The daily gazette., 1880-05-27
FIRST EDITION.
THE COUNTY COURTS.
THE CAPITAL CASE ENDS IN A
VERDICT OF GUILTY.
CLOSING ARGUM ENTs AND THE
CHARGE OF THE CoURT-A JURY
DRAWN In THE CASE OF cRoAsDALE
VS.. TANTUM.
Specially reported for the GAZETTE.
New CASTLE, May 26.

VS.. TANTUM.
Specially reported for the GAZETTE.
New CASTLE, May 26.
Court reassembled at 3 o'clock, this
afternoon, aud Mr.. Higgins resumed his
argument for the defense III the Neal
case. He alluded particularly and at
considerable length TO the testimony OF
The State in regard TO the Identification
of Neal by the prosecuting witness,
claiming that 1t was not direct and posi-
i've, outside Of her mere statement, and
ia conclusion urged the jury TO CAREFUL
y consider the testimony and see If IL
was direct as to Identification, and posi-
live as to the commission Of the crime.
At 3 35 O'Clock Mir. Higgins concluded
aud Deputy Attorney General Cooper
closed Oh the part of the State, Attor
ney- General Gray being prevented, on
account of the serious illness of his
vie, from attending Court to-day. Mr..
Cooper reviewed the testimony on the
part Of the State, and in conclusion
uoped the jury would return verdict
of guilty aid thus show that the peace
of homes and families cannot be violal-
ed with impunity by such acts OF brutal
ravishment.
Judge Wales delivered the charge 10
the jury. Alluding to the crime with
which the prisoner was charged, he SAID
II was one easily made, but hard TO
prove and equally hard TO dispfove.
The woman IN the case is always tie
main witness. and the credibility of her
statement is lett TO the jury, 10 be judg-
ed together with the attendant circum-
stances of time, place, etc.
The points contained in the charge
for the consideration Of the jury were:
|. Was the estimony of Mrs. GosseI
direct, positive and conclusive, beI
chat acter uuinpeached and her evidence
uncontradIcted? 2. Did she make conf
plainL of the outrage Immediately aftei
It's commiltal? 8. Was her house in a
.emote location, in place where the
man would apparently be secure from
Interruption?
The charge held that these points had
oeen quite conclusively established, and
hen pi oceeded 10 speak OF the question
of Identity, which the jury mast serious
~ consider. They must be certain thai
The crime was committed, and by the
Jrisoner, for IL there is any doubt oil
this point they cannot find him guilty.
AS 10 AIRS. Gosser's testimony, the
charge stated that tue jury must pass
,pon 1t, and If not fully satisfied that
lie Identity Of the prisoner was estab-
lshed, must acqu,t him. In CONCLUSION
II stated that the jury must not cOnvlcl
he accused unless satisfied beyond o
reesonable doubt Of his guilt.
At A 80 o'clock the jury retired for
consultation.
AGAIN THE LIBEL SUIT.
The libel suit of VIM. T. Croasdale
VS.. DIR. Joseph r. Tanlum, was allied,
and Col. Whiteley, OF counsel for the
defendant, asked that the plaintiff De
required to make another deposit to
meet the expenses of the special juries
he had caused TO be summoned for the
trial of the libel suits. In the case OF
Vim. Bright, just tried, Col. Whiteley
said the jury had drawn $125, and The
costs amounted to about 800 more
The jury Ill DR.. Tantum's s case had al
ready been here three days, at cost
If $9s per day, or 1894, and the trial
would occupy fully as much time as
lid Bright's. This irrespective of the
her costs, will amount to between
$3.50 and $4O0. Col. Whiteley sub
mitted that before this case proceeded
The plaintiff must put up at least $500
more for jury expenses. He was moi
satisfied to draw from the common
herd of jurors, but must draw ''from
the body OF the county" If they are
not satisfied, said Col. Whiteley, with
the juries your honor said were about
the best ever seen, and which l think
we're very good, they must pay fol
their special drawings.
| Mr.. Bird, for the plaintiff, said they
we're prepared at any time to deposit
any amount the Court may think pro-
per. They did not propose that any
man who served on the Bright jury
should go unpaid, and were ready t.
pay now if the Court said SO. They
mad no objection to the regular jury
panels, but the law gave them tn,
right to ask for special panels anC
they did so. Mr.. Bird said this cast
would exhaust two days, after whicl
The case against d. 4. Hawkins wal
| w uO IIlcu, anu JlCIClOlO ut dohSu Iii'
Court to discharge the two specia
panels in the libel suits Of the Della
ware State Fire and Marine Insurance.
Company agairstC and agains
che Eoery Eoening Publishing Com
pany, i'll order to save expense, a
cheese cases could not be tried thi
term.
Mr.. Lore objected TO this, and sal,
he waned the Insurance Campany'
suits tried at this term of Court,
possible.
Col. Whiteley said the question fol
decision was whether or not the plain
iff should make an additional deposi
on account of the special juries.
Mr.. Bird-There is no question
about paying the jurors.
Col. Whiteley-Money speaks.
The Chief Justice, in view of tn
expenses and the importance ofprompt
ly paying tue jurors, ordered an add
tional deposit by the plaintiff of 5000
Mr.. Bird again asked the Court t
discharge the juries in the two cour
ter suits.
! The Chief Justice said that as tn
plea in the case against Tantum wa
mot guilty." the trial might be finisl
ed in half day, if counsel did nc
, waste time.
r Mr.. Bird said the cases against IT,
Eoery Epening and Croasdale woul
occupy more than wo days.
The Chief Justice--Why not TAX