The herald., 1896-03-15
THE LOWRY AFTERMATH
Juror Vandam Has Something to Say PERT
nent to the Issue

Juror Vandam Has Something to Say PERTH
nent to the Issue
The Lowry trial and its somewhat
peculiar conclusion was common topic
of discussion yesterday. not only about the
courthouse but about the town.
Inasmuch as the jury stood eleven to
one for conviction it has very generally
been inferred that the one man that
''hungn the jury did SO for the main pur-
pose of preventing a conviction. Inasmuch
rs certain other jurors gave some cause
for such opinion, they charging that Mr..
Vandain was a friend of MIR. Lowry, it is
interesting to note what the gentleman
most closely concerned has to say regard
ing the matter.
''For many long hours had plenty of
company in The jury room,' said Mr..
VaEdan. ''in the conviction that Frank
Lowry was innocent. The entire twelve
jurors were unanimous in the belief that
he did not use one dollar of the money for
his OWL benefit, but that he did use it to
cover up some body eise's shortcomings.
Eleven of the jurors arrived at the con-
clusion, however, that because Frank
Lowry was coGnizant of the crime COM
mtted by others, and assisted by his acts
in covering them up, he participated in
the guilt as an accessory. by This ac-
cessory gull, they considered him as guilty
as the principal.
II could noS see the matter in that
light. l understood then and understand
now that Frank Lowry WAS being tried
for the crime of appropriatlng money and
converting it to his own use and benefit,
as charged in the Indictment. and not on
. charge of concealing somebody else's
crime.
"Holding such an opinion regarding the
case, never could have pronounced that
word guilty against Frank Lowry.
II want TO say. too," continued Mr..
Vandain, ''that the defendant in the case
ie not and never has been to me anything
more than speas>ing acquaintance, and is
not and has hot been any friend OF mine.
Neither nor any relative or friend of mine
has ever been under any obligation 10 him
in eny way, and would as soon return a
verdict against him as any other man were
l satisfied in my mind that such verdict
was just So long, however, that knew
anu my associates on the jury knew that
Frank Lowry did not steal any money him
self, / could never acquiesce in verdict
that would put the convct's brand on him
and be all outrage on Justice. Whatever
crime may be laid To Frank Lowry's charge
! know not. but this | am convinced Oft
was not embezzlemeut as charged
Whatever opinions may individually be
held it will be generally conceded that Mr..
VandaIn does not talk like juror that has
held out against his associates for the
mere purpose of saving "A defendant from
his deserts. He has the courage of his
opinions and it must be confessed that
there is more "truth than poetry underly.
ing the objections he puts forward.
Inasmuch as Mr.. Vandan had honest
and strong convictions on the matter. the
fact that he stood out against the argI-
ments and persuasions that one can read
lily understand are usual in the jury room.
reflects credit upon him both as a Juror
and a citizen.
1t must be confessed, however; that the
fact that tho twelve jurors agreed on the
fundamental point that Frank Lowry did
not appropriate money to his own use
must prove ''steggerer'' to the prosecu-
tion. The defendant was either guilty of
that or nothing.