The sun., 1901-03-13
NEW TRIAL
NOT GRANTED
Courts Decision in Pritchard- Hen
derson Will Case.
CITY JUDGESHIP CONTEST
Matter Will Come Up in Superior
Court Today-Defence in Love
VS.. Barnesville Mfg
Co. Closes.
CITY JUDGEsHIP CONTEST

If John Pritchard VS.. Henry Henderson,
II the Superior Court yesterday. Chief
Justice Lore announced the decision of
he court and said:
"One of the reasons urged for new
rial in this case, is the rather unusual
me in this court, Of the alleged mis-
'onduct of certain counsel for the plain
tiff; in holding private conversations
with members of the jury. after they
we're sworn in the case and before the
'erdict was rendered.
I'm Johnson VS.. Porter, 2 Harr. 225
lie verdict was set aside because the
defendant conversed with the jurors
,fter they were, sworn. The conversa-
ion being unexplained, and the verdict
icing against the evidence.
In that case Chief Justice John NJ.
layton used this language: In any
'ase where the verdict is strongly
gainst the evidence, and this is accom-
,anied by proof that the party in whose
avor the jury have erred, has been seen
n conversation with them, after they
tere sworn, and he does not promptly
,ccount for the conversation, we will set
side the verdict. He has no business
With the jury, except in court He ought
o keep away from them, and if he will
,lnce himself in suspicious circumstances
&c must be prepared to clear himself
rom the suspicion or take the conse-
iuences.
we would approve and emphasize
his doctrine, and say further that the
Doctrine applies to the counsel of the
all "a, thn
e. themselves. If. therefore, the con-
cIsatons which have been proved in
his case We're unexplained, the verdict
on that reason would be set aside.
by consent of counsel in this case,
he rules of evidence have been disre-
;arded, the doors thrown wide open and
III the conversations referred to have
,een detailed and explained, as having
10 relation to the case on trial both
" the counsel and the jurors impli-
ated. As explained, they seem to have
lad no influence whatever upon the
erdict. Iii such case, SO far as we
ave been able to examine, the authori-
les are quite uniform that the verdict
tself should not be disturbed, however
mprudent such conduct might be. The
'tlle being, that temporary association of
onyersation, between the jurors and
ounsel which is satisfactorily explained,
sill not require the setting aside of the,
erdict, if it is shown to be non-pre
judicial character, as where there is no
conversation in regard to the case on
rial. Delany VS.. Hartwig, 81 Wis. 412;
'alsons VS.. Johnson. 66 Iowa 453; II A.
nd u. Encyy 1914 ed Ed and cases
tied.
we must not, however, pass over the
act, that one of the counsel casually
meeting, publicly treated two of the
lrors in the case in one of the saloons
# this city during the progress Of the
rial Such conduct is most reprehensi-
lie. and we cannot too strongly con
Tenn such an example of culpable i'm
,rudancc and impropriety. Nothing but
he full and detailed explanation of all
he circumstances of this treating, made
,efore this court on oath, by the counsel,
ne of the jurors and by the saloon keep
\ saves this verdict on this point.
There was sufficient conflict Of testi-
uony before the jury in this case from
which reasonable men might draw diff
erent conclusions; and as the jury We're
| he sole judges OF the evidence, and as
| hey We're specially charged, not to re-
| gard any statement of counsel not sup
,ortcd by the evidence; and as there is
nothing before us to show that any such
,tatcHlent, in anywise affected the ver-
ict, within the well settled practice of
his court the verdict should not be dis
urbed for such reasons.
We therefore, refuse to order new
trial"
The trial of the case of Henry M.
Love VS.. the Barnesyille Manufacturing
| o., which involves between $4,000 and
5000. was resumed yesterday morning,
when the defense opened, claiming that
he yarn shipped to Love was up to the
ample, that he was told to rewind it
which he refused to do and that he had
gone into the market and bought yarn
or two cents more per pound than such
5ould be bought.
The defense closed at the morning
,cSsion. AT $50 o'clock counsel presented
heir prayers and argument was com
menced, each side being allowed an
| hour.
In the case of the Big Bed Slate Co.
IS. Frank A. Mitchell, judgment for
500 was granted the pltintiff.
1t is understood thahthe matter of the
City Court judgeship come up in the
Superior Court this iiWfhing on case
itated. The papers have been pre-
lared by Robert G. Harmon, one of the
lttorneys for Judge Cochran and are in
cadiness to be filed.