Evening journal., 1891-12-12
BIGGs AS A DANIEL.
Handwriting of the Clarks
Upon the Wall.


1t shows That the Three Letters Were
Written BY the Same PersoD-Full Text
of the Threatening Letter Sent TO will
Ham Dupont.
The trial of Edward Clark, Mary Clark,
Joseph Clark and William J. Gibbons,
for conspiring to burn aud destroy the
property and lives of the members of the
rm of e. /. DUPONT de Nemours & Co.,
began in the Court Of General Sessions
of the Peace aud Jail Delivery for this
county, in the Court House, at $40
o'clock yesterday afternoon.
Every seat in the court room was taken
before the judges took their places upon
the bench. Among those present were
Senator George Gray, E. G. Bradford,
Judge Ball, Francis G. DUPONT and Eu-
gene DUPONT
THE PRI sONERs BROUGHT IN.
At 2.35 o'clock the prisoners were
brought in by Sheriff Simmons, 1t was
the same old Gibbons, little more seri-
Gus, but with a devil-may -care express
sion upon his face.
dressed in black clothing. They wore
''biled" shirts and black neckties
Mrs. Clark was neatly dressed in
black dress, black coat and hat and wore
gray veil.
They took their places in the box, but
as soon as their attorney came in they
were given chairs outside the box. A
person charged with misdemeanor, does
not have to 90 into the dock.
At 2 IS o'clock court was formally
opened Hilles rep esented Gibbons and
ex Mayor Harrington represented the
Clarks- They were evidently working
hand IN glove.
DIRECTING TO A JUROR.
Biggs-"on page 46, No. 80, please
your honor A case of conspiracy
Harrington-sI ask that the witnesses
on both sides be excluded from the
room
Biggs-"I have no objection Thought
that the jury might be drawn"
Court" Draw the jury"
Clerk Biggs-"W William Armour.
Baillf 0eakyne-"C Come to the box"
Clerk Biggs-"Charles Simmons.
Hilles-''Now, If your honors please
Charles Simmons was juror on the jury
that has just convicted one Of the defen.
dants in this case, and hold that he has
expressed an opinion thereby, as the cir
eumstances attending the two cases are
interminglsd, and some of the evidence for
the state will be the same. He will have
to swear that he has not formed an
opinion on the strength Of that evidence
The rule Of law is that the Juror must
stand Indifferent IS he stands unsworn."
Judge Cullen" What do you base your
claim that the evidence in this case is the
same as the other, upon
Hilles-"Upon the Indictment aud the
fact that Thomas q, Lynch will bs one
of the principal witnesses, and the ale
cations are threats and conspiraeies
many of which came out in the other
trial Also the burning Of the barn
Judge Oullen-"It may be some other
barn"
dealing with the competency OF juror.
The attorney general spoke of an
oath in the other case and said that 1t
must be the oath of conspirators. The
whole line Of argument tended that way.
The case comes up as particular case,
relating to threats and letters received.
claim that he is incompetent to sit in
this case.
Biggs-"The law is well settled in this
case. A person indicted for a mis-
demeanor may challenge six jurors per
emptorily and no more except for lawful
cause. Where there is more than ono
person on tri al this right to challenge
six peremptoriy, shall be limited to that
number for them all. Such practice has
been used almost exclusively in capital
cases. Such an objection must apply to
the whole panel He has to a very large
extent drawn upon his imagination when
ha 4arQ e. IL the eannanaca II ic differ
emit case altogether. That was a felony
this misdemeanor; that was for burning
barn 5his Is for c0nspirlng to burn q
barn that never was burned They are
separate IN their nature and entirely
dependent upon a different state OF
affairs. | submit that II these twelv.
Jurors in the box that tried the case inst
closed were taken out it would clog tn,
wheels OF justice, as there would not be
enough left in the panel to draw a jury
from
Hilles-'I feel that the court will Sc
cure to the prisoner that impar6iality
which the law allows him. Il is prac
tice that exists in every court. He ha
six peremptory challenges and as man,
as he wants for cause The language O.
the constitution applies to every case, M
matter whether a man steals D can
tomatoes or kills a man. My learne.
friend lays his case upon the statutes
The evidence In the first case tended Il
prejudice juror in the second. Thes
prisoners have circumstsntial right Il
be tried by an impartial jury"
Court-"You must show some specif
cause"
Hilles-'Are we not to be allowed &
examine them on their voir direl"
Court-"You will not. And as the in
dictment is joint one you will only b
allowed six peremptory challenges"
THE JURY DRAWN.
The jury was then drawn as follows
William Armour, Charles Simmons, Sam
uel Townsend, William 7. Bradley
Charles Griffith William Reybold, jane
Il. Veasey, Samuel L. Handy, Thoma
O'Connell, Wilson Malone, Allison
Truitt, James A. Lambdin.
Challenged by the defeuce-y William
T. Bradley, Charles Griffith, william
Reybold, Samuel L. Handy, Thoma
O'Connell.
Drawn in their place-Jsmes Valen-
tine Benjamin Stevenson, John Wor-
rail-, George W. Cooley, B Frank Lip.
pincott, John Loockerman, Henry M
Silver
Challenged by the stgte-George w
Cooley, B. Frank LipPiucott.
The jury as it stands William Ar
mour, Charles Simmons, Samuel Towns