The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1894-02-23
Case OF DR.. A. {. BURR
Judge Archibald DiSmiSSsS lha Exceptions 10
The Return Of Inquest.
The FIGHT WILL Be CONTINUED.
DR.. Burr's Attorneys viii Take Steps
to Have the Case Heard Before a
Jury in Common Pleas Court
Judge Thinks Jurors Have Right
to Take Note OF Testimony if They
Feel so Disposed.

la an opinion handed down by Presi-
dent Judge Archibald. yesterday, the
exceptions to the inqaisition which
found DR.. A. +. Burr an hsbitual
drunkard, were overruled and the re-
quest confirmed.
The frat exception was that Jurors
took notes Of the testimony at the hear.
ing. but the judge did not consider
That sufficient ground for setting aside
The inquest He Gays that in the trial
" a case OF any magnitude he would
II nd it difficult to remember the facts
without notes, and if any juror recog-
tli2es in himself ths same inability he
docs not feel like rising up to condemn
him.
The second exception based upon an
alleged exclusion by the commissioner
OF evidence to show that the SUBJ
lect OF the proceedings was
fully competent to manage his busi-
meas affairs was oVerruled for the rea-
son that no hills Of exception were
given and the commissioner not bsiug
required to note down the testimony,
nor report the proceedings had before
him, there was nothing TO bring up the
rulings Of the commissioner from re
view
THE COMMISSIONERS CONDUCT
The third exception complained that
Commissioner Hawley before whom
the inquisition WAS held went into the
jury room after ths jury had retired 10
deliberate and instructed them in GER
tain irrelevant matters, thus intiusnc-
ing their findings OF this Judge
Archibald says
This is in substance a charge Of misbe.
| havi0r and we have therefore right to
look into 1t. The evidence however, falls
very far short Of sustaining it, Mr.. Haw!ey,
no doubt, went intO the room where the
jurors had retired to deliberate, but IL was
at their request, to further instruct them
upon certain points, and after he had al
swered their questions he Immediately re-
tired. That he attempted In any way TO
influence the jury in its findings has not
particle Of evidence TO sustain it. Counsel
for tho acceptant knew OF the call made
by ths jury and had opportunity Of going
into tue jury room with the commissioner
az to an open session Of the request Tie
| Communication was therefore neither
| private nor without notice and affords no
! Just ground for our interference.
The fourth exception charged that
the jury was influenced in its findings
| by the false statements Of one Of its
number based upon his own alleged
| knowledge that DR.. Burr was wasting
and mismanaging his property, rolling
/ up debts against it and not paying the
interest on his mortgages Regarding
this the judge says:
CANNOT lMPEACH THEIR VERDICT.
The testimony Of Jurors cannot be in-
! troduced to lmpeaCh their verdict, and
/ there is very little upon which to do so, if
! what they have sworn 10 could in fact be
! received. We are narrowed down to the
testimony OF DR.. Burr alone We will not
criticise the method by which this evidence
was obtained, for Dr. Burr was probably
entirely innocent OF intentional caves
dropping, nor 90 we mean TO say that we
will listen to nothing brought to US in this
way. But We cannot be expected 70 en-
courage 1t.
If we are to set aside the findings of
juries upon what somebody chances to
overbeR, Of their discussions from the
negh5oring corridor, We shall have no
end Of applications based on such echoes
from the jury room. We will not, there
fore, move in any snch case unless there
be the most substantial occasion for it.
There IS nothing Of the kind here and the
exception must be overruled.
The fifth exception has been practically
disposed OF by what has been said above
and the sixth is merely general excep-
tion without specifications and need not
be considered
DR.. Burr's attorneys do not propose
to give up the fight They will at once
take steps to have the matter heard bs
fore a jury in common pleas court.