The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1897-11-10
THE R0DDT BOYS
Appeal Argued Before the Supreme
Court
BstA Side. Confident Of wIaniag.


The appeal Of James and Joha Roddy,
convicted Of murder in the first degree
and sentenced to death for the killing OF
David Berkey, was argued before the .su-
preme Court al Pittsbarg on Friday.
The case WAS argued without complete
paper books, the appellants saying that
they were too poor 70 have complete
books printed, aud il not heard. innocent
men would be executed.
Messrs. Coffroth & Ruppel presented
the case for the appellants. and District
Attorney Colborn and f. J. Kooser, Esq.
argued in behalf Of the Commonwealth.
The appellants presented seven assign
ments Of error on which they hope 10
have the finding OF the court below re-
versed and new t-ial ordered
Their first assignment Of error is that
the Court erred in oyerruling the chal-
lenge for cause Of f. b. Maurer, juror
called aud sworn, and who was after-
wards challenged peremptorily by the
defendants. Mr.. Maurer. our readers will
remember, said when examined as to his
right to sit as juror, that he had made
up and expressed an opinion Is to the
guilt or innocence Of the defendants, but
Notwithstanding what he had read and
heard and the opinion he had expressed,
he could 90 into the jury box and render
a fair and impartial verdict on the evil
deuce. The Court permitted him to take
a seat in the jury box, when he was
peremptorily challenged by the defend
ants.
The second assignment of error is that
the Court erred in admitting evidence
which went to show that two horses and
saddles had been stolen from the barn of
neighbor OF Berkey's on the night of
the commission Of the crime.
The third assignment Of error relates to
the evidence admitted ia regard TO Con-
federate $40 note the victim had in his
pocketboOk shortly before the commits
sion of the crime. aud which the Com
monweslth attempted to place in the pos
session Of James ROddy.
In the fourth assignment of error de
PENDANTS complain that the Court erred
in admitting the dying statement of
David Berkey, the murdered man.
The fifth assignment Of error is 10 the
effect that the Court erred in that part of
his charge to the jury when he referred to
the evidence of Horner and Slick, two
witnesses who claimed to have seen the
defendants at Osborn cut on the morning
following the robbery.
In the sixth assignment of error it is
claimed that the Court did not adequately
present the evidence in behalf of the de-
PENDANTS in his charge to the jury.
The seventh assignment relates to the
overruling of the application for new
trial and to deposition taken since the
trial.
Messrs. CoffrOth & Ruppel were given
one hour in which to present their side
of she case. while the attorneys for the
Commonwealth were restricted to one
half hour.
The attorneys on both sides express
themselves as feeling confident that they
will win ont; the attorneys for thn de-
PENDANTS believing that the judgment of
the lower court will be reversed and a
new trial ordered, while attorneys for the
Commonwealth believe that judgment
will be affirmed and that the defendants
VIII be executed.
1t is not probable that the Supreme
Court will hand down an opinion for
some time, owing 70 the importance of
the case and the great amount of type
written evidence to he examined.