The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-05-28
Smith SPRINGS another
His Quarterly Sensation Appears on
Schedule Time.
POINTED LANGUAGE or COURT
Surprised That Attorney Smith Should
Continue TO Pursue His Old Tactics
His Client, John q. Jennings, Held
to Answer a Charge of Perjury.

has been scarcely term Of court dur
ing the last three years at which At
tolney Cornelius Smith. counsel for
the Jennings, has not created scene
by making charges affecting the IN
tcgrity of some one connected directly
or indirectly with the trial of these
suits.
Yesterday the regular quarterly SEN
sation materiali2ed when the case or
John G. Jennings against the Lehigh
Valley company was called for trlai
by Judge Archibald, who directed
Deputy Prothonotary Myron kasson
to draw the jury. Mr.. Kasson had an
nounced the names of two Jurors Wheh
Attorney Smith arose and objected to
the deputy prothonotary acting in that
capacity, at the same time presenting
the following affidavit to the court:
Now, May q, 1895, the plaintiff objects to
Myron b. Kasson calling the jury IN the
above case for the following among other
reasons:
The said Myron r. Kasson. being deputy
prothonotary and acting clerk of the court,
Is not authorized by law to draw the jury.
The said Myron B. Kasson does not draw
the jury according to law, that Is to say,
he does not roll and fold the names of the
jurors according to law, and while draw
ing the jury he Conceals the jury box in tho
drawer of his desk.
The said Myron B. Kasson Is not within
the meaning of the law disinterested per-
SON.
The said Myron Il. Kasson wilfully and
unlawfully packed the jury against the
plaintiff in the case of James Jennings
against the Lehigh Valley Railroad COM
pany.
The said Myron u. Kasson wilfuly and
unlawfully packed the jury against the
plaintiff In the case of John G.. Jennings
against the Lehigh Valley Railroad COM
pany.
John G. Jennings, the above named
plaintiff, being duly sworn says that the
above stated reasons are correct and true
to the best of his knowledge and belief
John G. Jennings.
Mr.. Jennings Sent For.
Judge Achbald ordered the affidavit
filed and directed that Mr.. Jennings be
at once brought before the court to
substantiate the charges. Tipstaf(s
finally brought him to the bar and he
was asked by the court to tell what he
knew about the alleged attempt to pack
the jury, to which Mr.. Jennings re-
piled:
Il saw Kasson changing tickets con-
tanning names of jurymen. lie laid them
aside and when Mr. Smith charged him
with doing so he put the tickets into the
box and called men for the jury. That
is all l have to say about the matter.
That is principally what l knew of Kas-
sons action in the matter" Attorney
Cornelius Smith was then called upon
to explain what he knew about the
matter.
Some time after the verdict in the
James Jennings case he replied, II
went to Kasson and said to him, You
packed the jury in the Jennings case,
and hereafter I want you to draw the
jurors according to law. You punched |
the names Of the Jurors on the slips be- |
tween your thumb and finger and drew |
from the top, bottom and center and |
classified them. You had them in your
hands and drew them that way Kas- |
son said to me, I can pack the jury just |
as well with the ballots rolled"
Mr.. kasson was next asked to make q |
statement, and said: when a jury |
goes out the names of the twelve men |
are folded and set aside. When the jury |
comes in | unroll the names of the jur- |
ors, who are then free again and place |
them among others who We're not called |
in any case. Mr.. Smith came to me and |
charged me with packing the jury, and |
in my righteous Indignation / may have |
said things / should not have said. ] |
ought to have done more and said less"
That ended the testimony, and Judge
Archibald, in dismissing the charge,
spoke as follows:
Jennings Held for Perjury.
This Is an utterly reckless and unwar-
ranted charge. 1t Is on a par with that |
which was made here before in which
counsel called in question the honor of a
dead judge OF this court. l am perfectly
that the same performance
should be attempted here In this case.
Everything with regard to this case seems
to fall under the suspicion of counsel and
client. We hope that this case will be dis
posed of at this term, so that we may
have nothing more to do with It, We
do not propose. however, to pass this over
without action on the part of the court. |
Where party makes an affidavit, such
as is made in this case, makes it without
sufficient basis for it and under circum-
stances Of such recklessness as this, he is
guilty of perjury. / propose to hold The
plaintiff, who, unfortunately, seems to be
directed in this case by his counsel, to bail
to answer the charge of perjury in this
affidavit.
"As he states himself, the only thing
upon which 1t is based Is simply because
he saw Mr.. Kasson, in drawing the Jury
In his case or in his sons case, change
around these. slips Of paper upon which
the names of the jurors are written, n
thing that has to be done constantly to
meet the case of excused jurors, Jurors
who don't answer and Jurors who are
called in other cases. Let Mr.. Jennings
give bail In $500 to answer this charge be-
fore the next grand jury. / hold that in |
these charges there is nothing, and there
Is no reason why the deputy prothonotarv
should not call the Jurors in this case ns
m entirely indifferent person. Just as he
has In hundreds of cases before without
question.
Continuance Refused.
Major Warren asked for q continu
ance on the ground that he did not
think 1T fair to the defendant to go
to trial, the jurors to be called having
been present and having overheard the
statements of the parties with refer
ence to this matter. The court over
ruled the motion and said he did not
think the jurors would be preiudiced
by what they heard, and directed that
the case be tried before Judge Schuy-
Ter, of Easton, in court room No O.
Mr.. Kasson thereupon called the
Jurors. Mr.. Jennings secured bail. BY
direction of the court a transcript Of
the proceedings will be furnished to
the district attorney for to lay before
the grand jury.
When the pane. of twenty Jurors
was called the jurors were ordered to
go into No. 2 court room and the case
then went to trial before Judge Schuy-
Ter, of Easton. Attrneys !. Fl. Burns
and Major Everett Warren represented
he defendant company and Jennings
sat at the plaintiffs table beside his
Attorneys Smith and James
Mahon. The attorneys selected the
Jurors that they wished to have stood
aside, and while doing 50 Mr.. Smith
applied ito the court for the privilege
Of examining the jurors to test each
mes competency in the same manner
rs such is done in oyer and terminer
,ases Major Warren objected and
court sustained the objection on the
ground that challenges for cause should
have been made before the jurymen en-
tered the box. The case then proceed
I'd. Attorney Mahon opened for the
plaintiff to the jury. His remarks
we're brief and confined to the mere an