The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1891-05-08
9HE FOURTH day
OF the Garrison Trial Proves
Very Interesting.
THE ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL
Occupy Nearly All the Day...A Sen.
sation When David Bell Was
Brought Up for Final Exam.
inntIon 80 The Rulings.

bAtlOn Nnen DAtlu bell was
Brought Up for Final Exam.
inntIon zee The Rulings.
Legal arguments are as a rule very
dry and uninteresting to the average
individual, but those that were con.
Quoted in the Garrison trial yesterday
were OF an entirely different character.
The audience was large all day, and it
WIS no smaller when court closed in
the evening.
The examination OF David Bell, one Of
the jurors who had been accepted by
both sides as fair and unprejudiced, was
very interesting and fora time was very
exciting. His examination was finished,
but the case was not finally disposed OF
and will come up sgain this morning.
When court opened the record was
read for the first time since the trial
began without an objection on the part
Of either side. The 6rst matter con.
sidered was statement from Mr.. W. F.
Krieg, who had been selected as a juror.
Mr.. Krieg said 10 the court that be felt
satisfied that be could not hear all that
would be said in the trial. He said that
his capacity for hearing was not steady;
that sometimes he could hear well and
at others he would lose all ability to
hear and several sentences would pass
without his hearing them at oil.
Mr.. KTieg also said that he had an i'll
mother, who Is nearly eighty years old,
and who was in such condition that her
life was very precsrious. On these
grounds he asked to be excused, and
the State asked that he be excused.
The defense objected 70 his being ex.
cused, because he was in the panel and
further selection Of jurors would con-
sume time and put off the hearing OF
the cause unnecessarily. After counsel
bad argued the matter at length, il was
dropped for the time.
Later DR.. A. F. Stifel was sent for and
stated that he had frequently examined
and treated Mr.. Krieg for his hearing.
His hearing is somewhat impaired. DR..
S.ifel said that q watch which he or an.
other person who hears normally could
hear at thirty inches, Mr.. Krieg would
not hear at more than six or eight
inches. When several persons are talk
ing at once, while bis attention Is drawn
to one, be will shear him bnt wonld not
hear the Others. His hearing was al
ways bad when he has slight cold. |
Mr.. Riheldaffer, an emplOye OF Mr.. |
Krieg's, stated that he frequently had to |
speak several times to Mr. Krieg 10 |
make him understand.
JUROR BELLS AGE.
The question whether a juror who
is past sixty years old is disqualified was
then brought up by Captain Dovener, as
he had promised to do the night before,
by bis making motion that all those
jurors who are past sixty years old be |
excused at once without further exami.
nation.
The question is raised on account OF |
the wording OF section Of chapter 1lG |
Of the Code, which is as follows:
"Allmale persons who are over twenty.
one years and not over sixty, and who |
are citizens ot this State, shall be liable to |
provided"
The room for argument comes from
the statement that all over twenty.one
shall be liable is construed to mean that |
all under twenty-one shall not be liable, |
heuce all under sixty are liable and all |
afNr Va ka fIS
question whether man is disqualified |
because he ia not liable presented itself. |
Further, II one does not desire to avail |
himself Of the opportunity not to serve
because 1t is offered, does the language |
OF the section make it obligatory upon |
the court to dismiss him and does 1t dis. |
qualify him for that duty2 Captain |
Dovener stated his position and Mr..
SommeTville addressed the court. In |
support Of his opposition 10 Captain |
Dovener's motion he read from vol. l6, |
Grattan's reports, page 5l9, the case OF |
Booth and Smith vs.. the Commonwealth |
OF Virginia. The case was decided by |
the Supreme Court in May, 1861, before
West Virginia was detached from the
mother State. In the case, the decision |
was delivered by Judge Mopcure, at
Richmond. Booth and Smith were in.
diCted before grand jury one member
OF which Was more than sixty years old. |
The case was decided against The appel
lsnts. The opinion OF MonCure went
into the case in detail and held that
while juror may be excused on account
Of his age, he ls not on that account in
eligible.
Captain Dovener stated that the
authority cited by Mr.. sommervilIe was
merely an opinion by Judge Moncure
as to the grammatical construction OF |
the statute. He held that because the
statute says that all between twenty.one
and sixty are liable to jury duty, and all
under tWenty.one are excluded on that
ground, then all who are sixty or over
are excluded for the same reason. Col.
Arpett held that under tweuty.one Is Q
common law disqualification and pro.
ceeded TO review Judge Moncure's case
in GTattan. Capt. Dovcner sAid he took
itsue with the care cited, and with all re.
spect wished to argue the matter on
smother line from the line laid down by
Moncure.
CAPTAIN poiEEER's POINT.
Captain Dovener held that the Do.
fense had no grievance, because II there
are two men in the panel who are dis.
qualified by. sge or other statutory dis.
ability the court proceeds 10 all their
places by men who are free from all dis.
qualifications and against whom there
can be no objection. II our point proves
after this trial TO he well taken, and
there is upon the Jury q man who 10
more than sixty, it Ia the same as eleyen
men trying the case, and 1t would be
unconstitutional and an error and
would be Just and good ground for & do.
mand for another trial. In proof, he
cited decision In New York Reports
wherein & man disqualified BY being not
freeholder, aa was demanded, was good
and so itiCient cause for reversal Of the
judgment.
The court suggested that II the section
says q man Vh0 is past sixty may not sit