The Bottineau courant. (Bottineau, Bottineau County, N.D.) 1895-1929, 1896-10-10

who lives IA miles southwest of Will
low City and who was examined but
few moments as he stated that he had
taken out his first papers at Devils
Lake about twenty years ago, and had
NOT taken out his second papers
Ed. Schoonover was next called, and
was passed for cause by the defence,
challenged by the State, granted by
the court, and the juror excused.
p. Haney was then called. Examin-
ed by defence. Said he lived in Will
low City, and had formed and express
ed an opinion from what he had read
in THE BoTTINEAU CoURANT, and was
challenged by defence, the State inter-
posing no objection, and the juror ex-
cused.,
There being no other names in the
jury box, at 500 p. m. the court took a
recess to Tuesday morning o'clock.
MORNING sEssIoN-OCT. 6, 1895.
Court met as per recess at a. M.
The jury was called and all answer
Geo. w. McFarlane, of Omemee,
was the first juryman called, and was
examined as to his qualification by v.
B. Noble, Attorney for defence, who
challenged the juror for actual bias,
which was resisted by the State, and
Attorney General Cowan proceeded to
examine him upon the part of the
prosecution. The usual amount of
objections were interpolated by the de-
fence, and were promptly over-ruled
by the court. The juror was subject
to cross examination by the defence,
and was recrossed by the State, and ex-
anined by the court, and his answers
not being satisfactory he was excused.
| Arthur Milloy, OF Omemee, was
next called and examined by the de-
fence. THE COURANT will here state
that the answers of the juryman were
as fair, straightforward and honest as
any man could give, showing him to
be as competent as any one to sit as a
juror, as were also many Of the panel.
Mr.. Millloy was passed by the defence
for cause, and accepted by the State,
the State remarking that it was still
satisfied with the jury and passed its
peremptory challenge.
The defence peremptorily cha]leng-
ed Caleb Garrison, jr., and Duncan
Stewart of Omemee was called,
examination by the defence and pass.
ed for cause, which was acquiesced in
by the State.
The defence then peremptorily chal.
lenged N. P. Hansen, and A. A. Knoke,
| of Omemee, was called, examined by
the defence, challenged for bias, which
was not resisted by the State and the
ljufor excused.
/ Ellery Smith, of Omemee, was next
called, examined by the defence, pass
editor cause and accepted by the State
The State then passed its peremp
tory challenge right. The defence
used its peremptory right on VIM. J.
Elliott, and Duncan Kippen, o.
Omemee, was called for examination
lwEsch waseconducted by Hon l. M
| Cochrane for the defence, and challeng
ed, which was resisted by the State
The defence then examined the juror
further and submitted it's challenge
The State recrossed its examination
and the juror excused by the court.
Louis H. Knoke was then called anG
passed for cause by the State without
examination. On commencement o.
examination by the State, the defence
objected to examination until he was
challenged by defence, which was over
ruled by the court, and the State pro
ceeded with its examination. In the
examination by the State the fact was
brought out that the juror had signed
a petition to the court asking for &
change of venue on the ground thai
Mr.. Scott could not have fair trial ir
Bottineau. On further examination
the juror stated that he had hearC
opinions expressed that Scott ought tc
be hung; that he had conscientious
scruples about hanging, and would be
in favor of lesser punishment. The
State submitted challenge, which
was denied by the defence, which pro
ceeded to examine juror, and submit
ted the challenge, which was granted
by the court.
At 1915 the court took a recess te
1:3O. ST..
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Court met as per adjournment.
Dan. Vollmar was called as a Juror
Examined by defence, challenged fol
actual bias. Resisted by State. Re
sistment withdrawn. Juror excused.
Frank Sims, living near Willow City,
next called. Examined by defence.
Challenged for actual bias. State re.
sisted, but withdrew. Juror excused.
Edward Sims of Willow City next
called. Examined by defence. Chal.
lenged for actual bias. Resisted by
State. Cross examined by defence,
which still continued it's challenge.
Resisted by State. Juror made one Of
panel.
Arthur Milloy was peremptorily
challenged by defence, the State ex-
pressing it's satisfaction of jury as it
now stood.
Donald McKinnon was then called.
Examined by defence. Challenged for
actual bias. State resisted and juror
examined, resistment withdrawn and
| juror excused.
Joseph Soucie was next called. Ex-
amined by defence and challenged for
actual bias, which was resisted by the
State. During the examination by the
State the question was asked the juror
''if any one had approached him with
what he should do or say as a jury
man." and the startling answer was
given 'syes." Every one was on tip
toe, for here was sensation. Upon be-
ing asked who, the juror asked the
court if he must answer the question.
| Upon being informed in the afirma-
tive, the juror answered, "my father"
| Thar Tho