The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-04-08
IT WAS AN EXCITING SCENE
When the yerd ct Was Handed in il
the Brown Case

When the yerd ct Was Handed in i.
/ the Brown Case
| Guthrie, o. T., April Judge J. L
Brown of Oklahoma City, charged will
subornation OF perjury, has been &C
! quilted. OF the conclusion OF the tria
! the Times-Jorural says: The end of th'
| Brown case came this afternoon wheI
| the jury who had the case from las
night gave as their verdict that he wa:
| not guilty of the crime with which hi
was charged. The length OF time thai
the jury were out in the consideration o.
the case was so great than nearly every.
| one around the court believed that they
would disagree and be discharged from
! further consideration OF the case, ant
| that another trial would be necessary
| The county has been saved this expense
however. and one of the most interesting
trials of the territory of Oklahoma has
come to its ending.
The argument to the jury in the trial
took all OF the afternoon and night. The
| argument following Assistant Attorney
Mitchell was that of John L. Austin
who lately removed to this city from De-
- VII. MI AuSltH IIldQe HIS 1lTSI appear
ance at the Ibar here and made a good
impression on all who heard his argu-
ment. He argued the case from legal
questions involved and made a clean cut
statement of the case as the evidence
and law from his standpoint showed the
facts to be. He was followed BY D. G.
Lewis for the prosecution and his argu-
ment was a strong presentation of the
case as he saw it, and he was given the
perfect attention of the jury and of the
audience. His argument was analytical
and followed the evidence closely. He
was followed by Judge Jenkins and Judge
Hayes for the defense. Judge Jenkins
made the principal address for the de-
Tense, and in his argument he attacked
the credulity Of the evidence for the ter
ritory and denounced the prosecution as
a persecution. The same line of argu-
ment was followed by Judge Hays and
at the close of his argument he was call
ed to account because of one of his re-
marks by the court. The closing ad-
dress was by Prosecutor Taylor and it
was an able presentation of the case from
his point of view. He Indignantly de-
MED that there was any persecution in the
case as far as his office was concerned.
The judge delivered to the jury the for
NAL verdicts and they were taken to the
jury room to deliberate. The officers of
the court remained in attendance until a
late hour when they left with instruc-
tons that they be called as soon as
verdict was reached in the case. The
jury argued the matter and took several
ballots all during the night. They were
called into the court this morning about
10 o'clock and when asked if they had
agreed on verdict the foreman said that
they could not agree, and that they stood
nine to three, rot stating how the vote
was. They were sent back for further
elaboration.
The jury was out until l o'clock this
afternoon, when they notified the court
that they had reached a verdict, and
they were brought in The defendant was
sent for and after ne arrived the fore
man delivered the verdict TO the judge.
who passed it TO the clerk. Judge Bur-
we'll then told the defendant to stand UP
and as he did So the clerk read the YER
dict which was: 1--WE, the jury impan-
eled and sworn in the case of the Terri
tory VS.. ]. L. Brown, find the defendant
not guilty as charged in the lldictmeDt."
The scene that followed the reading OF
the verdict beggars description. Judge
Brown rushed over to the foreman and
with tears in his eyes and with chok-
ing voice thanked him for the verdict
He was called to by the Judge, and went
to the table of the attorneys and bowling
his head in his hands cried like child.
When the jury was discharged he shook
them by the hands and said: Gentle
men. before God 1 was not guilty OF the
crime"
The jury was out fifteen hours and the
verdict was only reached after many bal
lots had been taken. The first ballot re-
suited in a vote Of five for conviction and
seven for acquittal. The second was sew
en- for conviction and five for acquittal.
The ballots succeeding, until this morn
ing, varied in the same manner as the
two Ballots given. This morning early
there was a break and the vote became
nine to three for acquittal. After the
Jury came in and reported they went
back and the vote then resulted ten for
acquittal and two for conviction This
was kept Up until the final ballot which
resulted in the verdict OF acquittal.
The jury was one OF the best that has
been had at this term OF court and the
verdict that they reached VIII be gen
orally satisfactory when the reasons they
give for making it are known The proof
in the case 70 them was not sufficient 10
make the guilt Of Mr.. Brown apparent
beyond 3 reasonable doubt.