The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-02-25
ALLEGED BRIBING OF
JURY GROUND FOR
NEW TRIAL
Judge Lewis Grants Motion
in a Personal Injury Case
Against the 500 Railroad
in Which 1t Is Alleged
Jury Was Tempered With.

The verdict of $3.50 secured by Will
liam Chittick a year ago in the per-
sonal injury damage suit brought
against the 500 road was yesterday set
aside by Judge Lewis and a new trial
of the case ordered. The case will be
retired at the March term of the dis
trict court.
The new trial is ordered on the
strength of aff1davits to the effect that
the jury which rendered the verdict
had been tempered WITH it being al
legged by sworn statements that Theo-
dore D. Patinaud, one of the Jurors,
had been offered 5000 by w. L. Keefe,
If he would hold out for a verdict of
$1,000.
The case was first tried more than a
year ago, at which time a verdict for
$3.50 in favor of the PLAINTIFF was re-
turned. A new trial on straight legal
questions was refused and the verdict
was sustained by the supreme court
Later, charges Of attempted jury
brlb1ng, supported by the affidavit of
one of the jurors, was made against W.
l.. Keefe, who was interested in the
prosecution Of the case, and the de-
tense sought a new trial on these
grounds. The motion for a new trial
on this ground was argued before
Judge Lewis Feb. Z, and in his decision
handed down yesterday he says a new
trial is not only granted, but that one
is demanded. The verdict is set aside
and the case will be tried again
In the memorandum attached to his
decision, Judge Lewis thoroughly re-
views the case. He adds:
Public Is Affected.
Were this a question involving the
rights of the litigants only, the situa-
ton would be radically changed, but
c n 10 nCrO of -
fects the commonwealth, or the public
policy Of the government. The consti-
tuition of this and every other state in
the Union guarantees to every citizen
that the right of trial by jury shall re-
main inviolate. The state is a sove-
reign power, and as such it is bound
and 1t is Its duty to execute faithfully
the authority and law vested in it by
the people and thus protect them
against invasion Of their rights as to
person and property, which thL consti-
tuition says shall remain inviolate
Tampering with jury is an offense
which interferes with the proper adj
ministration of the law and is a crime
against public Justice. 1t affects not
only the parties litigant, but the citi-
Zens OF the community as WELL And
for this reason public policy requires
that the administration of Justice shall
not only be chaSte, but that 1t shall be
above suspicion.
And so where 1t appears that a jury
has been exposed to improper influences
from outside sources which may have
affected the verdict, the presumption
of the law is against the purity of the
verdict.
There is the further fact that the
grand jury Of this county, in the dis
charge OF its duty, has returned an in
dfctment against Keefe for this iden-
teal offense, the trial Of which case is
now pending in court.
With these matters in the public
mind 1t is not strange that charges
and countercharges of jury bribing are
rife. And upon the showing before
this court in the matter, believe it Is
time that litigants understood that no
verdict which Is the subject Of suspi-
c1on because of the misconduct of the
prevailing party or parties in interest in
tampering with juries Will be allowed
to stand, to the end that Justice be not
subverted and that the DEGREES of court
may not be brought into contempt For
these reasons, among others, the mo-
ton for new trial is granted"