The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1882-09-16
CAPITAL CULLINGS.
THE LATEST. WASHINGTON NEWS.
Further About the star l.oute Proeeedlnss-Ths
Motions Plltd for aSsu TrIai-The Arguments Y
3 ofCouhs,i--rhs Court Grants New Deal.
oplaloa or the Judge-Mllor Nottu.

Motions Plltd for AMEN Trlai--The Arguments y
Il ( ofCouhs,i--rhs Court Grant. New Deal.
oplalaa or the Judgs-Mlaor NOt.I.
WARRINGTON, September 15.-In the
Criminal Court Mr.. 1ienklc, counsel for
Miner in the Star route trial, filed various
aflidavits upon which he based motion
for new trial. Mr.. Merrick said: l find
some motions on flo for new trial in the
case Of tho convicted defendants, accom-.
panied by statement Of variety Of rea.
sons and by somo aflidavits. Among the
reasons Is one, namely, that the verdict is
itself unanswerable. As counsel for the
Government Of the United States | am not
disposed put on FLEA consent to the grant.
ing OF this motion, but rs counsel for the
United States feel it my duty not 10 oppose
1t. The Government OF the United Suites
itselfis not entirely satisfied by any means
with the verdict. 1t is u verdict wliiclsub.
jects the master. 10 retreat and convicts the
servants. The Jury presumably found ev.
idence OF conspiracy to defraud the United
States and Of an overt act so rs 10 create
crime under the status OF the United States;
that having been found by the jury prior
to their determination OF conviction OF
guilty against Recrdell and Miner, there
WINS left ior. them the inquiry as TO who was
In conspiracy. 1t was apparent to all the
men that the dupes were rs guilty in point OF
morals and laws rs Ncerdell and Miner are.
The crime they pcrpetrated was the scheme
and device OF others. Now, sir, the Gov.
ernnient OF the United States cannot with
consistency, with It's dignity, object by
made 10 set aside such verdict and
bring to trial again both masters and SER
wants in order that full justice may be done.
The Government of the United States seeks
no victim, 1t seeks justice; and when
the 9yerdict apparently triiles with
Justice it cannot meet the approval OF the
Government OF the United States. Henklc
then read the, grounds upon which. he
based his motion for new trial, and then
read Foreman Dickson's sworn statement
which has been already published. The
Court stated that he had directed the jury
not TO canvass on the subject OF alleged
bribery. Whether the jury had trans
gressed the rule laid down by tho Court
did not appear from Dickson's affidavit.
llenkle proceeded to argue that the verdict
should be set aside OH the ground
that the jury had been tnmpcred with, and
in conclusion said the court room was dot
ted all over with ''spotters" whose business
it was to shadow the jury, counsel and wit
nesses. Some OF the vilest men in this
community were right here all through the
trial, doing that very thing in the service
of the Government. ,rg
AIerrick-ln the service OF the Govern
ment? f i..#ss
Henkle-Yes, sir. .sr1s
/ Merrick-ls there any affidavit Of that
sort on file? -. .l,s, ,,sat ,ty.,a,
Henkle-I have not any proof Of this
now, but will furnish it when we get TO
investigating tho matter.
Alerrick-When we come to investigate
the matter we will reach the conclusion
that this approach OF Dickson was a"got
up" thing on the defendants side.
The Court then suid as 10 the miscon-
duct OF the jury, that both sides concede
the discussion us 10 bribery in the matter
took place in the jury room. In the cir
cumstances oil the casc, considering it OF
rather m incumbent character OF this ver-
dict, think it will be safe for the Court
to assume what il conceded by the counsel
on both sides to have taken place in the
| jury-room, and will award n new trial.
aIr. Tobriner, one OF the jury, happened
to be in the court room, testified 10
the reading Of tho statement by. Mr..
Dickson after the retirement Of the jury.
lie said the jury voted in the affirmative
upon the question as 10 whether the paper
should be read.
The Court-What l wanted to know
was whether the jury had violated the
rules OF the court. The verdict Of
guilty then, as 10 Reerdell and Miner is,set
aside not only OIL account OF misconduct,
but 1may say on account OF general un-
reasonableness, and not that the court
would have made this decision on the lat
ter ground alone, because the unreasona.
bleuess oi the verdict is for the jury rather
than for the court to determine, unless the
uureasonableness shocks the court.
(. These two men seem to be at two ends
Of tho line. i'It did not seem to my mind
that they could have gone into the con.
spiracy without having had any Of the
Others along with them, but the jury
thought they could, and would not have
disturbed the verdict on that ground but
when said TINT the verdict was made up
by n jury, that were dismissing other. mat.
tiers that we're not in the evidence, Of
course, my duty is plain to set the verdict
aside as 10 the acquittal Of Peck, who is
already, l. hope, acquitted every
where. We we're not trying him. As to
Turner, Of course, the verdict stands. The
Court grants new trial, therefore, 10 all
except Turner and Peck. Miner and
Reerdell were then released on $4,000
each, Vaile and Williamson becoming
surety for the former, and A. G. Richards
for the latter.
December 4th was fixed rs the date for
the new trial, and the Court adjourned.
NEIGHRORHOOD POSTAL MATTERS.
InrGe Increase nt Murtin's Ferry-Stcu.
1