The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-04-28
MAY NOT GIVE VERDICT
JURY IN THE CASE OF MRS. GEORGE
OUT ALL LAST NIGHT.
Rumor that 1t Stands Eight for Ac-
quittal and Four for M~anslaughter
Judge TayIor's Charge.

CANTON, o.. April N.-What will be the
verdict against Mrs. George was the Ques-
ton asked wherever two or more people met
ever since the noon hour, when the jury re-
tired to it's deliberations. None could an
swer it, but all were willing to conjecture.
for forecasts ran all the way from acquittal
to first degree murder without mercy, with
a disagreement the favorite paddle on the
wheel of fortune. Nothing came from the
jury room TO forecast what was occurring
within. a greater bar to the publicity Of
the deliberations than contempt of court
was the large d~raughting room of the coun-
" surveyor, intervening between the jury
room and the corridors through which it is
approached. AS the afternoon dragged on
il was concluded by deduction that the ex-
tremes of possible verdicts had been elimi-
mated and that the differences of opinion
were being united in a verdict Of guilty of
a reduced degree. Many expressed the be-
lief, for which they claimed no authority,
that it would be manslaughter. AT no time
was the courtroom deserted. The nearest
approach was about 8 o'clock. when the
judge went to dinner and an evening meal
was ordered to the jury room. Then the
spectators, many of whom had been in at
tendance all day, filed out. Their places
were promptly filled by others who came 10
stay out the evening. Judge Taylor went to
the hotel, just across the street. leaving in
structions with the bailiff that he would be
in readiness to be called up at midnight,
and would come to the courtroom to receive
a verdict at any time during the night or
early in the morning that the jury was
ready to report. Meanwhile Mrs. George
was in her cell at the Jail, also awaiting
ana ready to come into the courtroom and
hear her fate: Relatives and friends re-
NAMED with her and her appearance and
manner indicated hope.
Shortly after IL o'clock tonight Judge
Taylor left the courtroom and retired to his
hotel across the street. The attorneys in the
case left shortly afterwards. The most per-
sistent report at midnight, however, was
that the jury stands eight for acquittal and
four for manslaughter. The feeling now is
that no verdict will be reported tonight.
Mrs. George has retired. The lounging posi-
ton of the jurors, as seen from the build
ing across the street, indicates they are
resting for the night.
Mr.. Pomerene concluded his review of the
case at 11:12 am. The delivery of Judge
Taylor's chargelto the jury occupied thirty
five minutes and was completed at 11:50.
The points in the charge bearing specially
on this case and aside from the usual form
were as follows: THAT Mrs. George has
been suspected and charged with the per-
petration of a crime does not tend, in any
degree, TO show her guilt or remove from
her the presumption of innocence which the
law casts about her. Under this Indictment
you may find the defendant guilty of muir
der in the first degree, of murder in the
second degree, Of ma~nslaughter, Of assault
and battery or of assault; or, you may find
her not guilty at all. This is not a mere
discretion, but it is your duty to return such
a verdict as the testimony under the law,
as the court has given ii 10 you, demands.
Evidence of the alleged relations of the de-
PENDANT and the deceased. George d. Sax
ton, in 1899, and prior to the death Of said
SaXton, has been permitted to go TO you,
not because the said relations OF said Sax
ton and the defendant are any excuse or
Justification or defense of the offense of
killing the deceased by the defendant.
IF you find from the testimony that she
did in fact kill said Saxton. as in the in
dictment set out. there is no justification
or excuse or defense. but such initiating
conditions are TO be considered for the pur-
pose of enabling you to determine whether
or not said homicide was committed with
elaboration. The alleged wrongs and mis-
fortunes of the defendant or the failure of
the deceased to keep any of his alleged
promises. or both of these together, would
not furnish justification for taking his life.
Neither did the defendant have any right
TO take TIE law into her own hands TO Night
any wrongs she may have suffered or which
she claims TO have suffered. What threats.
II any, We're made by her AGAINST him, their
der which they were made, if any at all.
and the weight to be given to them are all
matters for you to determine I'm the light
of the evidence and circumstances in the
case: This testimony is admissible as tend
ing TO show malice and motive and the de-
liberation and Fermentation with which the
crime charged was committed.
1T is for you to determine in the light of
the testimony whether the witnesses for the
state. Christina Eckroat and Mary Cradle,
or either of them. used morphine or like
drugs in such quantity or for such length
OF time as to AFFECT their moral perceptions
and the imagination and reliability for truth
telling; and also what. if any, weight is to
be given 10 their testimony or the testi-
mony of either of them.
"The fact that the defendant was not
called as a witness in her own behalf Is
not TO be considered by you as any evidence
or even a circumstance against her. The de-
PENDANTS attempt TO prove an alibi is no
admission OF the crime CHARGED. nor does
her failure to prove an alibi. IL she has
sumption that she was present at the time
and place and when and where the crime
is alleged to have been committed.
$1,000. d for PubIic Charifies.