Arizona republican., 1900-12-19
ROASTED IN COURT
Two Jurymen in the Case of I Haigler.

A jury, or rather one or two mem bers of it. received a lambasting in Judge Streets court yesterday after noon which will, perhaps, be regarded as a warning by other jurors who might otherwise do as trial jur;es have now and then done from the earliest times, put their sympathies or preju- dices before the facts. the law, and, more than all, their solemn oa-hs.
 The lecture was not violent, but cut ting, delivered in the smooth, easy style for which Judge Street is famous. The necessity for it's delivery at all, in the judges opinion, was so urgent that he chose to disqualify himself for a . further hearing of the case than to let the offending jurymen go unrebuked.
 This somewhat sensational episode occurred in the case of Chester Haig- Ter, on trial in the United States court for fornication. During the trial, which began on Monday morning, the woman, the complaining witness, sat in the court room with a babe in her arms. The evidence on the part of the government consisted Of an admission of his guilt made by the defendant be- fore the commissioner and of Variou; similar admissions made to persons in Tempe, near which both parties live. There was absolutely nothing contra dictory in the defense, which in itself was a constant admission of the un- lawful act charged. The single miti- gating circumstance Of the defendants youth was interposed along with Ad- ans plea that the woman was the temptress. The case went to the jury on Monday afternoon. It leaked out yesterday morning that the jury was eleven for conviction and one for ac- quittal. though now and then in the course of the numerous ballots one fickle-minded juror kept switching. It was even known who the switching juror was and who the unchanginS twelfth juror was.
 Quite late in the afternoon the jury wanted an audience. It was under stood that further instructions were desired. When the jury was brought in it was announced to the court tha- Juryman Clanton was quite ill and that there was no possibility of an agreement.
 The court thereupon said: Since I have been on the bench I have never lectured a jury, but I believe the time has arrived when in the interest of jus tice and the dignity of the law and our courts l should express my opinion. In what I will say I will disqualify myself from again trying this case. Here was clear, unequivocal and in- controvertible evidence that the de- fendant committed the crime of for nication within the statute of limita- tions. The evidence of the girl sitting in Ia hpy tI,,, i,, l,a,. that the defendant was the father of the child was uncontradicted. No de- fense was offered or attempted, in fact. The case stood proven when you went to the jury room. Your foreman here in the court room has volunteered the statement that you stand 10 to ?. l do not know which way and I do not care. It appears a if the old story of the sheep stealers standing together is renewed. There are either two hon est men or ten honest men on this jury.
 ''Thre never was a case in which the evidence proved the crime with such strength. There was nothing to hang a doubt upon and j. is beyond my comprehension how either two men or ten men or twelve men could say on their Caths that the evidence did not clearly show that the defendant had committed the crime of fornication as charged. Do not let my remarks af- feet any other case you may be called upon to try. I have admiration for the jurors honest conviction, but in this case I say there was no room fer discussiou or doubt. The crime was not only proven by the evidence, but was admitted by the defendant. I am amazed that any jury could find it.pos- sible under their oaths to say that the offense was not proven absolutely. You are discharged from q further con- siGeration of this case. Report tomor- row morning at 9:3O.'
 This was only in part what Judge Street said. The neatest stroke of sar- castle contempt was delivered in the statement that he hoped he might never know who had hung the jury.
 It was the intention of United States Attorney Robert E. Morrison to begin the trial over again at once in the event of a disagreement, but Judge Streets observations upon juries make i- necessary that a judge from outside this district shall be called in. The case may, therefore, not come up again for several weeks.
 One member of the jury. a young man, said as ne was going down stairs that this was his first public service, and though he had not come under tho displeasure of the court by any act he had committed, he felt the disgrace of the lash laid by the court upon the offending two.
 The case of Belle Sutherland, charged with violating the Edmunds act, was taken up early yesterday morning The other party to the alleged offense is \.