The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-12-03
Change OF VENUE ASKED
Dispositions on the Jennings Applica-
tiOn Heard In Arbitration Room.
FOUR WITNESSES EXAMINED
Their Testimony viii Be Presented to
the Court to Sustain MIR. Smiths
Contention That Fair Trial
Cannot be Had Hero.

Attorney Cornelius Smith and his
client, John G. Jennings, Of Minooka, are
infinitely weary of Lackawanna county
court trials and they desire to be al
lowed a change of venue in the case
wherein Mr.. Jennings is plaintiff and
the Lehigh Valley Railroad company
defendant. The action is for compen-
satory damages for the loss of his sons
services through the injuries he sus-
tanned at Mud Run in the accident on
Oct. 10, 1883.
The case was once tried here and the
jury disagreed. The second time it was
called for trial, one of the jurors. Super
intendent John H. Brooks. of the Mead
ow Brook silk MILL after he had been
sworn, arose and asked the permission
of the court to be excused. He had a
biased sentiment against the case from
all he had read about It and felt that
he could not do justice to the defendant
He was withdrawn and the case was
continued.
The third time 1t came up for trial
DR.. c. NJ. Kelley. the most important
witness for the plaintiff. was not pres
ent. He had been playing tag with the
deputy sheriffs and constables who
went to Equinunk to serve the SUBJ
poenas on him.
The fourth time Mr. jennings got in
trouble by making charges in an afIi-
davit against officers Of the court. The
afiiant was held for perjury and the
case was relegated to the statu quo list
Enrns Case an Outgrowth.
One of the ramifica lions of the charge
of perjury against Mr.. Jennings was
the famous libel suit of Attorney I. II.
Burns against Mr.. Smith. The details
Of it are of recent date and do not re-
quire repeating.
In the arbitration room yesterday
afternoon dispositions were taken before
Attorney c. c. Donovan acting as COM
missioner on the rule to have the Jen-
nings' suit tried in some other county.
Attorney Smith represented the plain
tiff and Major Everett Warren the
company.
Four dispositions We're taken. The
first was that Of Michael King. of
Minooka. His opinion was that it is
impossible for Mr.. Jennings to get a
fair trial in this county. John Heffron.
Va w 90 tHS SSNoiiN, ilS pldfiitu
the newspapers for creating senti-
ment against the Jennings case.
Major Warren asked him if the public
opinion was not against the lawyer
and not the case. Heffron agreed that
was so, but he said the newspapers
We're all wrong in the manner they
treated Messrs. Jennings and Smith.
Anthony Cusick, of Minooka, was
the third. His opinion was that Jen-
nings ought to get fair trial.
mot what he ought to get; but can
he get it?' said Mr.. Smith vehemently.
Would Have Nothing More TO Say.
"Well, I'll have nothing more to say"
said Mr. Cusick, leaving the stand.
Mr.. Smith had to coax him back
Mr.. Cusick then said he believed that
there is too much prejudice existing in
this county against Mr. Jennings to in
sure him a fair and impartial trial
Martin P. Judge was the fourth. His
opinion Is that there is too much biased
sentiment against the plaintiff that he
may have a fair trial in this county.
The hearing was adjourned until FRI
day afternoon at 2 o'clock. These de-
positions will be presented to court in
support of the argument for a change
Of venue.