The Anaconda standard., 1895-12-15
ALL KINDS OF TALES
Some Say This and Others That in
the krgey-Mantls Case.
LEFoRD DENIES 1T ALL
He says Positively That He Acted
~ q Good Juror Should Aot-
Net an Equity Action. But
Purely Legal Case.

1ucceed In stirring up a real sensation
Az soon as Largey lost his suit against
M. Mantle he started out to ind
something to sustain q motion for
new trial and he found Joseph Per-
ron, who made a startling affidavit In
which he made some serious charges
against George @. Leford, foreman OF
the fury, to the effect that Leford had
told him he was "out for the stun.
and would decide the case for a money
consideration. Several other afhdavits
were made In support OF Perron's
charges. Yesterday affidavits switched
around and the case took on different
appearance when a number OF counter
affidavits were filed in opposition to the
motion for a new trial.
George G. Leford, who was foreman
of the jury, and who has been charged
by other affidavit makers, with saying
that he was 'out for the stuff" made
affidavit denying that he ever had any
such conversation with Joseph Perron
or that he ever said to anyone that he
was out for the stun, or that he would
decide the case for a monetary consid-
Grafton, or that he said he was re-
publican and would decide in favor OF
Mr. Mantle because he was repuDn-
can, or that he said he was not
damned fool and was on the jury to
decide the way he did and knew there
was stuff there.
Leford said the only conversation he
ever had with Perron that had any
reference to the trial was at the corner
of Park and Main streets at $3.50
o'clock on Tuesday afternoon, Nov. IL.
.I was passing along Main street when
Joseph Perron tapped me on the shoul-
der and stopped me and said. George,
Bill Owsley Is In McGovern's saloon,
and we are all going down to Archam-
beault's saloon. Owsley is going to
spend some money down there. There
are three of you French boys on this
jury, and you must decide this case In
favor OF Owsley.' refused to go to
Archambeault's saloon with Owsley.
and said. I cannot do this while this
trial is going on. and 1 cannot talk
about the case with you, but will de-
eide Il as think Is right / know the
defendant, Lee Mantle. but / have
never spoken a word to him concerning
or in any manner referring to this
case. Neither Mantle nor any other
person ever approached me or spoke to
me about deciding the case in favor OF
Mantle. and no person ever offered me
money or suggested that ] could get
money by deciding the case in his ia
vor. / never was paid any money or
anything else by Mantle or any other
person In his behalf and in sitting on
the jury and In deciding the case was
governed entirely by the law and the
evidence. did not while on the jury
vote for verdict for the defendant be-
cause he was a republican, or because
I had been promised or expected any
consideration, but only because the evil
dence required me to do so. / never
had any conversation with Joseph Per-
ron in the presence of John Landry or
any other person in which I said was
out for the stuff. and never had any
conversation with him in the presence
OF Frank Jessrang In which I stated
would decide the case for money and
that Mantle had money or that Mantle
was a republican and belonged to the
same party and that / was not re-
publican for nothing. and was going to
stay with the party because there was
money in IL for me-"
Juror John Connell about alleged mis-
conduct in the jury room after the case
had been submitted. He says an in
formal ballot was taken and the vote
stood eight for the defendant. and
then a formal ballot was taken with
the same result. and each special find
ing was voted on separately and each
ballot stood eight to four. II was the
opinion of the eight members of the
jury that no discussion of the testimo-
ny was necessary as they had agreed
upon a verdict. having heard the testi-
mony In the court and the instructions
read by the court but no restriction
was placed upon the four members of
the jury, who held against the verdict,
and they might have discussed the
evidence among themselves and read
the instructions had they desired to do
so. Leford further denies that during
the trial or at any other time did he
make any remarks making sport of the
intervenor, Mr.. Owsley. and also denies
that he was approached in the court
room by Joseph Perron or that he had
a conversation with him or that he left
the court room and went into the cor
ridor with him.
John Ground. a Juror, made affidavit
as TO the conduct of the jury after re-
tiring to consider the verdict. and cor
roborated the statement of Leford.
Juror w. l.. FAINT made affidavit TO
the same effect. but says that the In
formal ballot stood 8 to 3 In favor of
the defendant and that the final ballot
was to T. He further said there was
no disrespect shown to any of the jur-
ors py the foreman, Mr.. Leford, AMI
that. although some of the jurors who
were voting against a verdict for the
defendant wanted to discuss the in
structions and the evidence, the eight
who voted for the defendant, having
ncdfu the tNluencc ana INSTRUCTIONS.
did not think IL necessary to discuss
them further. but there was no objec-
ton raised to any member of the Jury
discussing the evidence and instruc-
tions who cared TO do so. Mr.. Fant
further said that Leford did not make
sport of the intervenor or his case
Joseph Archambeault. in whose sa-
loon the alleged "out for the stun" con-
versation between Leford and Perron
took place. made affidavit that he. too.
was one Of the jurors in the case and
that there was no misconduct in the
jury room He also said he was ac-
quainted with Joseph Perron. Before
I was drawn to serve on the jury, I"
said Archambeault II met Perron and
he said 10 me. If you are drawn on the
jury in the case OF Mantle and Owsley,
you must decide the case in Owsley's
favor and ] said TO him, Who IS 10
serve on this jury. you or me?' Sew
eral times during the trial of the case