The record-union., 1893-07-06
NO VERDICT.
The Jury in the Ross Case Could
Not Agree.
They stood Ten for Acquittal and
Two for Conviction. and
Were Discharged.

The case of Angus ]. Ross, charged
with leasing or renting his property at
Second and K streets for the purpose of
maintaining therein unlawful gaming.
was tried before Justice Henry yesterday.
The complaining witness was Sheriff
Thomas O'Neil District Attorney Ryan
and Hiram w. johnson conducted the
prosecution, and G. i. Jones and E. G..
Hart the defense. The following jury
was selected to try the case: NJ. l.. Ru-
dech, A. C. Douglas, ID. NJ. Cress, w. w.
Bassett, J. Olsen, William Duden, Fred,
Mason, Thomas McCaffrey. D. Wilson, L.
Winter, Paul Graf and f. c, Yoerk.
The first witness called was County As
SCISSOR r. G. Irvine, who identified the
sworn statement of Angus Ross to the
ownership of the property in question.
Mr.. Jones objected to the Introduction
of the document in evidence on the usual
general ground of incompetency and
irreleVancy, and on the further ground
that the alleged statement was not a
free and voluntary admission OF owner
ship of the property, but was one made
compulsory under the law.
Mr.. Jones also cOntended that, because
the property was assessed to Ross in
March, it was no proof that the same be-
longed to him in June.
District Attorney Ryan argued that in
a criminal case the same rule for showing
ownership did not apply as in a civil case
of eiectment. He quoted from a decision
OF the Supreme Court i'll a cattle-stealing
case, to show that where time was not an
essential point at issue a slight variation
as to the date Of ownership made no diff
ference.
The objection of the defense to the in
PRODUCTION OF the taX-rol statement was
overruled by the court, and MIR. ones
excepted.
City Assessor J. J. Buckley was the
next witness called. He testified that
Ross is the owner Of the property in ques-
ton, which he purchased from Charles
O'Neill.
Witness produced the statement made
to him officially for the assessment roll.
lie did not know of his own knowledge
that the statement was signed by Ross.
On crosS-eXaminaIion witness admitted
that the only knowledge he had regarding
the ownership OF the property was OBJ
tanned from the records.
Mr.. Jones asked to have the witness
testimony thus far stricken out, and it
was 50 ordered.
4. I. Cohn of the Recorders Office was
called to identify the record of deeds, by
which 1t was shown that the property in
question was sold in 1854 by Charles
O'Neil to Ross.
Albert TeUens testified that in the
Ross building faro game is conducted
up stairs. Witness had visited the place
on the 9th Of June when a game was in
progress, and he played at it. He saw
defendant Ross in the room during last
month, but could not say he had seen
him taking part in the faro game.
The prosecution here rested.
Sheriff ON Neil was called and testified
to having notified defendant that he must
close his game the lst of June. Ross
asked him not to interfere until after the
spring races. Another notice was subse-
quontly sent through the mail.
Inc prosecution here rested.
Mr.. Jones asked Mr.. O'Neil if he was
ever in Ross place when faro was being
dealt, and he said ne was not. He had
sworn to the complaint on information
and belief
The defense offered no testimony, and
arguments were proceeded with. The
case was submitted to the jury about 5
O'Clock, and after being out a couple of
hours informed the court that they could
not agree and were discharged. The jury
stood ten for acquictaI.