The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-12-12
A HOPE FOR RUTTEN.
Supreme Court Grants Him a
New Trial for Murder.
HOW he RECEIVED THE NEWS.
The Big. simple Rancher From Kitsap
County Pleased as Boy at His
Good Fortune.

"servius Rutten has been granted n new
trial. This was Tire brief Geographic ar
nouncement from Olympia received az the
Post-fnteliigencsr ONCE yesterday after
noon at AS o'elock. telling ef the reopen
ing OF the famous kitsap county murder
case. \ Post-Intelltgenc-r reporter has
tened 20 the county JAIL and was taken in
b. Jailer Burkrsan 10 where Rutfen was
chatting with his felIow-prisoners.
Come here q minute, Rutfen." said
Burkman.
The great big, tall. simpie-looking fell
low came 10 tire bars and stood in silence
as IL waiting for something 10 happen. The
other prisoners pricked up their ears and
waited too. The dispatch was then read.
As the significance or the words came TO
Rutten smile stole over his features. He
first recitation. and never said q word un-
I'll the reporter asked:
wen. what do you think OF .hat?''
ITS nice" he replied. still smiling. Then
IN q semi-confideEtial manner he asked
who his attorney was. On being told that
II. r. Shields represented him still. ne
wanted 10 know II he would come and see
him. The reporter told him that Mr..
Shields would probably come when he
learned OF the decision.
How does the Post-Intelligencer learn
OF these things so quick?' asked RutteD.
and then. as IL a bright idea had struck
him. he added. does the t-Intelligen-
Ger have a telegraph TO the judge?''
When questioned about the new trial.
he said: II suppose the Judge viii set thu
time, won't he, and then ! will be tried
I think ought 10 be acquitted. 1 guess
the people over in K.tsap county don't
think so bad OF me as they did. / didn't
want 10 kil Fletcher and / think / viii
get a fair trial this time" Then he sud
denly added:
What is your manner You are not
against me. are your
AS the reporter went out Rutten said
he would pass happy nIght
The murder for which Rutsen was con-
victed took place az Chico. September 3,
1898. Rutten borrowed a rifle from Larsen
Bros. to kill cougar and was passing
Capt. W. +. Seymogrs house when a lit
tie dog owned by w. s. Fletcher. mate Of
the Chehalis, ran out and bit him. Rutten
shot the dog. When Fletcher heard OF it
he went after Rutten and from bridge
above Rutten's house called him out by
throwing a rock on the cabin.
What in hell did you shoot my dog
for?' asked Fletcher. Rutten said he did
SO because the dog bit him.
You Dutch ---. that dog would not
bite you or anyone else said Fletcher.
Come up here and T VIII give you the
damnedest best licking you ever had"
Rutten refused. but according TO the
story. told Fletcher ii he wanted anything
OF him, TO come down where he was. Fletch-
er went down. Then there was demand
for pay for the dog. and It was claimed
Rutten shot Fletcher down as he was GO
ing away. Two bullets did the work Rut
ten at the time of the AFFAIR said that he
fired one shot TO scare Fletcher and the
other in self-defense.
He was tried and convicted in the first
degree. although his attorney. Mr.. Shields.
tried TO get a change OF venue on the
ground OF prejudice. 1t has been said that
1t was the eloqBence OF John Fairfield
Dore. who conducted the prosecution, that
led to a conviction. Since then Mr.. DOre
has said that Rutten should not have been
convicted. Rutten will be remembered es-
pecially in King county as having escaped
from the county jail with Tom Blanck, and
who was afterward captured near Black
River junction by Michael Kelley and
Dick Burkman. Blanck escaping into the
bushes. Since his Imprisonment there has
been some doubt of Rutten's sanity.
Olympia, Dec. 11.-SpeciaL-The supreme
court has ordered a new trial for Servius
Rutten, convicted of murder IN the first
degree IN the superior court OF Kltsap
county. The first assignment OF error in
this case by appellant was that he was en-
by the county commissioners for 1894. but
the supreme court has already decided ad-
versely to the contention IN the case OF
the State VS.. Krug. The second contention
was that the court srred in overrullIl ap-
pellants challenge to Jurors DennIston.
Green and Stark In this case, says the
supreme court, three jurors admitted that
they had opinions which existed at the
time of their examination, and that IL
would take evidence to remove such opin-
ions. and the final announcement by the
jurors under leading questions by the
court and states attorney which plainly
indicated TO the jurors what answer was
expected OF them, does not outweigh the
statement made OF their own free will
that they had opinions regarding the guilt
OF the accused which Il would take evil
dence 10 remove. especially when IL was
answered by Juror Stark that he believed
there was something wrong and that he
could not go into tho fury box and accord
the defendant the presumption that he
was innocent until proven guilty. While
the statute gives 10 the court the right TO
determine the question Of the impartiality
OF a Juror, yet, this being a constitutional
right. this court viii review the discretion
OF the lower court in passing upon the
question, and from the examination ef the
Jurors, especially Stark. the supreme court
Is satisfied that the right Of the defendant
TO he tried by an impartial jury was
eyaded.
II further appears 10 the supreme court
that the lower court erred IN refusing 10
permit defendants counsel to ask Witness
Albertson the question: Are You testify
ing by guess or testifving OF what you
know" az the record showed that the
witness had a careless manner OF testify
ing. frequently using the words IT guess"
The right 10 determine through cross-eN-
animation the exact knowledge OF witness
or the accuracy OF his statements should
not be denied him. The other assignments
OF error are not regarded as meritorious.
Opinion by Judge Dunbar coucurred in
nv Judges Anders and Scott. Judge Cor
don concurring in the result. Judge Hoyt
dissents.
Ceramic cub Exhibition.