Mexico weekly ledger., 1890-02-20
OVERRULED.
The Motion for a New Trial Dis
posed of-Dusenberry's Case
to be Appealed.

the Dustnt' Fry case was argued at
length Monday, the attorneys on
both sides being present and the
Court House crowded. The mo-
ton for a new trial was based On
the following and a great many
other reasons, supported by affida-
Wits, and fought by counter afffda-
Wits:
The verdict is against the law
and the evidence.
The court erred in admitting i'm
proper evidence against defend
ants objections.
The court erred in rejecting
proper evidence offered by the de-
PENDANT.
The court erred in refusing in
structions asked on behalf of the
defendant.
That Warren Fowle is deaf and
did not hear the evidence.
That the jurors, B. S. Hite, J. T.
Hickman, Lewis Phillip, ]. M.
Culbertson, J. B. Stephens, J. H.
Minor, RI W. Kisor, Warren
Fowle, ]. L. Crisman, Luther
Barnes, w. p CAN'T and W. A.
Showers, of said jurors, expressed
their opinion as to the guilt of the
defendant before they were sum-
moned as jurors in this case, as
shown by afidavits herewith filed.
That the counsel for the State
were guilty in their argument of
using improper language, as ap-
pears from affidavits herewith
filed.
That at the closing speech of the
States counsel the audience in the
court room applauded the same
without proper restraint and re-
buke on the part of the court.
That the Coroner, E. S. Cave,
who acted as sheriff during the
trial of this case, did not qualify as
required by law.
That deputy sheriff, Thos. Atch-
ison, who acted as deputy of said
E. S. Gave, during the progress of
this case, was not appointed and
did not qualify as such deputy
That the prosecuting witness for
the State committed perjury in
testlfying in said case, as appears
from afidavits herewith filed.
That the verdict is the result of
prejudice, misconduct of the jury,
outside influence and improper &C.
ton and conduct of parties in the
court room, as shown by afidavits
filed.
In addition to the above, many
other reasons were given and a
shower of afidavits and counter
were filed.
The argument was opened by
W. W. Fry for the defense. Bark
er and Dryden followed for the
State and E. Robinson closed for
the defense. The question about
whether Juryman Hickman ex-
pressed an opinion before he serv-
ed on the jury appears to be the
leading point. He says he did
not; Sanderson and Morris say
he did. The attorneys on both
sides are making a hard fight.
The arguments in the Dusenber-
ry case were all made Monday and
the Judge slept on the matter, and
on Tuesday he overruled the mo-
ton for a new trial. The attorneys
then made a " motion in arrest, :"
that the transcript from
Montgomery county was defective.
This point. after being argued by
the attorneys on both sides, was
overruled. This case will, of
course, be carried to the Supreme
where the attorneys for the
defense hope to have it reversed.
inch of ground is being
fought and the costs in the
case will run up into the thous-
The State claims that if the
is tried again it will have
even a stronger case than that pre-
sented before.
On Tuesday at noon Dusenberry
was sentenced to the penitentiary
for thirty-fve years by Judge
His wife and child were
with him in court. A motion for
appeal and a stay of execution was
granted. Dusenberry will remain in
Jail until August Is, when the
Court of Appeals will be asked to
give him bail or grant him a further
stay of execution. If the Court
refuses he will then have to go to
the pen. 1t will be a year or SO,
at least, before the case is finally
decided.