Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1903-04-23
THE PATCH CASE
Arguments for New Trial Made In Rut
land County Court Saturday.

|
land County Court Saturday.
Rutland. April i9.-Thc motion for
| new trial made by the defendants in the
case of the +. II. Patch Manufacturing
company against Protection Lodge of the
| International Association of Machnists.
| occupied nearly all of the afternoon ses-
sion of Rutland County Court yesterday.
The court reserved its decision until
! Monday. The motion of the defendants
| for the setting aside of the verdict of
| $500 damages Is lmadc on the ground
| that one of the Jurors, Lyman 1nglcston
OF Castlcton, three days after the trial
hogan had publicly declared his hostility
to unions and stated that he was sure
| "Iatch would win"
| l.. T.. McManus read the petition Tor
new trial and the accompanying am
davits The motion. which was signed by
frederick J.chr president of Protection
! Lodge set forth that Lyman IngleSton of
| Castleton had on March q, three days
| after the trial on which he was a juror
! had begun. stated publicly in Carl Beach S
! store in Castlcton. that the defendants
ought to he beaten and would be beaten,
| The motion claims that these statements
| showed that the juror was not "A fit per
son To sit on the jury ana that he was 30
prciudicod as to deprive the defendants
4 of their right to "A trial before T. impair
tia jurors.
OF Carl Beach Frank Duffany and Ray
| Smith of Castletou to the effect that they
| SAW InglcSton in BcaCh'S store on the
| day in question and that he discussed the
| case and said he knew DID well that
! patch would win" they also swore that
! Beach warned him against talking about
! the case, but that lnglc Ston continued to
/ discuss IL. TheN swor" that lnglcSton
/ said the unions were u damage to thu"
/ country and were making lots of trouble
and that he was opposed To them. MI
/ MCManus also read AZ AFFIDAVIT from
/ Addison II cutting, who sworc that he
/ saw lnglcSton In Bcach's store but did
not know who he was. After Irglostou
went out Cutting learned that it was
/ Inglcston. He said that he saw the man
ON the street a little later and asked him
/ how the trial WAS going and that lngles-
/ ton replied: For I'atch.' Cutting SAID
/ h" was in hopes it would 80 the other
way, but InglcSton replied: Ky Ct.
YOU needn't worry about that, it won
1 col. j. &. Baker then read the counter
aiiidavts submitted by the Patch COM
panH. They were signed 10y Lyman In
gloston, G. j. Waters, j. j.. Edgerton, l..
H. Mcdonald, Marvellc Z. Weber and
! Ira Randall Tho affidavit of Mr. InElos-
ton declared that ne was not in Beach =
store ON the day in question but had been
the day before. lie admitted that he had
talked about the case but denied that he
had made any prediction as to the out
come OF the trial. He made sweeping
denial OF the statements attributed to
him and denied that Beach had warned
him that ne was talking too much. lie
also SWorc that he had been one of the
three men to vote for verdict for the do
PENDANT on tho first ballot and that when
1t came To the question OF liking damages
he had voted nrst to tx the amount at /
cent, then at 81. next at xl0N and finally
|,f iDt L., h.lI lie al
promise verdict OF $500. Mr.. lnglcston's
affidavit also told of u conversation which
he had held with Mr.. McManus at the
court house after the case was over. Mr..
lnglcston said lie told McNIanus that he
had heard the defense WAS making some
Inquiries about lis talking at Castlcton
and that Mr.. McManus told him to keep
quiet that they wouldn't hurt him
g. j. Waters ana j. f.. Edgorton. jul
rorS, III their aflidaVits cOrroborated what
Mr.. lngl"ston said regarding what took
place in the jury room
The aihdaVit al MdrVcllc G. Wcbbcr
stated that h" went to Castlctun on April
:. tho day ON which the Defendants an
daVito were signed but could not get any
information ont of Beach and tho others
hccauso they said they did not want to
hurt Iiglcston.
Ira Randall said that he had tried to run
down tia" rllmors that lnGlcston had been
could not do So.
/ Mr.. McMdnus then submitted an afi-
ddvit sworn I" by himself denying the
statements made by InE"ston in regard To
the alleged conversation with himself in
the court house. lie said nc told lnglcs-
ton he was going to look the matter up
hut. denied tho rest of it.
MIR. McManus opened the arguments
for the motion. He said the defendants
had right to a trial before an Impair
tal jury, but one of the jurors had shown
that he was prciudiccd before the trial
began
col. Baker for the Patch company crit
irlScd some points in the defendants af-
ldavitS. which h" said did not agree in
some RESPECTS with each other lie ad-
mttcd that the juror had done wrong in
talking, but claimed that the defendants
ana suffered no damage. as the juror had
voted for them. He claimed that the
Caslcton men had deliberately tried to
draw Ingicston into a trap and had sue
Cccdcd.
James Is Eatchclder closed for the de-
PENDANTS. lie declared that Inglcston had
heard that they were looking up the state
mcuts he had made. and to save himself
had at first made show of standing for
the defendants in the Jury room and then
| given in.