St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-09


Believing that you have rendered a
conscientious verdict, now say that
you may be discharged from further
attendance upon this court"
1t was all over, and a great sigh
of relief went up from the jurors,
who bowed their heads in acknowI-
edgment of the judges kind words.
Attorney Hall stepped forward,
and in a low voice asked for an i'm
mediate sentence.
Before Judge Smith could reply
John Day Smith said: 81 trust your
honor will grant a stay for a few
days. Mr.. Erwin is i'll in ST. Paul
and cannot be here. In case Of
such seriousness as this, I trust your
honor will defer sentence at this
time
The court said that it was not
necessary to defer sentence, as ap-
peals in murder cases could be made
after sentence had been passed
II will, however" said he, grant
stay until Monday morning, and if
1 deem it expedient 1 will grant
longer time"
There was nothing more to be said,
and the prisoner hastily threw on his
overcoat and after being handcuffed
walked quickly out of the room
guarded by three deputies.
Judge Smith went up to each juror
and shook him warmly by the hand
The jurors were SO happy in their
release that, in spite of the fearful
responsibility of which they had just
been relieved, they laughed and
chatted quietly with attorneys, re-
porters and others. They had agreed
not to divulge the secrets Of the jury
room, and it was impossible to get
them to give any information, but it
was learned from an authentic
source that Juror Dickey was the
acquittal.
They fingered about the court room
for half an hour conversing with a
number of people about the case,
but guarding we'll the story of their
deliberations.
|. Judge Smiths charge to the Jury
was certainly comprehensive, and
the lawyers and laity both who
heard it agreed that it was most fair.
He called attention to the fact that
the verdict must be either guilty of
murder in the first degree or not
guilty. There could be no other al
tentative. 1t was not necessary to
establish the guilt of the defendant
to an absolute certainty, but to a
moral certainty, founded on evil
dence incompatible with any theory
of innocence. While Blixt had con-
tradicted himself, it might take into
consideration the condition of his
mind at the time the conflicting
statements were made, and it might
also take into consideration the in
centive of promises of clemency. It
must also remember that as an ac-
complice his testimony must be cor
roborated. The state claimed that it
was Adry telling Elder Stewart be-
fore the murder that Harry had told
him of securing BliXt, who would do
the work. The testimony of any wit
ness might also be weighed in the
light of any i'll feeling which the wit
ness might bear toward the defend
ant. He also reminded them that an
adequate motive for the crime must
be shown. The state claimed that
this was found in the insurance
money. The defense claimed that
these policies were given to secure
a loan, which in turn the state
claimed was a fraud. The jury
should consider this fraud, and it
could not be presumed, but must be
established by a preporderance of
evidence, but it need not be direct
testimony. The testimony of the
reason might be received.
The jurors, who have been in con-
finement, some of them at least, for
over six weeks, were naturally jubi-
liant over their release, but none of
them seemed to feel that the expe-
rience was one which they would
not care to undergo again. Not that
they had any qualms of conscience
over their action, for the court and
the law expressly took that off their
shoulders. but the evidence was so
convincing that they could not do