The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-07-07
REPLY TO SPRUILL
Attorneys for Defendants in
Jones' Case Talk.
No Evidence Of Packed Jury--State Challenged
Mere Jurors Called Than the Defenst---
Only Fair Trial Asked.
Wilson Daily News.)


We called on the attorneys for the
defendants in the Jones case and asked
them if they wished to reply to Mr..
spruill's interview published in the News
and Observer. They authorize the follow
ing statement:
In the News and Observer of July End,
an interview with Mr.. Frank S. Spruill
appeared, and there are statements in it
which we think call for a reply. Without
the slightest foundation, Mr. Spruill in
Inmates that the jury in the Jones case
was packed. He fails to state that every
juror was drawn from the box prepared
by the County Commissioners, and that
not a bystander or talisman was called
The regular jury was drawn by the Coun-
ty Commissioners from the box, and the
senire was drawn from the box by boy
under ten years of age and in the pres
ence of the court, and of the attorneys
on both sides. From this venire and
regular jury, the trial jury In the Jones
case was selected. In the selection of
that jury the State, which Mr.. Spruill in
part represented, first passed upon the
jury. The State objected to four jurors
peremptorily and stood aside twenty-four
to the end of the panel, which was
equivalent to peremptory challenge, as
those stood aside jurors were not again
called. All the defendants together OBJ
jected peremptorily to only fourteen ju-
rers. So the state challenged twice as
many of The good and lawful men drawn
from the box as all the defendants did,
and it is a fact that the State objected
to only one person who on the panel
chosen to try Jones. that was Mr.. Lilies.
His Honor, Judge Shaw, heard all the
facts about his being asked to come to
Wilson and after hearing all the facts de-
cided that Mr.. Lilies was a fair juror.
curing the progress of this trial rumors
were reported TO Judge Shaw, detrimental
to Lilies and another juror. A large num-
Der OF witnesses were subpoened and upon
a thorough investigation the Judge ex
onerated both jurors and publicly stated
in open court that there were no grounds
of suspicion against these two jurors.
Every other juror was passed by the
State without objection, and any lmputa-
ton that these jurors were biased or
unfair is gratutous and without war
rant Mr.. Spruill's suggestion that the
County Commissioners of Wilson county
were derelict in putting such men in the
jury box seems to Us TO be a reflection
uron the honorable Board of County Com
missioners OF Wilson, which stands as high
a. any board ia the State. and who en-
ployed Mr. Spruill in this case, than
upon counsel for the defendants.
1T is a strange coincidence that every
unfounded rumor either as to the defend
ants. the witnesses or the jury, has been
preiudiciaI to the defendants, and reflect
ing and insinuating upon every person who
dared to open his mouth against the I'M
usual and drastic methods adopted in the
prosecution of the defendants.
1T has been the endeavor of the defend
ants attorneys TO have this case tried
before the proper tribunal and in &C
cordance with law and not TO determine
SO serious matter by unmerted rctlec
tion upon the character of good men,
newspaper articles and the impatient ella
NOR of thoughtless and irresponsible men.
1T is with great reluctance that we are
forced to give out any interview III re-
gard to the matter, and we regret very
much that Mr.. Spruill's interview com
pels us to make this statement