Condon globe. (Condon, Gilliam Co., Or.) 189?-1919, 1895-08-16
POOR LOT OF JURORS
Judge Murphy's Troubles in
the Durrant Case.
BOTH COUNsELs DISSATISFIED
Brown and Nathan Found to Have Pc
culiar Opinions on the Subject Of
Cireumstantial Evidence.

Cireumstantia1 Evidence.
San Francisco, August 9.-This was
day@of surprise in the trial Of Theo-
dore Durrant, charged with the Eman-
uel church murders. The purturba-
ton of Superior Judge Murphy, and
the attorneys both for the prosecution
and defense, was evident when the hour
for opening court arrived. Counsel
for the state and for Durrant had held
long conference before court opened.
The judge had no sooner taken his seat
than he announced a recess, and re-
quested the opposing attorneys to ac-
company him to his chambers. The
consultation lasted some time.
When the court session was resumed
the district attorney asked for an ad-
journment until tomorrow, request
in which defendants counsel joined.
The attorneys stated the adjourn
ment was necessary for consideration
of matters of importance which had
arisen in the trial. The sensation was
caused by the prosecutions dissatisfac-
tion with Juror Walter S. Brown, who
would not convict M. d. Howell, the
counterfeiter, upon circumstantial evil
dence.
Another disturbing factor was the
discovery that another accepted juror,
Charles P. Nathan, had record for
refusing to infiict the death penalty,
and for his discredit of circumstantial
evidence. In granting the motion for
an adjournment, the court said that
delay now would save time later on.
The judge added that certain exigencies
had arisen which would be disposed Of
at once.
While speculation was rife among
the juror matters, another sensation
was caused by the request from Juror
Brown, who had precipitated all the
trouble, for permission to address the
court ON personal matter. The judge
intimated his willingness to hear
Brown at the proper time. 1t is said
Brown will invite the fullest investi-
cation as to his conduct in the Howell
trial. He and Juror Nathan will both
be asked, it is said, to explain their
changed opinion regarding circumstan-
tial evidence, and the infiiction of the
death penalty. At the examination of
jurors, each gave satisfactory answers
to the district attorney on both points.
Another cause of trouble in connection
with jurors, was the cause of the
judges unusually stern admonition to
the jurors not to discuss the case with
anyone. Reporters for morning papers
had interviewed Jurors Brown and
Nathan regarding their qualifications
to serve, and their opinions ON mooted
points. The interviews were published,
and proceedings for contempt Of court
are said to be under consideration by
the court. A report that an attempt to
bribe juror had been discovered is
generally discredited.
District Attorney Barnes announced
that, for the purpose of avoiding de-
lays that might arise in the sickness or
death of juror, fourteen jurors will
be empaneled to try Durrant. Attor.
neys on both sides have agreed ON the
action from the fact that the trial is
expected to last several months. The
two extra jurors will attend the ses-
sions of the court the same as other
jurors, but will take no part in formu-
lating verdict unless called upon to
act as alternates. The law authoriz-
ing the swearing in of extra jurors was
passed two years ago by the California
legislature.