The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1901-12-11

"Manslaughter in the first degree" was
the verdict returned by the jury in the
case of the state against Reuben c.
Pickett this morning at 1O:45.
The verdict was good deal of sur
prise, in spite of the ugly look of the cir
cumstances, and it was thought that at
the very worst, from his standP int, the
jury would disagree.
Pickett took the announcement calmly.
The charge against the convicted man
was murder in the first degree, the indict-
ment alleging that something over a-Xear
ago he killed his wife. The woman was
found during fire apparently burned to
apartments. There was no thought of a
crime in connection with the case at first,
and Pickett went about his business for
nearly year. Then he was arrested, his
case was investigated by the grand jury
and an indictment was returned, the sub
sequent trial resulting as above.
The penalty for manslaughter Is from
five to twenty years.
How the Verdict Was Received.
Pickett did not make a move when Clerk
Ryberg read the verdict. He had steeled
himself for the shock either way and
listened to the words decreeing his fate
with composure. His wife and his sis
ter, who have been in constant attendance
at the trial, were evidently prepared for
the worst and, while plainly affected, did
not give way to emotion. Mrs Slater,
the prisoners mother-in-law, collapsed
in half faint and appeared greatly dis
turbed over the outcome. His mother
was not present
The witnesses for the state received
the verdict quietly. Mrs. Nelson, the
main witness. expressed approval. She
had no doubt Of the prisoners guilt and
said that he fully deserves the verdict.
New Trial to BE Sought.
Pickett insists on a new trial and a
motion to that end will doubtless be made
before long. 1t has not been decided
when sentence will be passed There NAV
possibly be a stay until the motion for
"a new trial has been granted. Pickett is
anxious to be released and wants the
court to fix bail.
There Is scarcely any chance for him
to be permitted to secure his freedom on
ball. 1t is true that the court would not
exceed it's authority by allowing a pris-
oner, either accused or convicted of man
slaughter, to go on bail, but there is little
hope for Pickett from Judge Elliott under
the circumstances. 1t is much too serious
a case.
To no one was the verdict greater sur
prise than to County Attorney Boardman.
While convinced himself that the prisoner
was guilty, he had doubts of the strength
Of the states case and after the testimony
was all in, the best he expected was a
disagreement. He thinks the verdict fair
and just under the circumstances The
outcome is a personal victory for Mr..
Boardman. Attempts were made to dis
suade him from trying the case on the
ground that he, as county attorney, was
not justified in causing the county a big
expense on such apparently inconclusive
testimony. He was convinced himself
that Pickett was guilty, and his sincerity
and earnestness were not without their
effect on the jury
A Compromise Verdict.
The jurors have agred to keep entirely
mum on what happened in their room. and
they will not say how they stood on the
various ballots.
That the verdict Is a compromise Is
quite plain. It was reached only after
considerable argument. The jurors must
have been at the case nearly all night,
as most Of them showed signs of needing