Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1895-06-15

Afliaut states that the bailiff, Juan Del
gado, was behind the jury and that he did
not see him at any time when they were
crossing the bridge, and does not know
as to whether or not the said bailiff, Juan
Delgado, indicated or pointed out or
made any suggestions to any of the mem
bers of the jury in reference to said body;
that upon the morning Immediately be-
fore the verdict was rendered in the above
entitled cause the said bailiff, Severiano
Rivera. walked together with Felipe Sena,
who sat in the said cause, across the
court room, they being alone, and talking
to each other in low tone of voice, the
said bailif, Severiano Rivera, going with
the said juror, Felipe Sena, entirely
across the said court room and entering
the Jury room with the said juror.
Affiant further states, that, during the
entire time in which the trial i'll the
above entitled cause was in progress, the
ballfs sworn and put in charge of the
iury, at all times commented to the jury
aud to different members of the jury,
when the said jury was out of the court
| room, upon tho case, and especially upon
the evidence in behalf of the defendants,
except AS to said Severiano Rivera, his
conversation was carried on in the Span
ish language, and af1iant does not know
positively the Import of his converse
tions.
The bailiff, Juan Delgado, particularly,
referred in general way to the testimony
offered in behalf of the defense as being
unreliable and Enthusiastically and at all
times referred to the defendants as bad
and dangerous men and the witnesses as
sons of b.; that, on one occasion
when the jury had been taken to the race
track. to see Cunningham'shorses ru n, IN
returning they passed by the house OF
Patricio Valencia, and Juan Delgado said
to aiIiant: Here is the place we arrested
one of those sons of b."
WILLIAM E. MYERS.
Subscribed and sworn to June 6, 1895
before R. G. Gortner. notary public.
WILLIAMS AFFIDAVIT INCIDENT.
Mr.. Spiess also offered an affidavit o.
, one James Z. Williams, who was drawn or
the Jury but was afterward excused, pre-
tending to corroborate the statement o
Myers respecting Sheriff Cunningham
playing cards with jurymen.
District Attorney Crist objected to thu
, introduction of this affidavit unless hi
was afforded time and opportunity to re
flute its statements, remarklng that
copy thereof had not been served on hin
as ordered by the court.
Mr., Spiess said that he had given {
> copy of the Williams affidavit to Mr.. Pop
and even offered to verify his Statement
of fact by an affidavit of his own.
The district attorney said that Mr.
! Pope had informed him to the contrary
!, and suggested that Mr.. Pope be sent for
The latter gentleman soon after appeared
and denied point blank that Mr.. Spies
: had given him Pope a copy of the Viii
liams affidavit.
: MYERS STATEMENTS DENIED.
. The district attorney thereupon rea'
/ afidayits of William P. Cunningham
! Juan Delgado and Severiano Rivera
: denying in detail and in the most postiv
manner every material allegation con
Q tanned in the affidavit of w. b. Myers
. These three atfidavits, which are too Ion,
4 to render possible their publication i
j. these columns to-day, serve conclusiveI
u to vindicate the sheriff and his bailiff
y from exertng or attempting to exert an
e influence with the jury for or against tn
e defendants, and that of Severiano River
q strongly tends to show that Juror Myer
q did attempt improperly to influence hi
!, associates.
X The district attorney then said that,
d granted time, he would be able to furnis
u evidence that the Williams affidavit wa
~ also untrue.
IT The judge said that the argument mus
a, proceed without interruption, ms he mus
Is conclude the hearing to day and return
9 his pressing duties at Socorro, but ths
II the matter of the Williams affidavit migt
IS be brought up later.
i Mr. Spiess thereupon began the opel
70 ing argument for the motion.
d Mr.. John Fl. Knaebel followed M
/ Spiess in support of the motion. M
= Catron did not speak, nor did Distrit
10 Attorney Crist.
8 Just before noon the court denied tt
d motion for a new trial.
: At $3.50 p. m. Mr.. Spiess is still arguln
n the motion for an arrest of judgment q
s an allegation that the Indictment was d
fective.