. Az
ONe left the Office. and was his way down stairs
King shot at him three times without warning, one OF
the wounds proving fatal.
District Attorney Phelps and Assistant DlsrlctAttor
Lyons conducted the for the people william
A. Beach, John o. Mott and A. II. Hummell appeared
for the prisoner. The court at time during the
day crowded The prisoner sat beside his counsel
watching each juror he called up for examine
on and occasionally offering suggestions to his counsel
The number of names In the panel l0 and about 80
answers were received but only three entered the
iury-0ox Seven were peremptoriy challenged by the
prosecution and SIX by the defense. The plea Of the
defense was foreshadowed by the questions asked by
Mt Beach. They asked II they had reflected upon
the question OF the defense OF insanity IL they
prcudiced against such defense, and whether they
would give To the evidence In such the Same
e @PSra consideration as to the evidence for the prose
The first called was John Rhody. who was
peremptOry challenged by the Distrct-Attorney
During his examination the question arose as to whether
the Jurors should be sworn they accepted, or
whether the changes in the jury law rendered 1t
necessary TO put them on oath until complete jury
obtained. The Court decided that they might he
accepted. Solomon Warner thought he had no i'm
preston opinion upon the homicide but the prosecu
ton challenged him peremptorily. George f. Dege,
druggist, proved satisfactory TO both sides, aud was
in first Juror. Henry NJ. Smith said he had
formed impression to the defense OF insanity and
did not believe OF insanity frequent He
was peremptorily challenged by the defense. Max
Frburg was excused account of his opinions
William DOOing thought the defense OF insanity
up Often and though he thought he could give
Just verdict, he set aside by the prosecution Mil
ton T. Lash challenged ny the Distrct-Atorney
Josiah c. Cady suspicious OF the defense OF insan
ity, and set ASIDE Dg the defense John Denny
also peremptOrly challenged by the defense for his
scrupcs regarding capital punishment though he would
give an honest verdict Henry C. Glover, travelling
agent Of No 10 Ann ST. was sworn IN as the second jury
man.
Chauncey A. Frees, maker OF artificial limbs OF No.
6o2 Broadway took his seat as the third iuTyman.
Charles III. W. Weggum, Fernando c. Gleason, Dedrich
Ahrers Matthew Morgan, Charles III. Scott, Edward +.
Miller, James W. Bell, and Herman Cohen
eessiey excused for previous opinions conscientious
scTupies about imposing the death penalty. Henry y.
Terben and William Hardy peremptoiily cha-
enged by the defense, aud Adam Gum challenged
perenptoIiiy by the prosecution.