The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1882-02-14
UNDER THE eALLoWS.
Mr.. ScOville's Notion Refused and
Gulteau Sentenced to be Hang.
ed on June 80.
The Prisoner Curses the Judge and
Jury and Declares that He VIII
Take a "Flight to Glory"

I
the body Of the courtroom, and of tn
small audience not more than a dozel
we're ladies.
The heavy snow-storm without, coup
led with The fact that it was the gcnera
expectation that the days session woul,
he occupied by the Judge in dry rem
dition Of his decision upon the motion
for new trial, was ansuerable for thi
falling ot1 in the attendance ofspectators
At few moments past 10 o'clock th
prisoner was brought in and took hi
seat at the counsel table and the cour
was then formally opened.
Mr. Scoyille said that be bad receive,
information that Curtiss was not one O
the baiTiffs in charge OF The Jury at th
time the Evening Critic was taken fror
the room by Snyder. hut that q ma
named Shier was in charge; that b
knew about the paper, and thathe CON
'municated With aperson whom he I Nj
Scoville) could call as a witness, that
the fact as to that psper came out h
would have to "jump the town"
Mr.. Corkhill protested against th
case being postponed on account Of On,
andny nous letter which Mr.. Scovill
might receive.
JUDGE cox's DECISION.
/ Judge Cox then read his decision
which was listened to atteEtively frou
beginning to end He. said that ,h
motion to set aside the verdict and grant
new trial had been. based on variou
grounds, only two of which we're mad
the subjects OF decision and need TO b
considered by the Court. The frs
ground in substance was that certain
newspaper matter calculated to prejl
Fdice the minds OF the jury against tn
prisoner was found in one OF the room
assigned to the jury and passed unde
their examination and inspection.
THEeALLEsED SIGNATURES.
It was further testified. however, b,
Mr.. John w, Guiteau that certain sigma
lures appearing on this paper we're il
the handwriting of the jurors, II tha
we're stfue it would follow that the pspe
was under their observation and in thei
hands. It was somewhat surprising a
! first to find the averment that the affi 10
was acquainted with tue handwriting o
the jurors, for obviously that knowledg
could not have been acquired 10 the or
dinary way-in the regular course o
business or social intercourse. It di'
not appear by any statements. at the bs
how that knowledge had been acquired
The inference was that it had been &C
quired by procuring the autographs o
those jurors for this special purpose
When it was acquired did mot appear
and that might be an important question
1t might have been acquired before III
making Of the sffidayit fnr the exprcs
purpose of allowing the affi iavit to b
made, and there was great doubt wheth
er knowledge acquired in that way quail
fed person to testify as to Handwriting
Such a case appeared in Doc vs. Sycs
more IL Adoiphus and Z lisl 1t wa
a subjec, of doubt whether II this know
edge had been acquired for the express
purpose Of qualifying af1iant to testif
in this case, it made him a-competeu
witness, and 1t was obyious that thi
knowledge was acquired under certain
bias, and under circumstances whic
took away from the influence whic
would attach to it If acquired in the reg
ulsr way. Therefore, t was that b
thought this affidavit vas one of doubt
tul competency and doubtful weight. II
had not given close criticism TO th
writing on the paper, but his eye ha
been attracted by one or two circum star
ces which were somewhat suspicion!
The letter III" In Mr. Brigh,s nau
was written in two or three ditferer
ways, and Mr.. Heinline's name wa
spelled in two ways, and each wrong
which made it extremely improbabl
that those gentlemen could have write
their names themselves. On 1.-The othe
hand. as opposed to the affidavit Of Nj
Guiteau, were the affilavits of the fou
gentlemen whose names were. purporte
to be on the paper, and who testified thi
the names we're not in their handwriting
1t was further alleged that the dt
Tense might be able to prove that or
Of the expert witnesses had. admitte
since the trial that his opinion Wa
different from that which he had give
at the trial. 1t was q general rule tbs
newly discovered evidence going TO in
peach witness was not ground for
new trial under any circumstances, bl
least of all when it went TO establish th
admission Of witness after the concll
4 sion of the trial. That would place
in the power of any witness to set asid
q verdict founded upoE his own test
mony after the trial was over. No ev
dence of that kind could he considere
by the Court in regard to new trial :
He had considered all the matters whic
had been presented, AID was .compelle
10 overrule the motion for new tria
TEE COURT IN sANo
Guileau-Hos much time, have |
which. to present my exceptions.7
I Mr. Scoville-I have till March ! I
, file my bill Of exceptions.
II The Couri-Yes. s,.s
, Guiteau-That is understood.
The District Attorney-Let il be u
derstood then that the bill OF exception
!. shall be in by March /. =
Mr.. Scoville-H / can do il in q wee
/. / will. ITO the prisoner-Keep quiet
Guiteau (violentlY)-I am going
talk too. ] am here and don't pre-
/, pose to leave this matter to you ha,
my opinion of you -ss lawyer. Yo
e have been doing well, but your theol
: is wrong. Your theory is too SMALL
You convicted me with your jack-a'
4 theories and consummate nonsense.
don't propose to have your theory pr
vail. ITO the bailiffs, who were el
J deavoripg to suppress him-I will NJ
8 be still for you, nor for anybody else
8 Mr.. Scoville-I move to postpone Il
final execution of judgment in this ca.
!, 10 reasonable time beyond the ne:
y term of court, not excluding thirty da,
d after the end of said term.
: Guiteau-Do / understand that it
necessary to pass sentence before Il
matter ia passed upon by the Court
q bancp Within what time will Yol
Honor pass sentence
Mir. Scoville (angrilv keep quie
:, Guiteau (wildly) lyon keep yol
: mouth STILL. l am doing this matt