The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-06-07
The Jurors In tho Paynter- Hank
Case Exonerated From Any
Misconduct
No Papers In the Jury Room Ex-
oept Those Given BY tho
Court
Four Opintons Handed Down by tho
Supreme Court On Nasstions
of Practice.

!, Ruth. Il. 7. kepnsr. ID. G. Ross and Fore
man Jacob Loeb. was summoned 70 appea,
before Judge Hunt yesterday morning 70
the purpose OF being examined - 70 III
alleged mlsoonduct Of some Of its member
while celebrating upon the case, tha
charge Of misconduct bsing made BY thl
plaintiffs; ths charges consist in tho separa,
ton Of the jury, entering Z room where in
toxieating liquors were sold, and that the
juror, Loeb, who was foreman Of the jury,
frequently oonsulted . paper. on which wal
some writing, while they were answering
aration Of the jury. The jurors all ap-
psared in court with the exception
Of d. {. Ross, who is absent in the north
ern part Of tho state. Judge Hunt said:
"Gentlenan, you are called back here by
the court because il has been charged that
the foreman of the jury absented himself
from the jury during its deliberations and
returned, and after his return and during
your nswsr to certain questions used .
paper. which hs seemed to draw from his
pocket. 1t is also charged that there were
separations of the jurors during their de-
alterations. And the court calls you for the
purpose of asoertalning exactly what there
is in those assertions
Foreman Jacob Loeb said: II was fore
man Of the jury. The occasion Of my alb
senting myself from the Jury was that I
had to 90 to the closet; ! went up stairs
and asked the bailif if he would give me
permission to leave for . few minutes. and
he gave me permission to leave for ff teen
or twenty minutes. / went up the alley to
the Cosmopolitan hotel, and then went
right through to Main street and came
back up to the Merchants hotel. whore tho
rest OF them were. During the time I was
absent I neither directly For Indirectly
communicated with anybody or heard any
thing said by my one concerning tho suit
uDon which ws were celebrating. The
statement in the affidavit that during the
deliberations the said Loeb would take
from his pocket, and did 20 take from his
pocket. a paper on which was some writing.
and did SO read and consult said writing.
and from said writing direct the answers
to be made to the special findings sub
mitted to the jury with the paper so con-
suited, and that the same was not q paper
delivered to him by the Judge Of the court.
or to the Jury by tho judge Of
s aos. e thar. va is entirely 1i;.n to false, me- The es
take in charge l took in my pocket; all the
papers when We loft the Jury room were left
on the table-that note l put in my pocket,
and whom We came back believe it was
either Mr.. Whitaker or MI. Ruth-ons Of
was handed te them; I took ont the papers
like this with a long envelope and handed
it to one of them; that was tho $4,000 note
that was offered "a an exhibit in the case.
As you (Judge Hunt) gave particular in
struetions to be careful about that note I
tool oara 81 ~ T Ala ~4k AZ an. k;ron l..
ing the deliberations of the jury have any
paper which l consulted or used which in
any way referred to this suit or was in any
manner connected herewith. except those
that were handed me BY you Judge Hunt).
! know nothing Of the separation of the
jury; ] think We were all in one room-ths
back room, whore there was no liquor. I
did not observe any of the member Of the
Jury. at any time during our deliberations,
under the influence Of liquor"
Upon examination by Nj. Wallace Mr..
Leeb said: We went in the rear Of a sa-
permission Of the bailiff: it was Il o'clock,
and We were hungry; va did not have to
PASS through the saloon as We vent into
this room-we entered this private room
from the outside. John S. N. Nsill upon
examination testified positively that MI.
Loeb had no such paper a. described, and
that there were no papers in the jury room
except suoh rs were given the jury by the
t.. Also that Mr.. Loeb did not lead at
all in framing the to the special
questions submitted to the jury.
w. +. Whitaker, who was clerk of the
jury, testified that whom the jury were go
ing out to supper he saw the SO. 600 note
lying on the table with the other papers, al
of them having been introduced in ovid
sncs. and that he called MI. Losb's alton
the note in an envelope and put it in his
coat pocket. He also stated that he was
positive there WAS no paper in the Jury
room other than those handed the Jury BY
the court. In regard to the separation he
testified that Mr.. Nsi!l. Mr.. Loeb and him
aftsrward met At the Merchants hotel
again. where the balance of the jury were;
and that when they went into the ante room
at the rear of the saloon there were two of
the jurymsn At that time wished to remain
outside, bat the hailif would not allow
them to do 80 and they all went inside.
Timothy Wilcox testified that there was
ne snch paper in the jaty room as il al
legged that there were no papers at all
other than those brought from the court.
And testified that the separation spoken of
was substantially as stated by the other
Jurors.
The testimony Of Jurors Simonton, Hol-
lenbaok, Fortune, Ruth and Perry was the
same rs the above, 'exceSt that Mr.. Perry
stated that Mr.. Loeb had lone memoranda
III u1h POOKet WAlCn Ne C0A6Ult6Q, b0t what
this memoranda was he did not know: he
also stated that there was no paper sub
mittsd to the jary and no questions dio-
tAtsd by Foreman Loeb to the jury, and
that there were others who also had figures
on papers.
Tn only testimony against Mr.. Loeb of
any misconduct on his part was that of Mr..
j. A. Doughty. who testified that whom he
WAS passing behind Mr.. Loeb's chair in the
jury room, he noticed him pat his hand in
his pocket and take out . package which
looked like three or four letters with the
ends torn off, and that on tho reverse side
OF the envelope there were two or three
marks alsnR Down, but that he did not
know what they were or what they con-
saiRed. as he did not examine, and that
Mr.. Loeb just looked At them for 4 moment
and then pat them back in his pocket and
that he made no remarks one way or the
ether at tho time; and testified that he saw
no papers other than that during the dslib-
srations, except sach as were given the jury
by the court. His testimony in relation to
the separation Of the Jury was substan-
tally the same as the others. T.. 4. Kap-
ner also testified that sometime during the
evening somebody called his attention to
the matter of Mr.. Loeb having q paper in
his pocket. and he told thsm that le hxd
not observed any, but that xftsrwards Le
noticed Loeb put his hand in his DC, ket
and take out a little paper, but that he did
not know what it was, and that that was
all he saw d0fing the evening"; also that
there were NO remarks made about tho