The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1893-07-19

says that his personal relations with said
Ryce were atsa1d time and for manYyears there
tofOre had been most friendly and even in
innate, and that affiant is not prompted by
any Ill viii toward any one In making this affi-
davit, but solely by sense Of duty and con-
victiOn Of what Is due to justice
Amant further says that about the beginning
Of October, 1886, when the motion for a new
trial was being argued In said cases before
Judge Gary, and when, as he was informed,
application was made before Judge Gary for
leave to examine afiiant In open court touch
ing the matters above stated, this Afiant went
upon request from States Attorney Grinnell
to his Office during the noon recess of the
court, and there held an interview with said
Grtnnell, MI Ingham and said Ryce, in the
presence OF several other persons, including
some police officers, where affiant repeated
substantially the matters above stated, and
the said Ryce did not deny atlantis statements
and atfiant said that he would have to testify
thereto II summoned as witness, but had re-
fused to make an affidavit thereto, and d6iGRt
1CdS then and there asked and urged TO persist in
ms refusal, and to make no affidavit. And dtiant
further saith not. OTIS 8. FAVOR.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th
day OF November, A. ID. 1887.
JULIUS STERN,
Notary Public in and for said County.
$50 far as Is shown no one connected with
the states attorneys Office has ever denied
the statements Of Mr. Favor as to what took
place in that Office, although his affidavit was
made in November 1887.
EXAMINATION OF JURORS.
"As to Bailiff Ryce it appears that he has
made an affidavit In which he denies that he
made the statements sworn to by Mr.. Favor,
but, unfortunately for him, the records Of the
trial is against him, for 1t shows conclusively
that he summoned only the class Of men men
toned in Mr. FaVor's affidavit. According to
the record S91 men were examined as to their
qualifications as jurors, and most of them were
either employers or men who had been pointed
out to the bailiff by their employers. The fol-
lowing, taken from the original record of the
trial, are fair specimens Of the answers of
nearly all the jurors, except thatin the follow
ing cases the court succeeded in getting the
jurors to say that they believed they could
try the case fairly Notwithstanding their
prejudice.
"William Neil, a manufacturer was exam
ined at length; stated that he had heard and
read about the Haymarket trouble and be-
lieved enough Of what he had so heard and
read to form an opinion as to the guilt Of the
defendants, which he still entertained; that
he had expressed said opinion, and then he
added: 1T would take pretty strong evidence
to remove the impression that now have. l
could not dismiss 1t from my mind; could not
lay it altogether aside during the trial be-
lieve my present opinion, based upon what I
have heard and read, would accompany me
through the trial and would influence me in
determining and getting at o verdict
A. Ia.
the ground Of being prejudiced, but the court
then got him to say that he believed he could
give q fair verdict on whatever evidence he
should hear and thereupon the challenge was
overruled
III. F. Chandler, in the stationery business
with Skeen, Stuart & Co., said: Il was pointed
out to the deputy sheriff by my employer to
be summoned as juror He then stated that
he had read and talked about the Haymarket
trouble, and had formed and frequently ex-
pressed an opinion as to the guilt of the de-
PENDANTS, and that he believed the statements
he had read and heard. He was asked:
Q. Is that decided opinion as to the guilt
Of the defendants2
A. It is decided opinion yes, sir.
Q. Your mind Is pretty well made up now as
to their guilt or innocence?
A. Yes, sir.
@. Would It be hard to change your opinion?
A. 1t might be hard; cannot say. l don't
know whether 1t would be hard or not
Ale was challenged by the defendants on
the ground OF being prejudiced then the
court took him in hand and examined him at
some length, and got him to state that he be-
lieved he could try the case fairly. Then the
challenge was overruled.
+. L. Wilson-Am q manufacturer. / am
prejudiced and have formed an expressed
opinion; that opinion would influence me In
rendering verdict.
ale was challenged for cause, but was then
examined by the court:
@. Are you conscious in your own mind Of
anY wish or dasira that thara should be evil