St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-12-16

to consider as this, departure from
the rule could hardly be expected. The
verdict of a jury is necessary compo-
site one, 1t is inteded to be. Ii 1t were
not, there would be no need OF twelve
men. but the jury might just as well be
composed of one. 1t is the consensus
of opinion that the law contempiates
as being the most likely to insure JUS
tice."
at is stated that you intend to keep
the jury out until they do agree in lhis
caSe-a week or two if necessary. Is
such your Intention?"
"Of course it would be improper for
me to state at this time my intention,
even if l could anticipate the causes
which might lead to such determlna-
Jion. 1t must be borne in mind, now
ever, that the court must necessarily
exercise discretion in such matter as
that. The supreme court may have TO
pass upon this case. Dropping the Gro
min case altogether, will illustrate
with an imaginary case. Suppose we
have case where eleven men are
agreed upon the question of the guilt OF
the defendant, and the twelfth believes
in his innocence. That jury, we Will
say, is kept out two and three days. and
the status of opinion is the same
against the eleven. Suppose then,
as you suggest, the judge
should order them out indefinitely,
after they had stated their Inability to
agree. and ultimately force them to
verdict, the eleven men all the time
arguing with, demonstrating with and
chiding the twelfth. Suppose then the
case should go 10 the supreme court and
the twelfth man should come forward
and state that he had been cOerced and
worried into an agreement by his fel-
lows against his better Judgment; that
it was only under the stress of mental
anxiety, or anguish, that he had con-
sented to the verdict. In such case
do you doubt that the supreme court
would invalidate that verdict, and order
new trial? Of course the jury should
be given ample time and every OppOr-
tunity to agree, but the demarcation be-
tween deliberate conclusion and c0er-
Give verdict should be clearly drawn.
The law does not contemplate an inqni-
siti0n to eXtOrt Judgment from the
mind of the juror"
"Have you received any request from
the jury for special instructions since its
retirement"
Il have not. I have never been in
the jury room, and indeed | have no
right to enter it. Should they request
any fuller Interpretation Of any instruc-
tion which the court has given them,
they can only request it formally, and
then it is the duty of the court to call
them into the court, and there, in the
presence OF the defendants and their
attorneys, interpret to the jurY's salts
faction the law applying to the evil
denco. No such request has been
made. and no reading of the record of
evidence has been asked for"
''In case of disagreement OF the
jury will the case be tried again before
you, or can the defendants take
change of venue out of the cOunty"
The defendants can, by the Gus
tomary affldavits, take a change of
venue from ten consecutive judges, and
probably succeed in having it tried out
of the county. There are five defend
ants, and each defendant can twice have
the opportunity of demanding change
of venue; so that a change be could
successfully taken from ten judges"
''What county would these changes
of venue probably take the case to
eventuallyP'
Likely to Lake or Dupage county.
They are the nearest counties to Cook.
Remember now, in answering these
QueStiC ms, am not attempting to pre-
diet what the defendants attorneys
would do. but simply what they could do
under the law by availing themselves
of all its provisions"