Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1884-1886, 1885-01-04
STATE OF KANSAS vs. ,ors yEesoLp.
Picnic in Iusti.e Ho6bs corrt-The Defend
ant Acquitted and Prosecuting Wit
ress Held For Costs

Justice Hobbs court wos the theatre of
regular picnic for the boys yesterday fore
noon The occasion being the trial of John
Jerrold. boyish looking young man with
sunfiower head. who was charged with dis
turbing the peace and quiet of one Moilie
| Dewitt.
George Z. 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 vernillion hair
went to the residence of the prosecuting wit
ness, where he found his better half. who re-
| fused TO 20 home with him-he then took
the child, which it seems had filed il
appearance on this mundane sphere, before
the gentleman with the brilliant upper story
had been harnessed into the family. That
failing in getting his family out of the house
he got hold of hatchet and threatened to
brain her-also said to man named Ben
nett, vi appeared to be connected with the
establishment in some inexplieable why, that
if he kept his wife there that night the house
would not stand; that he acted III n bolster
Gus and threatening manner, etc.
Mr.. T. b. Wall then arose, and at first
tried To look fierce, but failing in this hs
Strengthened himself up. brushed back his
hair. and with his face all wreathed with
smiles he struck comedy attitude.
He said the niinions 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 AMI dis
NAL cell in John Fishers bastile, there TO
languish and probably break all up. At
any rate il the present time of financial and
commercial depression, the closing down of
factories and the bust up Of things generally, |
if a verdict was rendered against his client
he would be forced into involuntary bank
ruptcv. 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 Jerscv. All this he exclaimed, with |
a 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 co,nely star, who appeared to much
bette. advantage than her support. although
some of the latter sustained their parts adj
mirable, her sister having scored a decided
success, was put upon the stand and testi-
fed that the dcfendent kicked up terrible
racket. kicking over an cmoty 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 10 cnbarass her. she could not be bull
dozed Her evidence conflicts in some
points with that of her sister. MR.. Miller,
a cadaverou- looking damsel. was next
called-shc knew very little about the mat;
ter. Two young men were examined whose
testimony did not a-Fcc; in fact the whole
thing wa, somcwha, mixed. The defendant
sand substantially that BE- did not consider
the house proper place fer decent woman
and he went there 10 get his wife away. He
did not deny >nin" OF the alleged racket but
placed il in quite different light.
In summing ~ Mr.. Wall sprung new
idea on the jury which, a the scqnal showed,
took Il strong mold on The jurors.
He said il WAS clear case of malicious
ani cited the fact that the
county attorney MAS not On hand L. prose
cute n, Indicative OF that conclusion. He
said j; was Inc duty Of the jury To bring in
a verdict t. that effect, thus throwing the
cost, on the prosecuting witness. Thi-, he
said, would have 4 tendency TO put a stop to
bringing such ridiculous casc> into court.
"A very able argument by
Mr.. C"wast the jury brought in just that
verdict. In such cases the lay demands that
the parties be committed until the costs are
paid. An appeal MAS taken, there is a
chance for more fun i.eNt week.