Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1882-06-25
THE LARKIN CASE.
Opinion of Justice Matthews Granting
New Trial

Opinion of Justice Matthews Granting n
New Trial
By the blindness of Mr.. A. r. Humes,
clerk of the United States Circuit Court,
we are permitted to give the opinion of
Associate Justice Stanley Matthews, of the
United States Supreme Court, granting a
new trial to ex-Deputy Marshal Geo. T.
Larkin, who was convicted in May of man
slaughter, for the killing of Arthur Larkin,
while attempting to arrest him, and SEN
fenced to five years in the penitentiary
The opinion is in the shape of communi-
cation addressed to Hon. D. NJ. Key, who
sat with Justice Matthews in the case, and
is as follows
Il have given the question of granting
new trial to Larkin, found guilty OF volun-
tary manslaughter at Knoxville, much con-
sideration, and am confirmed in the conclu-
sion we had reached before leaving you at
Chattanooga. 10 appears that one of the
jurors, who, on his o0ir dire, stated that he
had not formed or expressed any opinion
as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner
did, shortly after the homicide, engage in
an argument with the affiant, Cooper
prisoner was guilty of an otfense against
the law. The counter affidavit of the Juror
does not deny it, but virtually admits it,
saying that he has no distinct recollection of
it, and claiming that, at the time ne was
sworn as a juror he was not conscious of
having had any opinion on the subject. The
fact, however, must be taken as clearly and
fully proven.
'In the courts of the United States. per-
sons are required by law to possess the same
qualifications, are required by the law of
the State III which the court Is sitting, for
jurors in the State tribunals, with the ex-
ception, of course, of residence in the par
ticular county. The constitution and laws
of Tennessee disqualify citizen to sit as a
juror In a capital case, who has formed or
expressed an opinion as to the guilt or in
cence of the accused, on the ground that
such a person is presumed by law not to be
impartial. This qualification, it has been
decided by the Supreme Court of
Tennessee, has been SO firmly imbedded
in the consultation of the State that it can
not be changed by legislation, and an enact
ment that sought to change the comm N
law definition of impartiality, was decided
to be void
I'm the present case, | think, we are pc
culiarly bound to apply the rule Of follow
ing the State practice and decision, as it is
prosecution by the State of Tennessee
against one of its own citizens, for an aleg-
ed violation of it's own laws, triable in the
Circuit Court of the United States on &C
count of the nature of the defense.
You are, therefore, at liberty to an
nounce the decision of the court, with my
concurrence granting the motion of the
defendant, Larkin, for a new trial. on this
ground alone. Yours truly,
- STANLEY MATTHEW'S
The new trial in the case is set for Tues
day of the second week in the regular July
term of the United States Circuit Court,
which is July 18th, next.
Mr.. F. 2. Bonner of Meadvile, Pa.
writes: Il feel Ike a newborn creature
Transformed from crabby, dyspeptic and
nervous sufferer to a robust, strong, healthy
man, it all seems like dream yet Browns
Iron Bitters did it. I feel very kindly
toward everybody, especially to the invent
ors of so good a medicine"