New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-12-06
THE JURY BRIBERY SCANDAL.

WAsHINGToN, Dec. 5.-To-day was set
down for tue preliminary examination OF the Die kson
case in the police court Tdere two charges against
Dickson one OF attempting 10 influence the Star Route
Jury improperly. and the other of conspiracy with
George W. Driver TO obtain money from tne United
States illegally. Fhe Government was represented by
H. H. Well; beside him Brewster Cameron. Mr..
Wells tne hearing by reading the warrant In the
case and the attached affidavit OF Juror MoNelly, IN
which he accuses Mr. Dickso Of reading 90 the jury
paper charging Department OF Justice with attempt
inc 10 pribo uim tho OBJ set Introduction being
influence the Jury July in the case then under consid
GRAFTON. Assistant District Attorney Moore was called
and identified the paper correct copy Of the oig
nal affidavit. whicn said in Dicksons hand =
writing and had been gwen 10 MIN ny
Dlckson on September ~ last. Matthew
mcNeily described the proceedings IN the
inryroom. Dickson pulled out paper relating TO the
Bowen matter and osed 10 reau IL 10 tlo jury Ihe
witness objected, aud believed anOther juror ALSO oO
jeoled bat tAe jdry took vote, and the paper was
The certified copy allowed 10 go IN evidence. and
by Mr. Wells. fl mas been published before ana
recital by Dickson bis oOnNerSatlOns WIN Bowen
III Drivers restaurant
the reading OF toe the because ne mad
previously Informed by Dickson ON two occasions
that he had been approached fhe witness did not know
when tho suDect oi attempts 10 OrDe lhe Jury nfSt
up the ury-roo1. He believed IL was after TWO
three votes had been taken. Dickson was
tie FIRST VINO brought up the subject
believed the had been Introduced TO influence
George ". Cox, another Juror, was then called He
said thOGght tAe jury had taken vote Dick
drew paper from ais pocAo and asAed permission
read IL jury The witness said after the read
ing paper tuat 10 did not want TO he ozen of
tue Uuted States the statements made in paper
were true Dickson tneD swOre 10 II.
AIR Dickson witness did not vote the same way ON
the question Of guilt Innocence. He in favor
of Laying tue paper into account III making YER
dict
woud certainly 10 destroyed II such proceeding were
allowed IN tue jurJ room. Ii was paper mat ought
NOT 10 nave been read lis reading was illegal,
Improper and iu violation OF the rght OF tra by jury
In IA not necessary consider tne elect OF the paper.
UnauestOnably II would lay the i0undItiOh OF motion
10 sci aside tue verdict No verdict That might Oe rem
dtred could r Dad after that paper nad Oeen READ
H. Al. Alexander strnOgtapner, testified 20 the cor
rocness the printed record o tho Slar noute laL
Mr. Cox Was thon recalled Tor cTOss-examihalOn Dy
Sir. Cuppy Hs said taat ne did not believe thaI MI
Dickson nad ever done aAything wrong Ia inc mater,
lie he would not nave read tbe paper "thout
a being laken. -
Juror Edwin -. DOnphan cOrr0borated the testimony
OF Jurors In nO lust incoS. Ihdss looAeu
stormy Jury room Tor alter the nrst woe
and witness that Is Dad enough TO nave 10 take
ia "a verdict Without quar- CLING In the jury room
Mr.. TINT lac yOGed according 20 MS con
soieBce that did thtuk t1nt 4. W. Dorsey hsd
zone auy tAng more tnan brother would have done
tor another Witness said there mad been some hafsh