Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1901-07-25
With them, and smoking with them.

with them, and smoking with them.
The motion of the respondent Is based
upon section 1892 of the revised statutes OF
vermont, which reads as follows:
IF party in whose favor a verdict is
rendered during the same term Of court,
gives TO a. juror in the cause, knowing him
10 DC such, amy victual or drink or pro-
cures 1t to be done by way of q treat
either before or after such verdict, the
same on proof thereof, shall he set aside
and new trial granted
The Judges came in at $50 a., m, and
Immediately took up the motion. states
Attorney lIoar moved that court dismiss
the motion unless amended SO as to mako
the charges specific. He said be objected
Il the motion as 1t then stood because
there was nothing specific stated, no &C
tual knowledge asserted He wanted lhe
respondent to say whom he. the states
attorney. had treated and when and whore
ana ne wanted the respondent to assert
mat ne had treated jurymen on that C., e.
lie went on to give the law MS to specifca-
tlot in such cases and gave its object as
that of informing the States attorney ca
tfat he meet end also inform the court so
that 1t could have something dennitc to
work with
John w. Gordon for the respondent re-
pied that the specification was as cluse
as could be given at the time of the max
ilg OF the motion ard that from the ma
be obtained there SO the petition must be
,iIicd on the grounds of information and
neilef which the States attorney had OBJ
Jected TO- He stated that now he was pre-
pared to and was willing to make direct
charges as to certain iurymen on that
us ' having played cards with Mr.. Hoar
ana been treated to cigars by him.
Judge Watson then ruled that tho chor,-
eS IN the petition must be specific and
gave the respondent leave to amend forth
WIN 50 as to reredy the weakness of the
motion as 1t stood a recess was ,hen
taken until II O'Clock To give tho rcs.c,,
dent time to amend.
At II 80 the attorneys for the rnsnondort
brought in and submitted their motion
amended which vas then allowed TO sta,,I
nV Judge Watson. Tho amendment mako.
the following charges:
Richard A. Hoar, states Attorney
loT washington count. sought tho
society OF a. II. Graves of DuXbury and
George Whitaker of planneld who ucro
IuiNmen on the panel which tried tn. onse
IN question, PLAYING cards with them and
treating them with cigars in the Grand
jury room and tho room called the Gates
room in the court house. also at the Mont
reuer mouse; tfat he employed and pni
j. Elliot Hancock of Worcester, one of no
turymen to go about for him and look
up evidence fer the State on The motion
1of new trial of tho present case Tho
respondents were unable to e+ve erecin,
dates on which Mr.. Hear PLAYED cards
WIN the two iurymen first mentioned
benjamin Gates. deputy sher,n In a..
tendance at court was the first u.it,nss
called by tho petitioner At tho out.o,
the petitioner began to offer evidence with
regard To Mr.. Hoar's associating with ami
playing cards with the iurvmen in ren-
cril but. Judge Watson limited him r.
Ine 'urNmen specified until he could pre-
la riAt
mony admissible or until the court could
examine the law.
Mr.. Gates could not saw that bo had
ever seen Mr. Hoar or known Mr. Hoar
either to play cards with or to treat to a.
CARS either Mr.. Graves or Mr. Whitcher
d. D. Donovan, a juryman not on this
panel testified to having seen Mr. Uoar
play cards with Mr.. Graves once
George j. Lewis, another juryman didn't
remember about seeing Mr.. Hoar plav
with Graves or Whitcher at all
Mr. Hoar was then called to the stand.
lie stated that he did play cards with
Graves two or three times. That no nlav-
ed csrds with Whitcher a few times-hA
couldn't remember Just how many. That
he knew Mr.. Hancock and that after he
learned of the petition Of the respondent.
he saw Hancock and had him upon his
own offer see some Of the other iurymen
with regard to afldavits That he never
treated to cigars either Graves or Witch
or or for that matter any of the Jurors on
the Donovan cases.
On the discrimination by +. L. Laird
assistant for the State, 1t was brought
out that court officials were always about
when the states attorney PLAYED cards
with any Of these jurymen and that Mr..
Hancock received no pay in any way for
his services
This closed tho evidence which the potl
TONER was prepared to put In under the
ruling of the court restricting the testi-
monY
The states attorney chose to put in no
evidence stating that he considered that
the petitioner had in no wise proved any,
thing about ais giving any cigars to the
Jurors named. The court was asked TO
hnd the facts Tho arguments on the
facts as found by the court will probably
be heard tomorrow.
Mr.. Hoar on being intervied by the cor
respondent for the Free Press stated that
he considered the whole affair as mere
smut or as he eXp tins an attempt bv
the attorneys for Mr.. Donovan to lnlure
him by bringing up these charges when
thew had no grounds at all for them. He
said that personal feelings We're at the
bottom of it all and that the reason for it
was that during the trial of tho case the
state introduced evidence which proved
that Z. II. Gordon. one Of the attorneys
FOR Donovan rubbed the note under con-
'ideratlon in order to blur the figures I'M
Ter cOnsidera ton so that the forgery could
not be seen. There was severe aterca-
ions between the attorneys at that time
and now Mr., Hoar said the other side
aas evening up by backhanded stroke.
Mr.. John W. Gordon on being shown the
above statement given by Mr.. Hoar said
ne had only this to say about 1t that il
vas to quito an extent untrue and that
Mr., Hear ought to be more careful what