Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-09-16
ANOTHER CHANCE.
The Convicted Star Route Conspirators
Granted New Trial-Inconsistency o
the Verdict and Misconduct of the Jury
the Reasons

|
Granted New Trial Inconsisteney
the Verdict and Misconduct of the Jury
the Reasons.
| WASHINGTON, Sept. 15.-In the criminal
court, Henkle, counsel for Miner in the
star route trial, filed various affidavits
upon which he bases the motion for new
trial..
Merrick said II find some motions ON
file for new trial in the case of the con-
victed defendants, accompanied by state
ments, variety of reasons, and by some
affidavits. Among the reasons is one.
namely, that the verdict is itself unreason-
able. AS counsel for the government of
the United States am not
disposed to put on file
consent to the granting of this motion.
but as counsel for the United States feel
it my duty not to oppose it. The govern
ment of the United States itself is not en-
| tirely satisfied, by any means, with this YER
dict. It's verdict which subjects masters to
treat with convicts servants, and minions.
The jury presumably found evidence of
conspiracy to defraud the United States,
|
pleted crime under the statutes of the
United States. That having been found
by the jury prior to their deter
mination of the conviction of guilty
against Reerdell and Miner,f there was
left for them some inquiry as to who was
in the conspiracy. 1t was apparent to all
men that, deeply guilty in point of morals
and law as Reerdell and Miner, the
crime they perpretrated was the scheme
and device of the others. Now, sir, the
government of the United States cannot
consistently with its dignity, object by
practical resistance to the motion made to
set aside verdict and bring
to trial again both the masters
and servants in order that full Justice may
be done. The government of the United
! States seeks no victim; it seeks simply
justice, and when a verdict, apparently.
trifes with Justice it cannot meet the ap-
prevail of the government of the United
States
Henkle then read the grounds upon
which he based the motions for new trial,
and read then foreman Dickson's sworn
statement which has already been pub
lished.
The court stated he had directed
the jury not converse on the
subject Of the alleged bribery
Whether or not the jury had transgress-
ed the rule laid down by the court, did
not appear from Dickson's affidavit
Henkle proceeded to argue that the
verdict should be set aside on the ground
that the jury had been tempered with, and
in conclusion said that the court room was
dotted all over with spoilers, whose bust
ness it was to shadow jurors, counsel and
witnesses, and some of the vilest men in
the community were right here all through
this trial doing that very thing in the
service of the government.
Merrick-In the service of the govern
ment?
Henkle-Yes. sir.
Merrick-Is there any affidavit of this
sort on file?
Renkle-I have not any proof of this
now. but / will furnish it when we get to
the investigation of the matter.
Merrick-When we come to investa-
gate the matter we will reach the con-
clusion, this approach of Dickson was a
put up thing on the defendants side.
The Court-As to the misconduct of the
jury. both sides concede that the discussion
as to the bribery matter took place in the
jury room. In the circumstances of the
case. and considering the rather incoherent
character of this verdict, think it will be
safe for the court to assume that what is
conceded by the counsel on both sides to
have taken place in the jury room, and 1
will award new trial to Miner.
One of the jurors happening to be in
the court room was called to the witness
stand, and testified to the reading of
statement by Dickson after the retirement
of the jury. He said the jury voted in the
affirmative upon the question as to whether
the paper should be read.
The Court-What wanted to know is
whether the jury had violated the direc-
tions of the court. That verdict of guilty,
then, as to Reerdell and Miner is set aside,
not only on account of the misconduct Of
the jury, but may say on account of gem
eral unreasonableness. Not that the court
would have made this decision on that
ground alone, because the unreasonable
ness of the verdict is for the jury
rather than the court, unless
the unreasonableness shock the court.
These two men seem to be at the two
ends of the line 1t didn't seem to my
mind they could have gone into the con-
spiracy without having had any of the
others along with them, but the jury
| Thought tneJ coulu,' anu Woulu Hot Nave
disturbed the verdict on that ground, but
when l see that the verdict was made up by
a jury that were discussing other matters
that were not in evidence, of course my
duty is plain to set the verdict aside. AS for
the acquittal of Peck who is dead, hope he
is aquitted everywhere. We were not try
| ing him. As to Turner, of course the YER
dict stands. The court grants a new trial.
| therefore, rs to all except Turner and Peck
Miner and Reerdell were then released in
$4,000 bail each, Vale and Williamson
becoming surety for the former, and A. G.
Richards for the latter. December 4th.
was fixed as the date of the new trial, and
the court adjourned
ALL AROUND THE GLOBE.