, 1877-10-19
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1877.
THE SUTTON TRIAL.

ne ScAtH6 DisphtCl, Ill 'o
cent issue, speaks of the above event
and has evidently misunderstood the
real import OF our words when we
stated that the Prosecuting Attorney
could have been more earnest and
vigorous in the discharge Of his du-
ties. 1t says that there must be some
difficulty in understanding how an
attorney who got the severest ver-
dict that could be rendered upon q
criminal under the law and tcsti-
mony, could have failed in discharg-
ing his duty.
We stated, at the time of writing
tho affair up, that from the testimony
brought in, certainly no other grade
of crime could have been fixed upon
by the jury. This, we are confident
Of still; yet the verdict was not OBJ
tanned by the Prosecuting Attorney,
but in spite OF him. That the jury
before whom the case was tried was
fair and impartial, Cannot be denied
At the time of the impanneling Of
the jury, it was quite evident, from
the efforts OF the counsel for the de-
fense in trying to get jurymen Sc.
lected from by-standers, that in 4
"packed" jury lay their hopes Of
success. This plan, however, was
summarily frustrated by Judge
Lewis who ordered a juryfo be sum.
moned from Island County; thas
men free from prejudice were Sc
cured. So much for that. Then,
finding themselves "headed off" in
che matter Of jurymen, the only feas-
able channel through which Sutton's
counsel could work, was that of testi-
mony. On account of threats being
made that money would be used to
prosecute the man who would pub.
lish anything dercgatory to the
Prosecuting Attorney, thus forcing
us to the belief that something must
be wrong, we instituted an cxamina-
tion of facts. We will here give
them as obtained, and let the public
draw conclusions. The most impor-
tant witness in Sutton's behalf, was
one Quinn, who testified positively
with regard to certain threats which
Howard should have made to him,
in Port Townsend, on the 18th day
of last May. BY his testimony it
was shown that Howard had sworn
he would never give Sutton another
chance for his life; that Sutton was
apprised of these threats, and that as
a consequences he had reasonable
grounds for supposing that, at the
time OF the shooting, Howard had
come to his house TO kill him. We
have ascertained from Capt. Thomp-
son of the Pilot boat, with whom
Howard was during the month of
May; from the positive statements
of those who we're working OF the
boat, and from other sources, that
Howard left Port Townsend on or
about the 7th Of May. for Neah Bay
and that he did not return until on
or about the 21st of the same month.
These facts considered in connection
with the decided proof regarding
Quinn's disrsputabis character, and
more than all, the significant fact that
this Quinn very mysteriously and
hastily hied him to other climes i'm.
mediatcly after the trial, leaves lit.
tie room to doubt concerning the
course pursued to tighten the verdict
on Sutton.
Now what we claim, is that if Mr..
White had performed his duty thor.
oughly, he would have made an effort
to impeach Quinn's stsstimony. This
could have been done upon the testi-
mony of at least one present, and
others who could have been sum
moned, and would have put a very
different light upon the case. Our
Statement that Mr.. White laid him
sell liable to csnsure, can be sup
ported upon the testimony OF many
OF those who heard his argument,
and who declared that a stranger.
not knowing him to be on the prose
cutlon would have been almost puz.
zled to know which side he favored.
Ihis statement can be still more
strongly borne out, ifthe Dispatch
tolls the truth, land we are quite