Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1885-12-10

chief justice In delivering the charge. The
wife and mother of the prisoner trembled
and wept with emotion, while Davis, whose
indifference during the trial has been
almost stoical broke down several times
during Mr.. Birds pathetic address, and
burying his face IN handkerchief, wept
freely and evidently with sincere grief.
When the court met OF 10 o'clock Saturday
morning, the Davis Jury was still out, and
current report said the members thereof
were hopelessly divided. crowd that
fiirly filled the body OF the court room was
present, waiting anxiously for the verdict;
Shortly after II o'clock, word was conveyed
to the court by bailiff that the Jury was
coming down. The States prosecuting
officers and the prisoners counsel were
hastily sent for, and at seven minutes past
II o'clock the jury filed into the courtroom.
The prisoner, Lewis L. Davis, was brought
up from the cells, aud the news spread so
quickly that there was great rush OF uddi-
tional spectators at all the doors before the
iilrynen had fairly taken their seats.
The Jury roll was called by Clerk Cochran,
and everybody awaited subsequent pro-
ceedings with eager interest. The prisoner
seemed the least disturbed person in the
court room, and wore his usual look OF pro-
found Indifference. 1t was not known
whether n verdict or disagreement was to
be announced, and there was no indication
of the result until the clerk propounded
the formal question, "Gentlemen of the
Jury, have you agreed upon verdict ?"
Several jurymen audibly remarked, "no
verdict, "and then Foreman David Woolman
arose and said. I'VE have not agreed upona
verdict and are not likely to agree"
GLOW do you standP" inquired Chief
Justice Comegys.
"Seven to fiye," was the response.
Is there no prospect of an agreement "
asked the court.
"No prospect whatever was Mr.. Wool
mans reply.
as that what you all say, gentlemen"
the chief Justice inquired of the jury.
eyes, sir;" Eyes, sir" was the unani-
nous answer.
"Then, we will have to discharge you,"
| rejoined the chief justice, and the jury was
| discharged until 10 O'Clock Monday morn
| ing. Court, Immediately afterwards, was
adjourned until the same time.
| Davis was at once returned to his cell. A
| CLEAN of apparent satisfaction was noticed
| In his eyes, but beyond this slight change
| there was no expression whatever OF his
feelings in regard to the matter.
| HOW riff JURY STOOD.
The Jury deliberated from 5.35 O'Clock Fri
| day evening to II. 05 O'Clock Saturday morn
| ing, a period of III hours. The first formal
ballot, 1t is understood, was seven for muir
i der in the first degree and five for murder
4
i alton OF this expression of sentiment from
When the Jurors retired Friday night the feel
first to last. It was this fact that induced
the jury to come into court and announce a
disagreement, as all felt the tmpossibility OF
arriving at unanimous conclusion, when
each was determined to adhere to his de-
liberate conviction without wavering. All
looked tired, hungry and worn out when
they came into court, and expressed feel
ing of relief at being released from their
grave duties and irksome confinement.
IN THE JURY ROOM.
As above stated, the first ballot taken by
the Jury resulted seven for murder of the
first degree and five for murder of the
second degree. This continued without
change until the next to the last ballot
when one man changed, and the ballot
stood 8 to In favor of first degree. The
last ballot, however, taken Saturday morn
ing, awas to 8, as follows:
For murder of the first degreee-Davit
Woolman, Wilmington; Stephen Downey
Wilmington; Obadiah q. Vincent, New
Castle; Thomas l.. Truss, New Castle
samuel Peachey, Appoquinimink; Samue
carpenter, st. Georges; Robert Motheral
White Clay Creek.
| For murder of the second degree-Myle
, | lark, Red Lion; and John 7. Alifrey
Benjamin M. West, John Townsend ant
| Daniel Delaney, all of Appoquininink.
During the deliberation the case was con
, | sidered In all Its aspects, the discussion
: lasting until midnight. Those in favor Q
5 first degree could see no po sible excuse 70
/ | lowering the grade of the crime, while tn
| second degree men, with the single except
r ion noted, were equally determined in thei
opinions.
Since the disagreement almost every on
3 Is asking what will be done with Davis nov
! when he will be tried again, &C., question
ii | uhtah onnnot vet he aDSXVarad hut the sci
g timent is everywhere met that the publ
e interests, the efficiency of the police fore
. Justice to the bereaved family OF mu
. dered public servant struck down in Il
4 discharge of his duty, outraged law, all d
u mand that the State shall push the prosec'
e inflexibly persisting in the determ
g nation to put the final respons
Is bility for any miscarriage of justic
n | should a verdict for lower grade
d | murder be the outcome in the end, entire
n upon the shoulders of the jury renderir
" tho verdlct--that duty to the people forbi
the attorney general from assuming az
5. share whatever in such responsibility. U
1t less this Is done, It is argued, no officer
n the law will feel warranted hereafter
IA | arresting q drunken man whom ne n
If reason to believe has a weapon about hill
The court proceedings, while waiting I
~ the Davis jury, Saturday morning, were
follows:
or Middletown, through John Biggs, ESD, I
Nv n rule to show cause why the sheritf's 50
" of the property OF Joshua b. and Edwa
n @, Fennimore should not be set aside, W
heard, The reason assigned was mad
uuacy of price. John H.. Rodney, Es'
at representing the sheriff and the purchase
st opposed the motion on the ground that I
bank was the Judgment creditor in t
in case. and that a sale could not be set asi
I'd on the application of a Judgment creditt
rt The objection was sustained and the n
ly discharged. ,,,,,,
v Fl. Graham, applied for writ of possessi
on against Mary II. Raymond, admin1strati
ch 81 Lewis Raymond, deceased, which b
eh been purchased by him at sheriff's sale. L
lie application was opposed by Harry sharplt
cd ESD, and the matter was held under
es visement. 80,
At II Is O'Clock court adjourned until
k, O'Clock Monday morning.
ny Immediately after the opening of col
IL Monday morning the trial of Charles re
he inson, colored, indicted for felonio
nd assault upon Mrs. Ella F. Gardner
los Blackbird bundled, on the Sd of Octot
I'D last, was started and the work OF draw
~ the jury begun. -,
IN IN and Daniel Delaney, were excused
ee. cause they had formed and expressed
vs.: opinion, and John +. Brackin was Oh
H. lenged by the defence; William Sweer
or and Levi Fisher had conscienti'
the scruples against rendering verdict
iiIIy guilty where the penalty is death; Rob
n uao Sindall, Francis j. Bruner and Jose
der Heisle, were challenged by the Sta
Thomas T. Banks, Frank j. Pening
in and Charles Herdman, were challenged
md the defence, Geo. Adele was challenged
at the State and Samuel Carpenter, Thoi
aeu CLAYTON and Isaiah brennan by the
t the fence; George r. Donavan and Will
tbe Fl. Steele had formed and expressed
ties opinion Michael Vlendt had consci
cry tious scruples against rendering ver'
0 Of where the penalty is death; VIII
uch Peach and Edward Woodward were q
VIII lenged by the defence. In all 30 mi
u " were called, of whom 70 were swt
or nine challenged by the defence, foul
as the State and eight were excused.
{ he Jury is rs follows:
pro- Stephen Downey, Wilmington; j
Q of Townsend, Appoquinimink San
ION Beck, Red Lion James M. Downs, ]
,nd cader; Samuel Peachey, Appoquinim
hsir George F. Wilson, ST. Georges; d.
the b. McCullin, Pencader; Patrick d.
less, Brandywine Myles Clark, Red u
osed David Woolman, Wilmington; A
the Mills, Wilmington; John t. All
fiu H. Appoquinimink.
, i his Of the above, Samuel Peachey
: 'i' Myles Clark were on both the Becker
the Davis juries Messrs. Downey, Wool
had and Townsend were on the Davis
only and Mr.. McGullin was on the Becker