New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-07-03
JURY ROOM SCENES FULLY DESCRIBED

|
Jury ROOM SCENES FULLY DESCRIBED.
pyr,urp NARRATIVE ny JUROR WHO WITH
HOLDS HIS N,ME-AS AGREEMENT BARELY
MISSED THE FIRST hrrERNOON-BEECHER MEN
yrgM AND TnToN's SUPPORTERS wAvERING-
nFyrrY iy,ps THE PLAINTIFFS PAKrY.
One of the uryrnen, who objected To having ma
| po,ne made public at present, made the following
statements 10 q reporter of TIE TRIBUNE yesterday
afternoon:
The first test vote. which was taken soon after we
| retired 10 the iury-roon stood for the de-
J f,ndant and for the plaintif-those vot-
ing for the plaintiff being jeffrey, flaIe,
| and Davis. The second ballot STOOD ~
| to q and then came so near an agreement ~
# 10 l. four or five successive ballots staining III
this way. Unfortunately, ! believe, 1t was pro-
posed nj this stage of the proceedings to debate the
! oucstiou If this had not been done believe We
sbouId have agreed during the first afternoon that
| WE were ont We were fresh from The Jury-DoN
where we had Just been listening TO the Judges
charge. and we undoubtedly had clearer d'a "'
the essential points in the ease than after the
confusion occasioned by prolonged discnssl"n Inc
| great trouble was that there was SUCH
| n vonmc of evidence submitted that il was inpos-
sible TO remember all of il, and when We attempted
20 refer to any part, the question at once arose
whether or not we had quoted II correctly. Ihls
was why We sent for the printed testimony ana TIC
judges charge. and we all ve"y mnch regretted Ii
| when il was first refused.
As we continued TO ballot the first day We adj
yanccd more and more toward m cqnal division OF
the jury until finally stood, / believe, at II
| certain ballot 6 to g. This was not done at
| a time when it could Dc considered test
vote showing the actual standing Of the jury; 1t MAS
| done rather 10 show the leaders of the minority
that their argument had received consideration.
After this We again went back to the original posi-
tim,-9 to g and dnrng the remainder ot oIlr con-
6reu,rut. whenever a ballot WAS taken, we stood
either 9 10 3 or To t. After half dozen ballot at
to 3, some one wond vary the mono;"ny by voting
on the other SIDE and it would stand for while M
y To :: then agiin il would return to the original
| numbcr.
Tho Juror was asked if there was any objection to
making Nh Carpenter folcman He replied mat
there wa. q litlr hui il was instantly talked down.
The only real opposition TO him came from Thycr
Soon after the trial began ir. Thyer WAS seen read
pp newspaper article upon the subject ot the lIlal
and Mr. Carpenter insisted upon BIZ putting down
the paper rs it was in direct violation OF the m
sfructionS ol Judge Nelson. As Carpenter as s'iN-
! tanned by other inrlmen and Ihyer was compelled
to nut down the paper the latter became very angry
and never forsavc Mr.. Carpenter, apparently dnrIhg
the lnng course If the trial, and undoubtedly this
was tine sole cause OF the OPP silion The
! duties however OF the foreman were merely
nominal He was generally understood to he very
strongly in favor Of acquitting Mr. ieecher, ana the
Triton men would not Listen to any argument he
might advance this account. Then Ihti thought
! ,h4 Judge should not have given him the position,
and his influence suffered for this No one
WIS influenced in any way BY Mr.. Carpenters
oinion and hc therefore. did not ake active part
! in any Of the debates. Mr.. jeffrey made clerk
witlout IN objection.
The iuro, said in regard to Mr.. Carpenters state
lnent in court yesterday that the point oil dis
agrrcn, nj was question Of fact. that he supposed
tha, d,clara. ION covers the question, although il Is
a very general one. IL would require entirely too
mncl time to take mp all the points made, but in
general il was question OF veraeiiy between the
statement oi Mr.. Brccher Oh one side and those ct
/ TJlton Monlton. and Ar.. Mention on the other II
WAS claimed thaf thi testimony Of these three should
| be as good a. the the other side. Ia"
g, i,lrnce OF mu,neous witness, considered, but
we seriously felt fhc want Of III" testimony
before Ii. We wrr, ilonndrripg about in Opeh sea.
unable IA rreollcrt fhc precise l.pguakc used and
! hence 10 foicibly argue the disputed points. This
WAS a rrarral complai It among all the jury mcn We
! al.o very much needed The Judges SUMMING up. II
wa thc grr"Irl opinion that there was vast amount
| Of testimony admitted which should not have been
! allowed ami we hoped tat tie judge would have
.i,;d ont Tire point. more closely for before ask
| iug ~ 10 decide npon them. We had only Dag AMI
half after ihe Testimony scht as and y me we
were very Glad 10 gel H. and was clo>' j. examined
there WIS sufficient time to make the uSr 81 IT
that might have been made earlier in our dclibcra-
! lions.
Toward thc lasi Mr. Jeffrey confessed his inability
! to arrive at an. satisfactory conciusion and # wr
! had remained oni another week believe We should
have been able 10 bring in verdict for the dcicid-
ant Tliougnout our deliberations the l'ccchcr men
were decided and finn, while the Tilton m'n were
continually WAGERING and apparently more or less
undecided. II was strongly nr&ei that If there
was doubt in the minds of aiy, the
defendant shoud have the benefit OF
| that doubt. and think This argument had good
! effect upon Whclan, and that il was what induced
| him to vote for the defendant. Although Case was
! = Brcchcr man. ne spent most of his time with the
Jeffrey party, which consisted of Jeffrey, DAVIS.
| lialstcai and Whelan. The others were scattered
about and did not club together often Thycr
Bcccher man all the time. When he ballot stood IL
70 J. Jeffrey east the vote for the plaintiff. lIe
the leading spirit on that side. He spoke several
times in debate. and il did seem that we might soon
come to nm agreement if il were not for
| his opposition. 1t was claimed BY some of
the urymrn that there would Ice little difference in
the effect upon Mr.. Bcecher's character, whether
verdict was rendered by not. This position
wa, taken by those who were not strong for either
party. Ii was arpncd on the other hand however,
that This must bc Il mistake, it would be claimed
there must be something ia the charges, otherwise
! the jury would have OCCASION for such long
dcliberation. Up to the last the Iton men adj
mtted that they might yet he influenced to
vote for an acquittal. | think. however that
| fho