The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1888-02-08
ORDERED TO PRISON.
Judge Woods Passes Sant'ncs Upon the Dsm-
ocrats Convicted Of Election Conspiracy.
OR. Coy Fined 900 and Given Eighteen
Months Observation-Disclosures $1,000 and
One Years Imprisonment.


two defendants found guilty OF a con-
spriacy to induce election officers to part
with their election papers, made their last
appearance before Judge Woods yesterday
morning, They are through with the
United States District Court, and their fate
is next to be determined by the United
States Supreme Court. Their motion for
new trial was promptly overruled
py Judge Woods after which he pro-
nounced eentence. He fined Mr.. Coy 500
and sentenced him to prison for eighteen
months, and fined Mr.. Bernhamer $1,000
and sentenced him to one years imprison-
rected that both the men should
go 10 Michigan City. and remanded them
to the custody of the United States Mar
shall.
A curious and motley throng crowded
that portion of the Federal court room set
apart doors for as ops as at ao S
O'Clock yesterday morning, but
there were many vacant seats in that por-
ton CT the room usually reserved for the
bar, Jury, defendants and witnesses. Be-
fore the proceedings we're over, however,
this portion of the room was half filed
with lawyers and friends OF the defend
ants.
Promptly at 10 O'Clock, the time set for
the hearing, Simeon Coy followed his law
yers, Messrs. McNutt and Buskirk,
into the room and took seat at one OF the
tables provided for counsel. Mr.. Coy was
dressed in the same dark business suit
with cutsway coat, that he wore through.
out the progress of the trial. Mr.. Bern
hamer came in few moments afterward
and took q seat in the jury box which
only last week was occupied by one of the
men who had judged his case
and found him guilty. He
was dressed in black, as usual, and he, like
Mr.. Coy, had a silk hat. They appeared
10 be in excellent spirits neither of them
seeming to realize that before they left
that room they would have q sentence
passed upon them which if executed would
Deprive them of not only their property,
hut their liberty as well.
Just before the proceedings began, ex-
Senator Harrison and his law partner, Mr..
Miller, came in and took seats in the rear
of Mr.. Bernhamer.
For the first time since the beginning of
the case Judge Woods was a little tardy,
though he was in mis- private office. and had
been since about o'clock. 1t was 1880
when he took his seat. His presence was
signal to begin business.
Solomon Clsypool addressed his Honor,
and stated that the Government desired to
object to the afidavits filed by the defense
in relation to the statements OF jurors
after the return of the verdict,
for the reason that the evidence was
incompetent. He cited various authorizes
IN support of his position, and insisted
that az Juror could not make an affidavit
himself that would affect verdict, much
less conId his statements to other parties
be used for such purpose.
MIR. McNutt read the telegram received
by Juror Messick last Saturday morning,
and also Messick's reply.
They we're as follows:
NEW CASTLE, Ind, January IS, 1888.
AIhart McSSiQk II 8
Your mother is dead. Come as soon as you
ian. W. GREEN.
Nj. Messick's reply was as follows:
INDIANAPOLIS, January IS, 1888.
Aaron Haines, Esq, MOreIand, Henry county.
viii try and get there on number three to-
night. SEND word to my folks
Sol Claypool gave notice that the prose-
cution desired to introduce two
-sfidavits from Juror Davis and
Juror Messick.
Mr.. McNutt-'If the afidavits we intro
6uce were incompetent, then those you
offer in reply to them are certainly not
admissible. We object"
Sol Claypool-"Very well, the record
will show that both sides objected"
Mr.. Buskirk read the reasons why a new
trial was asked and the affidavits sub
Stimulating them, as published in full in
yesterdays Sentinel.
Mr.. McNutt inquired whether, before
exceptions to the record could be filed, the
record must be submitted to the Court?
Judge Woods said that had not been re-
quired in civil cases, and no record had
ever been made in that court, except in
the Perkins habeas corpus proceedings. He
said. however, that there would be no
trouble about that.
District Attorney Sellers read the afida-
Wits of Jurors Davis and Messick. Juror
Davis, In his affidavit, denied that he rep
resented to the other urors that if convicted
the defendants would not be imprisoned,
but only nominal fine assessed against
them; but said he gave il as mis- opinion
that If Mattler was convicted his punish
ment would be light. He said that Juror
MeSs1cks telegram had no effect on the
verdict, and none of the Jurors appeared to
be under the influence of LIQUOR.
Juror Messick denied that his telegram
brought about the verdict, and denied say
Ing that he thought it Influenced some of
the jurors. He did not notice that any of
thejurors were under the influence of uor
at any time.
Sol Claypool briefly argued the question
OF LIQUOR being drunk by one OF the Jurors
He insisted that verdict could not be set
aside on that account, unless it could be
shown that it had in some way affected the
verdict
Mr.. McNutt said he did not wish to m AXE
any extended argument. 1t was conceded
that there was some question as to wheth-
er the afhdavits giving the state
ments OF jurors made after the
return of the verdict was proper evidence.
He contended, however, that the affidavits
on file also involved the conduct of the
Jurors, and that such evidence was compe-
tent. He thought the mere fact that tele-
gram was allowed to go to juror was of
sufficient importance to presume that it
had some effect on the verdict.
Mr.. Buskirk called the attention of the
court to the fact that two of the Jurors had
drank intoxicating liquors, and ar yued
that this Iniitsef was sufficient error to set
aside verdict.
Judge Woods without hesitation, rem.
dered his opinion on the motion for a new
trial. He tooK up the Messick telegram
question first, and in substance said
"Messick knew that his mother was at the
point Of death ali the time, and his great
est ANXIETY must have been to see her
. ain In life. IL the situation tended to
equality him, this was more the case be-
1oEe her death than after. The telegram
tsttled in his mind that he could never see
; mother alive again, and he already
J. 4 the assurance of the court that
te would be allowed to attend her
funeral. 1t seems to me, on the
lace OF the thing, that the telegram
was no disturbing force in the minds OF the
Jurors; but, on the contrary, the anteced-
ent facts make the inference the other way.
But ii Is not left to inference alone, for we
have the testimony of two of the jurors
themselves that Ii did not influence their
var1fok and khak - a A