Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1883-1888, 1885-01-09
STATE OF KANSAS VS. JOHN JERRoLp
A Picnic in Iustiae Hobbs court-The Defend
ant Acquitted and Prosecuting Wit
ness Held For Costs.

regular picnic for the boys yesterday fore
noon. The occasion being the trial of John
Jerrold, a boyish looking young man with a
sunflower head, who was charged with dis
turbing the peace and quiet of one Mollie
Dewitt.
George C. Cowart appeared for the state,
and T. B. Wall for the defendant.
A jury of eight was empannelled and Mr..
Cowart, who appeared to regard the whole
thing as farce, explained the nature Of the
case to the jury, in his humorous style. He
said the gentleman with the vernilion hair
went to the residence of the prosecuting wit
ness, where he found his better half, who re-
fused to go home with him-he then took
the child, which it seems had filed its
appearance on this mundane sphere, before
the gentleman with the brilliant upper story
failing in getting his family out of the house
he got hold Of Ratchet and threatened to
brain her-also said to man named Ben
nett, who appeared to be connected with the
establishment in some inexplicable way, that
if he kept his wife there that night the house
would not stand; that be acted in a bolster
Gus and threatening manner, etc.
Mr.. 7. B. Wall then arose, and at first
tried to look fierce, but failing in this he
Strengthened himself up. brushed back his
hair, and with his face all wreathed with
ay,,ila. ha etr,,ce ..n,pa1,- attitude
He said the minions of the
great commonwealth of Kansas had
dragged this luminous headed boy before
this august tribunal with the malicious in
tention of consigning him in dark and dis
NAL cell in John Fishers bastile, there to
languish and probably break all up. At
any rate in the present time of financial and
commercial depression, the closing down of
factories and the bust up of things generally,
if verdict was rendered against his client
he would be forced into involuntary bank
ruptcy, which he claimed would involve
nearly all the monetary circles of the
United States, Europe and most of Asia,
two large banking houses in Africa and one
in New Jersey. All this he exclaimed, with
look of sorrow at the jurors, on the testi-
mony of this prosecuting witness, support
ed by two or three of her husbands.
He declared that it would take a
Kansas cyclone to disturb the "peace and
quiet OF this woman. He said his client
merely went to endeavor to get his wife away
from house which, to say the least, was not
above suspicion, the inmates of which were
striving to ALLEVIATE her affections. By this
time the court: room, which was full of spec
tators, was in an uproar Of Laughter. Mol
lie Dewitt, the prosecuting witness, plump
and comely star, who appeared to much
better advantage than her support, although
some of the latter sustained their parts ad-
mirable, her sister having scored decided
success, was put upon the stand and testi-
fed that the defendent kicked upa terrible
racket, kicking over an emoty oil can that
stood at the foot of the bed and
terrorizing the whole layout general
ly. Her sister was next sworn and
numerous attempts of Mr..
Wall TO embarass her, she could not be bull
dozed. Her evidence conflicts in some
points with that Of her sister. Mrs. Miller,
a cadaverous looking damsel, was next
knew very little about the mat
ter. Two young men were examined whose
testimony did not agree; in fact the whole
thing was somewhat mixed. The defendant |
said substantially that he did not consider
the house proper place for decent woman |
and he went there to get bis wife away. He
did not deny some of the alleged racket but
placed it in quite a different light.
In summing up Mr.. Wall sprung a new
dea on the jury which, as the sequal showed,
,ook a strong hold on the jurors.
He said IL was clear case of malicious
and cited the fact that the
county attorney was not on hand to prose-
,ute as indicative of that conclusion. He
aid it was the duty of the jury to bring in
verdict to that effect, thus throwing the
,osts on the prosecuting witness. This, he
aid, would have tendency to put stop to
bringing such ridiculous cases into court
a very able argument by
Mr.. Cowart the jury brought in just that
'erdict. In such cases the law demands that
he parties be committed until the costs are
'aid. An appeal was taken, SO there is a
nance for more fun next week.