Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-11-30

AErer waiting two and half hours for a verdict in the case of the eight boys in the superior court Saturday af- ternon the jury reported disagree ment ot o'clock. and in the opinion of the foreman, Henry H. Mack, a har- ness maker in Guilford, it seemed i'm possible to him that an agreement could be reached. He said each jury man was polled and from the result he deemed likelihood of unanimity ut terly impossible. Apparently this was surprise to Judge Wheeler, at least 1t was to the waiting crowd and the att torneys, for after the long wait every one was certain an agreement of some kind had been reached.
 The court said he could see no ob- stacle in their way to coming to a unanimous conclusion, and he regretted one had not been reached However, he did not wish to impose any hard ships upon the jury by ordering them to retire again, so he excused them 1n- t1l Monday morning. He then remind ed them of the importance of avoiding discussions of the case with outsiders. and court was adjourned to this morn ing.
 This morning when court opened there were not half dozen present out side of those who had business there. Promptly at 9:30 o'clock Judge George w. Wheeler took his chair on the bench and Immediately the jury began to file out. Each having answered to his name the court addressed them fo the effect that when adjournment was taken Saturday afternoon the foreman Inquired of him if there were any fur rher papers in connection with the con fessiOns of Thorpe and Ball. The court then explained that there were no other papers so far as Thorpe's state n1ent was concerned; but in the case of Ball he said part of his confession was in evidence. They knew which was in evidence and which was not They h9 heard the evidence of Detective Rogers and of Judge Peasley on Balls confes- sion and his evidence in the city colrrt. The case, he said. has been very fully tried. It took long time to try 1t. The court readily understood it was probably rather difficult for the jury to carry the case without notes of the evidence fully in their minds. But after all 1t was not so very difficult to arrive at @ conclusion, and it was for that reason he was unwilling to dis charge them from a further discussion of It.. Tn asking the jury to consider the case again, the court requested them to particularly examine the evi- dence as they recalled it. He advised them to harken to the conclusions and arguments of each other. to hold them up to the light of reason and see if they were Justified by the evidence. for probably no other jury can have the case so fully presented to them s'Do your duty honestly" he concluded. 'and endeavor to reach a just deter mination." He then handed the papers in the case to the, jury, when they re- tired
 At 1:30. after being out four hours, or in all six and half hours includ- ing the two and a half hours Satur- day, the jury reported another dis agreement and asked for information if they could bring in verdict on either of the three counts charged They were instructed that they could, and they again retired. The inquiry was taken as an indication of a ten- dency to agree on a verdict of guilty on one count. At 1:45 they again re- ported and this time brought In yer dict of guilty on the first count, that is, guilty of conspiracy to assault, and