Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1874-01-10


accused was discharged. Being grateful for
his escape, he promised, as he was leaving the
court, that II would be his last as well as his
first ofiense, oblivious to the fact that the jury
had decided he had done nothing at all. Ply
steal arguments have been used by a majority
when more legitimate ones failed. A jurymsn
once asked judge whether his differing in
judgment from his eleven brethren justified h.s
being knocked down with a chair. In the case
OF another jury, one, at dispersal, was heard to
ssg to another: "Only l threatened to kick
appear to have a gentler method of insuring
unanimity. When Abraham Lincoln had to de-
fend fellow charged with stealing half a-dozen
prime hogs the case against his client was 80
clearly proved that he told him as much. Not
at all discounted, the accused said: "Never
mind about that; just abuse the witnesses, and
spread yourself on general principles, and it
be all right" Sure enough, it was so; to Lin
coins establishment, the jury brought In YER
die Of not guilty. Cengratulating his client on
the result, he could not help saying the affair
PLANTATION set his wonder at rest. "Well, SQUIRE"
said he, "you see, every of them ere fellows had
a piece of them hogs" Indeed, according to
the latest advices from the States, a
being obtained by bribery. In q libel case
tried in Louisiana, the losing counsel de-
manded new trial, offering to prove, by the
evidence of the foreman of the jury, that 0ns of
the jurors had received a letter Offering bride;
by the evidence Of one of the court officers, that
he had delivered such letter; and by other
accepting . bride, and that the foreman had
been in constant communication with outside
parties. The application was dismissed, the
judge ruling that .'No juror must disclose what
happened in the jury room; that the confessing
OF juror could not be used to impeach his YER
diets; and that the person TO whom the incrimi-
mating note was addressed could not testify to
receiving it," The verdict had been rendered
and registered, and could not be disturbed.
counsel trying to mako the best OF bad
case insisted that there was some evidence in
favor Of the view he wished the jury to take.
When he had done Mr.. Justice Maule said to
the jury: "The learned counsel is perfectly
right In his Law; there is some evidence upon
that point; but he's q lawyer, and you're no
lawyers, and don't know what he means bv
some evidence 30 I'll tell you. Suppose there
was an action on bill of exchange, and six peo-
PIE svore they saw the defendant accept 1t, and
six others knew him intimately, and seore to his
handwriting; and suppose, ON the other side, they
called poor old man who had been ct school
with the defendant forty Year, before, and had
not seen him since, and who said he rather
thought the acceptance was not In his handwri-
ting, why. there would be some evidence that 1t
was not-and that's what the learned counsel
means In this case" The apt illustration was too
much for the jurymen; they had seen their way
clearly enough before, but found Il necessary
to retire and solve the judges sbstruse couun-
drum ere they oould agree up1n the verdict.
Another bothered jury, We suspect, was that
American one, which Vas responsible for, 1--we
ind the prisoners not guilty, but believe they