Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-04-14
CLEARED ON A rECHNIcALIrY.
Strange Experience in the United States
Court in the Hanlon Case Yesterday

AT the session of United States district
court on Tuesday, the grand jury ap-
peared at 2 p. m. and handed in the fol.
lowing true bills: United States VS..
Thomas +. Hanlon, violation of postal
laws; John I. Poore, for same Isaac Cross,
assault on the high seas; and three bills
against Ella OFT of this city for violation
OF revenue laws. The grand jury was dis
charged. Court adjourned until yesterday
morning.
United States district court opened yes
terday.. Proceedings were somewhat lie
layed through the non-arrival of the chief
prosecuting witness, Columbus w. Ken
ney, in the case of the United States VS.,
Thomas Il. Haulon.
District Attorney Beniah Watson an
nounced the discharge of all the witnesses
court.
The following jury was called for the
case of Thomas +. Hanlon: Jesse I. Wells.
John Jackson, Joseph II. Vantine, James
II. Anderson, William II. Guthrie, L. b.
Windsor. J. Colby Smith, Philip ID.
Marvel, William A. Husbands, William
Wheatley, James i. Burtnett, Charles II.
Evans.
The charge against Mr.. Hanlon was that
ne had sent threatening letter to Column
bus w. kenney, editor of the SUSSEX Coua-
iidn. Mr.. Kenney was the first witness
called. He identified the card as one re-
ceiyed by him from Mr., Hanlon. Other
witnesses were Post Office Inspector Max
well and Postmaster Daniel Il. Stewart.
The postal card in question stated that
Mr.. Hanlon would hand over certain
threatening letters received by him from
Mr., kenney if the latter did not stop
PIONEERING him Chat is bothering him
through the post.
For the defence, w. Michael Byrne
called Thomas Il. Hanlon, who made GER
tain statements which did not materially
alter the direct value of the evidence.
Suddenly, however, Mr.. Byrne, for tho
defence, arose, and addressing the court,
moved that the defendant be discharged
on the grounds of discrepancy between
the indictment and the evidence.
Or course the motion caused quite SELL
sation. The court and the district attorney
looked inquiringly, the latter quite con-
ceerned, at Mr.. Byrne as he proceeded to
indicate that the indictment related that
the postal card in question was posted at
Laurel while the evidence from all direc-
tons. including the card itself, showed
that it had been posted in Wilmington,
lie therefore asked that his client be dis.
charged.
District Attorney Watson thought the
motion preposterous and laughed al the
idea of such proposition.
After listening to both sides Judge
Wales said he thought variance existed
between the act OF Congress and the in
dlctment. The same letter cannot be
mailed simultaneously in Wilmington and
Laurel.
Gentlemen of the jury, the court con-
tinued, have to direct you to find YER
dict of not guilty.
Some. of the jury seemed to hesitate
about their position in the matter. Judge
Wales then carefully again explained the
those oversights that pleaders sometimes
make; If You find the defendant guilty
shall have to. set your verdict aside.
In two or three minutes Foreman Jesse
I. Wells returned verdict of not guilty
upon which the court ordered Mr.. Han
Ions discharge. Court adjourned to 1870
y. m.