The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-04-15


subject of taking a body from the grave
and the penalty is the same. The reason
the second count was dismissed was be-
cause the penalty in the new law Is three
TO ten years for the concealment or a BODY
while in the old law the penalty Is from
one 10 three years. Prosecuting Attorney
Ruckelshaus maintained that the penalty
being increased in the new law made II Inn
possible for the State to bring the defend
ant 10 trial on that count. since a man
cannot be tried under 'aw that makes
the penalty greater at the time of his trial
than II was when he committed the OIL
fense.
After the defense had re-entered plea
of not guilty the work of the court was
directed to securing jury All day there
room. A considerable per cent. OF the audi
ence was colored. great many negroes
hung over the gallery balustrade, gazing
curiously at the prisoner The venire con-
tained a number of the best-known busl-
ness men of Indianapolis. Almost without
exception they showed the keenest desire 10
be excused from duty.
One well-known man anxious TO
get away that he declared his prejudices
were so strong that he could not be guided
by the law and evidence in the case. One
colored man brought to the jury box
and he was speedily excused because ne
said he had decided opinion. One doctor
was the stand and he, too, was allowed
to go. Nearly every man called had read
the reports In the newspapers about the
grave-robbing cases, and many or them
bors. Most of the veniremen were asked
IL they had relatives buried in special To-
calities. and If they entertained any great
er prejudice against a grave robber than
against any other lawbreaker Some of
the men to whom this question was put
gave decided reply in the affirmative.
Henry SEVERN, one Of the men drawn
some time ago for jury duty, was excused
several days ago by Special Judge Thorn
ton on account of illness in his home. A.
A. Barnes was one of those who sat in the
it,rN how for chn lima
Barnes showed that he did not relish the
prospect of sitting on the jury In this case
and his eagerness to get away was appar-
ent. He said he had formed decided opin-
Ion in the case and told Prosecutor Ruck-
elshaus that he did not believe he could
be governed by the law and the evidence
In reaching a verdict.
HELD STRONG VIEWS.
Charles O'Connor. another Indianapolis
business man, also had decided opinion
in the case, so strong, he said. that it
would take a great deal of evidence TO
change it. Charles E. Woods said he doubt
ed If he could be guided by the law and evil
dence. and he, too. was excused. Frank
Fesler, Perry township farmer, who was
formerly deputy county clerk, was one Of
the members that remained in the box at
5 o'clock. Harry E. Gabe physician, was
called. but the court excused him, ii being
understood that the law gives doctors the
privilege of being excused from jury
service where their profession re-
quires their attention. Among other
well-known men who called during the day
were Clifford Arrick, John r. Allen, Robert
NJ. Fletcher, William NJ. Hereth and At
torney William l.. Garfield. They were all
excused. AT o'clock when court ad-
journed the men remaining in the jury box
were Samuel r. CRUDE, 341 North East
street; Theodore F. Marcy. 249 South East
street; Emil Mantel. West Eleventh street:
James Hook, 407 Ketcham street; Robert
H. Aker, Lawrence township; Robert Nix
on. 1l22 East Tenth street; William Thorne.
1450 South East street; George Wagner, 2457
| Shelby street, Thomas Hessong, Washing
| ton township; Frank Fesler. Perry town
ship; c C. Thompson, Lawrence township;
John +. Lombard, 73S Hoyt avenue. Some
Of the men called during the day belonged
| to horse thief detective associations, and
these men were questioned closely by the
| States attorneys as to whether they had
| ever been asked to contribute to a fund
| to be used in running down grave robbers
| and whether their associations had taken
an active interest in the case