Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-01-31
SNYDER'S FORGERY.
The Alleged Names OF Jurors Found on
the Margin of Newspaper
Said to be
FOrgery-Friday Fixed as the Day for
Hearing Argument-Cheeky Card
~ from Scoyille.

! WASHINGTON, January 30.-In the Grim.
! inal Court District Attorney Corkhill ap-
/ piled to the Court to fix a day for the hear
| ing OF arguments upon the motion for a new
! trial in the case of the United States against
| c. J. Guiteau, stating that he was willing
! that to morrow should be assigned.
Scoville called the attention of the Court
10 the fact that one of the afidavits in sup
port of this motion had annexed to it a copy
the EteHiug Critic. The allegation was that
during the progress OF the trial the paper
had been read by or to the jury. Ii had on
the margin what purported to be the sigma
lures OF four OF the jurors. The jurors de-
MED that they saw any newspaper, or put
their names upon any paper during the time
they were impaneied. This raised an issue
which was very important to be deter
mined. The question was not a matter that
the Court could determine parte sffida-
wits, The jury admitted that during the
time they were impaneled they gave their
autographs TO various persons, and he
thought IL might be important that he should
have an opportunity to cross-examine the
men in that connection, TO determine whether
the signatures upon the newspaper were
genuine. The full names of two of the
jurors were on the paper.
The District Attorney-And one of them
is spelled wrong.
Scoville-All these things show the pro-
priety OF something more than er pdrte aft
davits in this matter. l ask that the jurors
be produced in court, or the Court appoint n
commission to take their depositions, and
that be allowed to produce such further
testimony as l think proper as to the gen.
uineness of the handwriting. As to the
argument for a new trial he thought he
could be ready by the latter part Of the
week, as all the questions he cared about
taking up were as to this newspaper and in
respect TO newly discovered evidence.
The Court therefore fixed Friday for argu-
ments
The district attorney said he did not in
tend that the jury should be put on trial.
This newspaper was suspicious on its face.
The gentleman who had fled the affidavit,
and who had purloined the paper, had al
ready been bound over for forgery in the Dis
trict. He THE district attorney would show
the Court that this was a clear attempt at
forgery He would not agree that the jury
who had done their duty so faithfully should
be put upon trial, and the oath of such
man that placed against theirs.
The Court stated that there was no such
practice as appointing a commission on a
question of the kind, but thai it was within
the discretion of the Court to interrogate
parties making affidavi:s, and he thought he
would exercise that discretion
Seoville said he was perfectly willing that
the Court should interrogate the atlantis |
When the district attorney came here and |
alleged forgery, it became a serious matter.
The Court suggested 10 the district attor- |
ney that it might be well to have the jury |
present Friday, and the matter went over for |
he present.