The News-Herald. [volume] (Hillsboro, Highland Co., Ohio) 1886-1973, 1892-04-28
SUSTAINED
The Decision of the Common
Pleas Court,
In the Trial Of John w. Lewis for
killing Ed. Elliott.

The court room was filed last Satur-
day with an expectant crowd waiting to
hear the decision of the Circuit Court in
by far the most important case brought
up for consideration at this session, that I
of John w. Lewis vs. the State of Ohio;
error: in which Lewis asked for re-
versal of the decision of Judge Pugh, of
the Common Pleas Court, who refused |
to grant Lewis new trial for the killing |
of Ed. Elliott. All of our readers are
familiar with the details of the tragedy |
in which on July 3lst, 1890, Ed. Elliott
lost his life at the hands OF Lewis, who |
was at that time City Marshal.
Elliott had been in some trouble in
Jim Doorley's saloon on North High
street, and Lewis was sent for to arrest
him. Elliott left the saloon by the back
door and went down Beech street as far
as East, where he was overtaken by
Lewis, who attempted there to arrest
him. In the shuttle Lewis revolver was
discharged and Elliott fell, dying almost
instantly. Lewis gave himself up inn
mediately and has acted ever since on
the claim that the killing.was purely &C.
cidental.
The next Grand Jury brought in an
indictment for murder in the second de.
gree and he was tried under it in the
latter part of March OF last year, the
jury returning a verdict OF manslaughter.
Lewis attorneys Immediately moved for
new trial and the arguments were
heard by Judge Pugh, who overruled
the motion and sentenced Lewis toseven,
years in the penitentiary. The applica
ton for new trial was then carried to
the Circuit Court and last Wednesday
and part of Thursday were occupied in
the hearing of the case. Error of the
lower court was claimed in several of it's
proceedings, but the principal point on
which the claim for a new trial was
based was the manner in which the jury
for the trial was selected. In such a
case, if the defendant demands struck
jury, the County Clerk, Auditor and
Recorder shall, without delay, select
forty names of residents of the county
and this list shall be given to the attor-
neys for State end defendant and they
strike off twelve names each, leaving
sixteen jurors on the list. If twelve Of
these qualify they constitute the jury
for the trial. If this does not fill the
jury special centres are issued until
twelve jurors are obtained. Lewis de-
manded struck jury and the Clerk,
Auditor and Recorder selected forty
names. The States attorneys, however,
refused to strike from the list, claiming
that one Of the persons, Clerk keech,
by whom it was selected, did not stand
Indifferent between the parties. Judge
Higgins then appointed Mr.. J. NJ.
Hibben to act as Clerk in Mr.. Keech's
place, and he acted as such III the selec
ton of a new list of names. Lewis at
torneys would not recognize this as a
legal action and refused to take part in
the selection of the jury. Consequently
they claimed before the Circuit Court
that the jury was not legal one and
that its acts were null and void. Other
points of error in the trial were alleged,
but this was the most important. The
case was argued by Prosecutor Garrett
and T. II. Hogsett for the State and
Hon. Uric Sloane for Lewis.
The decision of the Court was reserved
until Saturday morning when it was
rendered by Judge Clark. An exhaust
i've review in the case was given and the
opinion occupied two hours in the de-
livery. The lower court was sustained
unanimously in every point, except the
important one we have outlined, by the
three Judges, Cherrington, White and
Russell. In regard to this one Judges
Cherrington and White agreed in sus-
tanning Judge Pugh, while Judge Rus.
sell dissented, taking the view of the
matter presented by Lewis attorneys.
Notice was given of the intention of
Lewis attorneys to carry the case 10 the
Supreme Court.