The times., 1898-10-29
PRICE ADJUDGED GUILTY
Convicted Of Robbing A. 0.
Babendrier of $1,6S2.
MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL
The Accused Looked Unconcerned
when the Jury Returned with It's
Verdict-BOnd Fixed mt 10000
Prisoner Released-First Vote
stood Eight for Guilty and Four
for AcquittaI.

John Price, of New York. was convicted
yesterday in Criminal Court No. /, Chief
Justice Bingham presiding, of stealing
Sl,6s2 from Arthur o. Babendrier at the
Vatoldi Cafe on March 80, 1897.
The case was given to the jury at 1:57
p. m. and verdict was reached at 4:lO
| p. M Immediately ]. A. Rose. the leading
attorney for the defense, gave notice that
he would move for a new trial, and Of
fered bail for Price during the pendency
OF the motion. Bond was fixed at 500
ana Robert +. Menair, of New York, the
former bondsman of the accused. was
taken as surety.
The closing hours of the trial were in
teresting and even exciting while the
United States attorney for the District
was addressing the jury.
Mr. Davis, in citing hypothetical case
to the jury. closed the illustration with
the remark. 'and he is done because he
could not prove where he was that day."
In an instant Rose and Lipscomb, counsel
Tor the defense, were on their feet. OBJ
Jecting to the statement Chief Justice
Bingham decided that the statement of
Mr. Davis should be disregarded by' the
jury. Mr. Rose went further and asked
the court to withdraw a juror and con-
tinue the case 80
Chief Justice Bingham overruled this
motion and Mr.. Davis continued. He
again asked the jury to consider the un-
uisputeu fact that none of the defend
anu friends are present TO prove that he
'frice) was in New York on the day of
Mr.
ana asked the court to stop Mr.. Davis
and instruct the jury that il was no, in
cumbent upon the defendant to prove an
alibi.
MI Lipscomb, who made the closing ar
sument for the defense spoke for one
hour and forty minutes. holding The
closest attention of the jury during the
whoie time. His argument was not an
appeal Tor mercy. but asked for the ac-
quittai OF his client on the contradictory
nature of the testimony of the Govern
iheht- lie then took up the evidence of
the witnesses severally calling the at
tention OF the jury to the differences in
the testimony and showing wherein the
witnesses contradicted each other
10 All appearances, when Foreman
Farker announced the verdict of the Jury
Price was as little concerned as he had
Deen during the progress of the trial
Even when the assistant district attor-
ney, who was acting for Mr.. Davis an
hounced In reply to the request OF Mr.
Rose, that bail be fixed pending the re-
suit OF motion for u new trial. that
ne desired that that matter go over till
Mr. Davis was present, Price seemed in
different as to what the decision of the
court would be
Mr.. Lipseomb insisted that as the pris-iI
oner was present with his bondsman. the
privilege of giving bail should be &C
corded, and suggested that If the Gov
ernment desired to increase 1t from 500 |
to double that amount IT would still be |
given. Mr.. Baker was not satisfied with |
the amount and insisted that 1t should |
be placed at $4,000, which suggestion was |
acted upon by the court in admitting the |
prisoner to bail.
When the jury was dismissed il was |
learned that its first vote was eight for
guilty and four for acquittal. II was also
stated that one of the jurors knew Price
Whether or not this inhu need the YER
dict the members of the jury declined to
say. He, however informed Mr. Rose
Prices attorney. of the fact.
Mr.. Rose stated that the question of
which was raised during
the early part of the trial, will be made
a special cause of argument before the
Court of Appeals, and as it involves the
question of constitutionality, he will, If
necessary, carry it to the Supreme Court
of the United States
The jury was composed of Elmer E
Dwyer John l.. Schaffert, Harry o. Dal-
ton, Thomas Foley, Benjamin F Harper,
Charles r. Murray, Douglass Thompson,
John Curran, Charles Merkle, Theodore
F. McCauley, Philip A. Delano and VIII
liam Mckinley, jr.