Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-18
Irving Ford Now on Trial for His
Lite.
DEFENSE OBJECTS TO JURORS
More TaIesmen Summoned and
an Adjournment Taken.
ALL DELAY REFUS ED

Long before the hour for opening court,
10 o'clock, a great thro1g of men, women
and even children gathered about the en-
frances to the old Criminal Court room to-
day, all anxious to obtain, If nothing more.
a glimpse of Irving Ford, the self-confessed
murderer of poor little Elsie Kreglo. Even
the sidewalks about the city hall and the
parking surrounding it were crowded by
those anxious to see the wretch. The great
majority OF them, however, were doomed
to disappointment, for, in obedience to the
instructions of Judge Cole, Marshal Will
sons orders excluded about every one ex-
cept members of the bar, members of the
regular panel of jurors, Of course, court
officials, newspaper n en- and others whose
presence was absolutely required. There
fore, when, at few minutes after II
O'Clock, Judge Cole took his seat and di-
rccted the opening of court, not all of the
chairs i'll the court room were occupied.
Ford brought In.
Just after Crier Joyce had formally open
ed the court. Criminal No. l, Ford was
brought up from The cage below by BdilitfS
Sprngman and Brown. he former seating
himself beside the murderer, who Sd JUS
back of his counsel MnSSrS. Arthur Pete!'
and X. Newton Donaldson. Fora vas, of
course, the one great object Of every eye,
and it was observed that his personal ap-
pearance had greatly improved since the
day oil his arralSlmCnt, last Monday. With
the exception of barely disccrnible mus
t"che, his face was Clcanly shaVen, and his
head was "a closely cropped as scissors
and razor could we'll Clake it. He wore d
sack coat OF pepper and salt material, his
trousers being OF the same material and
:olor- The most conSpit uous feature of his
attire, however. was bright red flannel
shirt. lie sat with folded hands tie great
er part of the time, MS eyes constantly
wandering about the times
Too, ne nervOusly twined his fingers in and
out. and sometimes he would rest his
head on his hand. on the whole he Wore
4 Sullen, listless look, as if he was weary
Of the proceedings and was anxious that
they should he quickly terminated.
Delay Refused.
Judge Cole was preceded in court by Dis
trict Attorney Birney and his assistant.
Mr.. Laskey. and the defendants counsel
the prisoner being brought in a moment
later. MIR R.rney at once announced that
he was ready TO proceed. but Mr.. Donald
son submitted a motion for a poStpone-
ment of the trial for one week. In support
Of the motion the prisoners counsel swore
that they have had insufficient time 70 pre-
pare defense, and declared that he had
been prejud!ced by taking the case from
the foot OF the calendar and advancing it
over large number of other cases. some
of them being homicide cases.
JuUSc SOlc however, t1llSu tEe TlOllOn,
holding that no good reason had been
given in support of it. The practice OF the
court, he explained, permits the district
attorney to call cases for trial as most
convenient to his office About the only
reason given in the motion was that the
defendants counsel not prepared to
go on, but ii is seldom that counsel In
any case think that hey are fully pre-
pared. During the last four or five years,
remarked the court, the courts here, as
we'll as other United States courts have
so fully discussed and defined the law ap-
plying to homicide that all the questions
likely to arise in the present trial have
been determined. Therefore, On the whole
the motion assigned no real ground for de-
lay. and it would nave to lie denied The
defendant is entitled to and will receive
fair trial, said the judge, but, at the
same time, he will be given no advantage
to which he is net clearly entitled by mat
ter of right.
Getting Il Jury.
Mr.. Donaldson noted an exception, and
then Judge Cole directed the jury to be
impaneled. At his direction Clerk Smith
called twelve members of the regular panel
INTO the box, swearing them to give true
answers to such questions as the court and
counsel might ask them. They were John
II. Thornton. Matthew Byrnes, George NJ.
Fillmore, Richard w. Allnutt, John D.
Nauck, George w. Peritt, colored, f. A.
LiHSeT, Il tdllh "A JONES, odlnuel l.. turner,
oolored, William Hollander, Daniel Shea
and Edward Brooks.
Matter of Opinions.
First the members of the panel called in
to the box were questioned by Judge Cole.
He asked them, separately, of course, if
they had formed CIR expressed an opin-
ion as to the guilt CT innocence of the pris-
oner. Then, when they ar sW cred, as about
&c tI,,t no 4
ed or expressed an opinion, the judge In
qured If they could not listen to the evil
dcnce as presented in court, and render
verdict based entirely on the evidence un-
influenced by the former or expressed opin-
ion. If the talesmen declared that they
could, and that they were not opposed to
capital punishment, and had no bias one
way or the other the court declared them
to be competent to serve. Then the coun-
sci for the defense took part in the in
qury, asking on what the opinions were
based. whether they were strong opinions,
and if it would not require strong evidence
to remove such opinions
The defendants counsel also closely in
terrogated the taleSmen as to the alleged
confessions of the prisoner, published in
the newspapers, inquiring whether if the
alleged confession should be excluded by
the court, they would, nevertheless, retain
their opinions.
Mr.. Thornton stated that while he lad
formed An opinion, he could render YER
sCnted in court He was, therefore, direct
ed to retain his seat in the box. Mr.
Byrnes also had formed an opinion based
like that of Mr.. Thornton, on what he lad
read of the case.
Have you ever said that you thought
Ford should be hung"' inquired Mr. Dom
aldson.
You need not answer that question"
said Judge Cole. Counsel have no right to
know what the opinion of a talesman is'
would 1t not require very strong eyi-
dence to remove your opnion?' next in
qured Mr.. Donaldson.
1T would" replied Mr.. Byrnes, where
upon counsel tor the defense submitted
that he was incompetent.
NO" ruled the court, that does ret
disqualify him. for it stands to reason
that if no evidence should be presented
in opposition to d jurors opinion he would
retain his opinion
Mr.. Byrnes explained, however. that he
had bias, but remarked in answer to the
courts inquiry that it was not one of i'll
feeling against the defendant. lie was
then declared competent, whereupon the
defense challenged him for cause Their
challenge was overruled. when they noted
a IN hn