The Indianapolis leader. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1879-1890, 1882-02-04

Some people think me greatsnan this age, and
that my name will go down 10 history as patriot
by the side of Washington and Grant.
CHARLES J. GuITE4U,
United States Jail.
Washington, D. c., January l6. 1852
The Motion Filed by Counsel for New
Trial = The Question Of Jurisdiction
Raised.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 2s-In the Criminal Court
this morning Scoville and Reed counsel Tor
Guiteau, appeared and the former Inquired of
the Court in respect to the form OF his bill of ex
ceptions, whether he would be compelled TO ex-
eept specifically or whether general exceptions
Judge Cox stated that under the practice of the
Court he would have to except specifically. SEQ
vile then stated that he had intended 70 file
motion for new trial, but would like to have
until Monday. The District Attorney objec ed
and Scoyile stated that in that case he would file
a motion this afternoon in the Cierk's Office.
The District Attorney asked the Court TO assign
Tuesday next for hearing argument upon the
motion, but UPON represen tations from Scoville
that he will scarcely be able to enter upon the
argument at that time, the Court declined to fix
dav at present. tf..
This afternoon Scoville filed with the Clerk of
the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia
the papers upon which he basis his motion or
motions for new trial. Not being familiar with
the practice in this District. scoyle concluded to
file two motions, to assure himself against the
possibility of being deurived through
any legal technicality Of right of
review by the Conrt in general
| are: That of the prisoner, the affidavit of Fred
erick III Snyder as to the finding of newspaper
in the room occupied by the jury under circum-
stances indicating it had been read by the Jury;
he is acquainted with the signatures
of five Jurors whose names are written on the
by the Jury; that he has seen them write their
names and believes the writing upon said news
ss ar a o ae ss0Se sets
| forth that newly discovered evidence has been
found, upon which he based the motion for
new trial. The first paper is motion for a new
| trial upon tie following grounds:
/. BY reason OF the Uncertainty in said ver-
dict, in that the jury thereby found the defend
ant guilty as Indicted, vine reas the Indictment
consists of different co1nts variant from anu in
| consistent with each ether in matters OF sub
| stances.
2. That the said verdict of the Jury docs not
| specify which count or counts Of the Indictment
| Ii was founded upon. and several of the counts
| being materially different from the Others, the
defendant is not advised by the former substance
of said verdict to the finding of the Jury upon
| the material facts Of lie death, or the place of
3. That the trial of this cause was commenced
a. the June term 1881. o. this Court and was not
concluded In the same trm OF the Court, but was
! extended into the December term without
| thority of law.
4. For the reason thai this Court had no juris-
diction o. this cause by reason OF the Geath of
the deceased having taken place outside of the
| District of Columbia.
5. That the Court erred in overruliug each and
/ all prayers upon tne QueSllOlB OF law asked Dy
the counsel for the defense, and in refusing in
/ struct the Jury requested IN each of the four
| teen prayers proposed by them.
| g. That the Court erred en- the trial OF this
cause in excluding proper evidence offered by de-
tense as set forth in the bill cfexception.
| T. That the Court erred ca the trial of this
| cause. i'll admitting to go to the Jury improper
| evidence on the part of the prosecution, shown
| in the bill of exceptions
| g. That the Court erred II commenting i'm
properly during the trial uponthe conduct of the
| cefeE dant, and in entering irfo arrangement
| with the District Attorney (wthout the knowl
| edge of the counsel for the debnse) whereby the
| Jury and expert witnesses for the prosecution
| during the portion of The tnal, might observe
| certain conduct OF the defendant to subserve the
sanity without the restrain ing power OF the
| Court being exercised until those purposes were
Accomplished to the prejudice of the defendant.
| g. The misbehavior OF the Jury in the
| reading. or having read to then. newspapers Cal
culated to prejudice their minds against the de-
fendant. as shown in the afiidavits OF Frederick
IL. Snyder. Geors g Sc0ville and John w. Guiteau,
fled herewith.
10. BY reason of new and material facts un-
known at the time of the trial and not ascertain
| able by reasonable diligence on the part of the
defendant or his attorne7, having come to light
since the trial. as shown In the affidavit filed
ii. That the verdict is contrary to the evidence.
| II. That the verdict contrary to the law of
| the case GEORGE SCovILLE,
Defendants Attorney.
The second paper filed Is the bill of exceptions,
and contains the same pnts made iR the notice
1
Guiteau, in his affidavit, says as he is restrained
of bis liberty. he is compelled to leave the whole
matter OF new trial to scoville.
Inc ahdavit OF Frederick II. Snyder. OF Jersey
City, sets forth thst he guest at the National
| Hotel during portion II the month of December
| and occupied a room near those occupied by the
| Jury In the Guiteau case. On one occasion he
| saw the door OF one of the rooms SO occupied
standing open, but with no person therein. and
| on the table OF said room was newspape' and
knowing 1t was forbidden the Jury to have news
papers, he (Snyder) slipped in and took the paper.
| which he found was a copy of the Evening Critic,
containing an account of the attempt of Jones to
shoot Guiteau and an editorial deneuncing the
prisoner. On the margins were either the names
or initials OF five of the Jurors. In the interests
ol }nsee ne TOOK the paper to scoyiile attached
to, with the names of the Jurors mentioned writ
ten in ink upon the margins
The affidavit of Scuvile is tn the effect that he
| beiieveS the names of the Jurors were written on
the margin of the paper described in Snyders ati
davit by the Jurors themselves and that since the
trial new and material facts showing the insanity
OF the prisoner came TO his knowledge. The main
reliance of the defense Is the affidavit of Snyder
and the copy of the Critic appended to 1t, which
ii is claimed was seen aud read by the Jury pend
| ing the ial. careful comparison of the writing
| upon the margin of the newspaper with the sig
nature OF the Jurymen whose names appear there
strong case of circumstantial evidence. The Dis
| trict Attorney, however, asserts that this matter
of tampering with and irregular or improper con
duct on the part of the Jury, as set forth in thu
Snyder affidavit will be disposed of in short orde
by the prosecution. The Jury themselves ar,
quite indignant and firmly deny the charge o
improper conduct on their part
AS an indication of how little weight is attached
by the prosecution to the motion of Scoville for
| new trial, District Attorney COrkhill remarked
to-day before a number Of gentlemen, that Gui
teau will be sentenced and as surely executed no
later than June 80.
Belief That He VIII Not Have to b,
Hanged-Judge Cox to Dispose of tn