Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1886-05-26
The McMeen Murder Case.
REASONS FOR ASKING FOR NEW rRrAI-rx,
EXTENDED TO FILE REASONS rrLrxAY
70, lSo6-coUSsEL NOTIFIED TO BE
READY TO PROCEED WITH THE
CASE IN ARGUMENT COURT
TO BE HELD JUNE 8,

On Saturday evening at O'Clock, MAY l.
1856, the jury before which William Josiah
AcMeen had been arraigned for trial, for
the murder of his wife, Nancy McMeen, by
a dose Of strychnia, at their home in Port
Royal, Juniata county, on the morning Of
March ., 1856, rendered a verdict of guilty
of murder in the first degree.
Counsel for the prisoner at once moved
for new trial and the Court gave them
twenty days to file their reasons for asking
| for a new trial.
On the 18th day of May, 1885, lawyers for
AeMeen filed eight reasons for asking for a
new trial of which the following is synop-
sis:
First. That it was a mistake to admit, un-
der objection, that part of McMeen's moth
er-in-law, Mrs. Eliza Funk's, testimony, In
which she proves that McMeen threatened
to leave his family and child, and when she
told him that if he did, it would break her
heart. he answered that she-the mother
ln-law-would have something more than
that TO break her heart before long. At most
the threat or prophesy involved the moth
er-in-law, and the conclusion that it was a
threat or prophesy of disaster to his wife
was illogical and unfair.
Second, That Judge Barnett was suffer
ing with cold and his voice was hoarse
and he was compelled TO leave the Bench
and stand in front of the jury and deliver
bis charge. The result was to give weird
and unnatural effect to the scene and Ian
guage. That while the Judge thus stood in
front of the jury, spectators within ten feet
of the jury assented by nodding to each 9TH
er TO the statement OF the points on which
Commonwealth relied for conviction and
the movements of the spectators gave to
the jury the feeling of the outside public on
the case.
Third, Because of the Judges cold and
hoarseness there was seeming emphasis
Ii effect that the charge was against the
accused.
oNSeAeC, VI NLC UNIVERSAL
quiet, but unmistakable bearing of specta-
tors against the prisoner, that he should be
executed as murderer, whether there was
proof of his guilt or not.
Five, Because, while the proof showed
that McMeen mailed the poison to his wife,
she took it herself, In his absence, and
there was nothing to show that he had any
understanding with her that he was to send
her medicine and instead sent her poison.
To convict the accused it must have been
found as fact by the jury that such an IN
derstanding had existed between McMeen
and his wife and that he deceived her, while
in fact it was proven, that the poison enve-
lope was found in the room where the
spoons, knife and poison were found.
Sixth, Because, since the trial it has been
discovered that Mrs. Minnichen, while
searching the room where the spoons, knife
and poison were found, gathered mp scraps
of paper and burned them, and that the poi
son envelope might have been burnt by her
for aught she knew. This fact she withheld
in giving her testimony.
Seventh, Because, counsel for Commoa-
wealth was allowed u recess in his speech
at noon, and was accorded more time than
bad heen fixed or agreed TO and conformed
to by all the other counsel.
Eighth, Because, the bill of Indictment
was not certified from the Court of Quarter
Sessions to the Court Of Oyer aud Termi-
ner. There was in fac; no Venire issued TO
call grand jury in the Court of Over and
Terminer.
After the above eight reasons were pllc-
Ell on file, counsel for McMeen again asked
Judge Barnett TO extend the time for fling
additional reasons, because, no account of
the record had been filed by the Court Re-
porter, because, some of tho counsel for the
prisoner had been constantly employed and
were not able TO assign all the reasons for q
new trial, because, no copy of the reporters
notes had yet been received, and also an
other reason which inv olved the conpeteu-
cy of one OF the jurors. The Julg, extend
ed the time for fling of additional reasons
for a new trial 10 May 2S, 1856, and notified
all counsel to be ready with their reasons
for argument court to be held on tbs Sth
day of June, 1856.