The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1902-03-25


have the case go over.
To this the Prosecutor replied he WA
perfectly willing to go ahead with tn,
trial at once if Mr.. Budd would consent tx
the presentation of the testimony Of Mr.
Wells as it was given at the hearing.
Mr.. Budd said he could not consent tx
any such arrangement even if he fel
favorable to the proposition. The con
stitution says that in trial of this char
acter the defendant must be confronted
with the witnesses in the case, and coun
sci has no right whatever to make al
agreement of any other character
Judge Garrison sustained Mr.. Budd il
this position, so there was but one cours
to pursue and the trial went over unit
this morning.
THIS MORNINGS PROCEEDINGS.
Long before nine o'clock this morning
there was crowd in front of the cour
house awaiting the opening of the doors
Court officers. newspaper men and ladie
were admitted by the rear door Their
were 81 women in the room, only few o
whom were witnesses
That perfect order might be maintained
Judge Garrison instructed the officers t,
remove forcibly and quickly all person
who committed the least breach of de
corum
| Mrs. Haines came into the room at
tended by Constable Thompson. Sh
was heavily yelled, but removed the GOV
ering from her face as soon as she tool
her seat. She had her two children will
her. The baby was carried by Mrs. Fen
Ston, mother of the prisoner. Howard
the little boy, was Immediately taken up
on the lap of his father, who was at tn
wife's side.
The drawing of a jury was prompt,
commenced. The first man called wa
Albert s. H. johnson, of Westampton
In reply to the questions put by counse
he said he was not opposed to capita
punishment and could do justice to tn
prisoner. He was accepted.
George L Wurst, of Mount Laurel, die
not know that he had formed an opinion
and thought he could do justice to tn
case.
| Mr.. Budd thought this witness shout,
be challenged by the court, but this wa
refused and Mr. Budd took an exception
and then challenged peremptorily.
William H. Jennings, of Medford, wa
accepted
George G. WINS, Burlington township
was quite positive that he was not op
posed to capital punishment and had no
formed an opinion. The defence excuse,
him.
Wesley H. Slocum, of Bordentown, ha'
formed an opinion, but would be guided
by the evidence. The defence challenged
Franklin B. Haines, of Mansfield, wa
accepted.
Charles H. Bennett, of Chester, wa ex
cused by the state
William w. Leap, of Palmyra, wa
challenged by the defence.
/ AOAdc " 0AluH, VI wa
challenged by the state.
Isaac j. Aston, of Eastampton, in re
Spouse to the question whether he ha
formed an opinion, replied; with a
due respect to the reporters, l wish to sa
that am very slow at forming an opiu
ion on newspaper reports. Notwithstand
ing this statement, the defence objecte
to Mr. Aston.
Jas. O'Donnell, of Burlington City, ha
formed an opinion SO firmly that tn
evidence would have to be very strong t
change it. The defence excused him.
Thomas W. Ridgway, of Chesterfield
was sworn, and John B. Shreve, of Mans
field. was excused by the state.
Clarence H. Edwards, of Northampton
was accepted.
i William E. Mccoy, of Mansfield, wa
challenged by the state.
Frederick L. Owen, of Northampton
was excused by the defence.
/ Leander H. Alloway, of Southampton
was challenged by the state.
Joseph Cross. Burlington township, ha
formed such an opinion that he would nc
be guided by the evidence. The cou
excused him.
i Lewis H. Wallace, of Palmyra, said b
hearing was defective, and this was show
to be the fact by the answers he mad,
He was excused by the court on tn;
ground.
Philip T. Lyons, of Burlington cit,
was challenged by the state, as was Davi
H. Rigg, Springfield
Joseph B. Lamson, of Bass River, an
Allen j. Scott, Southampton, were e,
cused by the state.
William j. Taylor, Riverside, said Il
newspaper reports would not have an
effect upon his opinion He had col
scientious scruples against capital punisl
ment which were so strong that he woul
not render verdict in the first degree, .
matter how strong the evidence might b,
The court excused him.
} The state challenged George s. E
bridge, of Bass River, and John T. Mo
rel, Beverly City.
Thomas c. Sooy, Bass River, was swor
Albert A. Grant of Cinnaminson, W
&C cepted and the state challenged Edwal
D. Jennings. of Beverly city.
Joseph L. Everlockner, of Burlingtt
4 city, sal i'd The had and he had not form,
an opinion" He explained this stateme
by saying that at first he formed
/ opinion and then after discussing the ma
ter in his own mind he came to the co
clusion he had no opinion. He was q
cepted
| Samuel N. Ellis, of Tabernacle, said
could not help forming an opinion fro
the newspaper reports, but he would
guided by the evidence. He was chi
r lenged by the defence.
William G. Kemble, of Florence, W
: sworn, but William P. Pray, of Mansfel
: was excused by the defence
4 John R. Voorhees,, of Chester, h
/ formed partial opinion and was afrs
!, he could not be guided by the eviden'
. and he was excused by the court.