Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1898-02-09

Presiding JustiCe-LUCILIUs \. EMERY.
Clcrk-JoHN F. KNowLToN.
Sherir-LEwIs +. HOOPER.
Cricr-WILLIAM Il. HIGGINS, Bar Harbor.
Deputies-RoBERT r. JOY, Gouldeboro; JonS
NJ. VoGELL, Castine.
Stenographer-J. G. CLAY, Portland.
Messenger-HARoLD II. CLARK,
Court finally adjourned this afternoon.
There WAS no session Monday, court ad-
journing over from Saturday to Tuesday.
The juries were discharged Saturday.
Yesterday and to-day have been occupied
in hearings on cases and motions.
Twelve cases have been tried, one OF
which was withdrawn from the jury and
reported to the law court. Three divorces
have been decreed.
A strange and unfortunate coinci-
dence Of the term is that in two cases
motions have been made to set aside the
verdict on the ground that the jury was
unduly Influenced.
One of these, the pauper case of Bucks
port VS.. Bluehill, has already been widely
commented on by the press OF the State,
the facts OF the case misconstrued or
misrepresented, aud various sensational
features added.
The facts OF the case, as brought out at
the hearing on the motion to set aside the
verdict, are these:
The jury retired on the case late Satur-
day afternoon, Jan. %. Deputy-sheriff
Joy was the officer in charge. About 2
O'Clock Sunday morning the foreman Of
the jury, Charles A. Allen, OF Ellsworth
summoned the officer at the door. Sher-
If Hooper happened to be with him, and
the foreman spoke to him.
Nh. Hooper, Mr.. Allen, L. L. Chase
who was in the attorneys room, and Ziba
WILDER, OF Franklin, one OF the jurymen,
testified to the conversation. Edward
Noyes, OF Sullivan, and f. f. Brady, of
Ellsworth, also mem bers of the jury, were
examined, but testified that they could
not over hear the conversation.
Following, in substance, is the con-
versation between Foreman Allen and
Sheriff Hooper rs testified to:
The foreman said: "There seems to be
no possibility OF our agreeing; can we get
out?"
Sheriff Hooper replied: "The judge
told me il you wanted any instructions
on points OF law before twelve O'Clock, to
send messenger for him and he would
come down and give them to you;
further than that l have no orders until
Monday morning at 9 o'clock"
3 The inry NJ, -
8 O'Clock Sunday morning. The counsel
/ for plaintiffs, who made the motion for
new trial, contend that the jury was
influenced in reaching a verdict by the
conversation reported, which was con-
strued by the men OF the jury to mean
] that they would not be released until
Monday morning, which belief precipi-
tated verdict.
The motion, with the evidence, goes to
the law court.
The circumstances Of the other case in
which motion is made to set aside the
verdict are very different, and Of more
serious nature.
In Ellsworth, in common with most
shire towns, cases on trial in the court
are he subject OF more or less general dis
cussion outside the court house. The ju-
rors, when sitting on a case, are not Sc
cluded when court is not in session, but
mingle freely with the public. The court
recognizes the danger of outside influence
on the jurors, when it so carefully en-
joins them not to listen to outside infor-
nation or discussion of the case, and not
even to discuss it among themselves.
But on rare occasions there is found a
juror who fails to be duly impressed with
the responsibility of the duties entrusted
to him, and who listens to outside in
formation, or even joins in he discuss ion.
This constitutes a serious offense against
the law, and the man who knowingly
talks with juror in regard to case on
which he is sitting, is equally guilty with
the offending juror.
1t is such a case which has resulted in
the motion to set aside the verdict Of 5000
tor plaintiff in the case OF Campbell VS..
the BluehilI granite company. After the
trial +. f. Chase, counsel for the defend
ants, was told ''If your case had been tried
in the court room instead of in the board
ing houses, you might have got q verdict"
Mr.. Chase started an investigation. He
found that the case had been freely lis
cussed in the boarding house of George
SWEET on Water street, and he found
one juror who had expressed an
opinion on a material issue in the case
while it was on trial. Armed with this
evidence, he appeared in court Tuesday
morning and made motion to have YER
dict set aside. The witnesses examined
were Mr. WILDER, the delinquent juryman,
Thomas Lee and George SWEET, of Els
worth, Frank Coggins, of Surry, and W.
F. Chapman, OF East Bluehll.
The hearing on the motion brought out
the facts as stated. To say that Judge
Emery was indignant would be express
ing it mildly. The lecture that he
gave he offpn6i inc iurymap nd wit m esSeS