The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1898-11-28
MOT GUILTY"
Continued from First Page.I

''The courts mind is made up in this
instance"
proceed said the judge.
Mr.. Hayden then explained that
Pages answer to the questions and
the further fact that Page said he had
read the newspaper reports of the test
imony and believed them to be true,
certainly Indicated that Page had IorIn-
ed an opinion as to material facts:
Judge Hazen said: 1.-The old theory
was that any sort of an opinion dis
qualified a juror. Now our very latest
Kansas reports say that an OPINION,
unless it be a fixed opinion, does not
dfsqualify a man from serving on
jury. The challenge is overruled.
a. Thurman, a colOred man, residing
in Topeka. thinks Collins was murder
ed. He was challenged by Mr.. Hayden
Thurman, in reply to Judge Hazen' s
questions said he had not heard the
Testimony read. but had heard the case
discussed and had formed no opinion.
The challenge was overrhled, where
upon Mr.. Hayden again drew from
Thurman this statement;
Il believe Collins was murdered;
The challenge was then resumed and
Thurman was ordered to stand aside.
Men on the Jury With Sons.
J. s. Jordan of Williamsport was then
called. In the examination of Mr.. Jor-
dan, one Of the strong points in the plan
of the defense was developed, and that
is the fact that the jurors passed are
those who have grown boys of their
own Although not the slightest in
timatiOn was given in this matter it IS
clearly apparent that the defense Will
place upon the jury men who have sons,
and thereby place upon the parent
greater sense of responsibility than
could be found in men who have no
families. Mr.. Jordan and Mr.. Fitzgerald
were passed by the defense, and both
have several children. This is true of
the majority of the jurors passed by
the defense.
One question put to jurors is: Did
you believe what you read in the
newspapers concerning the Collins
caSe2''
The answer is sometimes no; some
times yes; the proportion of disbelievers
being about equal to those who accept
the reports as true. Some say: 4 read
the newspaper accounts but have not
made UP my mind as to the guilt or in
nOcence of the defendant
c. D. Cooper, a farmer, was passed,
as was r. S. Butner.
At exactly L o'clock the jury box was
occupied by twelve men who had not
been challenged. They We're:
/. Diment
r. H. Harrington.
Charles D. Cooper.
Joe Bowers.
Q. H. COmstock.
John Dickey.
Peter Heck.
J. D. Page, co1ored.
Henry Porter
]. 5. Jordan.
Z. 7. Fitzgerald
R. s. Butner
The court then adjourned until 1:30.
In support of the theory t at the de-
tense will insist on a jury which con-
tainS a majority of married men with
families is the fact that Mr.. Diment
has five children, ranging from 10 to 20
years of age; Joe Bowers, a grown
daughter; c. H. Comstock, a married
daughter; John Dickey, two boys; Peter
Heck, two boys and two girls, while Mr..
Page, Mr. Porter, Mr.. Jordan and Mr..
Fitzgerald each have families.
Afternoon Session of Court
When the Collins case was called af-
ter noon the twelve unchaIlenged jury
men sat in the jury box. There was
an air of uncertainty apparent because
the right of peremptory challenge had
not yet been employed. This gives the
defense the right to challenge twelve
men without question; the state hav-
ing the right to six challenges, in each
instance the Juror heinz cnrnnaIlad To