The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-09-10
The Jury. Ont but Few Minutes,
Fixes a Fine of 800 and Six
Months in WOrkhouse.
SHOCKING DETAILS RELATED
MANY GIRLS TELL OF RELATIONS
WITH THE DIVE KEEPER.
Story of the Case Is Recalled-Attor-
ney Spahr VIII Ask New Trial
Other Court Cases.

After being out but fifteen minutes the
Criminal Court jury gave Albert s. Girls
void, keeper of disreputable resort at LAG
South Illinois, a fine of 800 and six months
in the workhouse, the limit under the stat
ute. The testimony was of most revolving
character and was damaging to the defend
ant.
The three young girls recently arrested
in Griswold's place were brought from the
Reformatory and were the chief witnesses
for the State. Ethel Pollard, fourteen
year-old girl, told of her relations with Girls
void, and that he had given her cards to
distribute to draw trade to the place. Her
statements were corroborated by Lulu
Astry and Leona Pfifer, two other victims
of the resort. and, although subjected to a
severe cross-examination by the defendants
attorney, John o. Spahr, they never wavered
in their testimony. Sergeant Leet. who made
the arrest, and Sergeants Milan and Hager-
man testified to the bad reputation of the
resort.
THREE CHARGES.
The case was appealed from Police Court.
where Judge Whallon gave Griswold a $500
fine and $50 days in the workhouse. There
are three charges against the defendant
keeping resort, permitting children to wit
ness an immoral exhibition and selling
liquor to minors. He was convicted on the
first and the two cases remaining against
him will come up later.
In his closing argument Prosecutor Ruck-
elshaus arraigned the defendant in scathing
terms and told the jury 1t lay with 1t to say
whether there was any protection under the
law for young girls from such men as Girls
void. The credit of working up the case is
largely due to Prosecutor Ruckelshaus, who
prosecuted the case alone, and the efforts
of Police Prosecutor Ira Holmes and Judge
Whallon had much to do with the result.
Judge Afford charged the jury in no un-
certain terms. He said the rule of law
about which there was anything whimsical
or chimerical. but practical rule for the
guidance of practical men when engaged
in the solemn duty of assisting In the adj
ministration Of justice.
JUDGES INSTRUCTIONS.
I'm this case" continued the court, 'if
you find the defendant guilty. in fixing the
punishment you may take into consideration
the age character and condition of the per-
sons unlawfully permitted to frequent his
place. the enticement, If any, that the de-
PENDANT held out to them. to visit his place
for the purpose OF prostitution and lewd-
ness. From all the facts and circumstances
in this case, fix such punishment as in your
judgment will adequately punish the de-
PENDANT, and such punishment as in your
judgment will be likely to cause this de-
PENDANT and all others contemplating the
commission of such crimes, 10 refrain from
such violations. Fix such punishment as
will in your Judgment lead all to have due
respect and regard for the laws Of our
State"
The instructions of the court received the
strictest attention of every member Of the
jury. The jury had hardly retired when
Bailiff Mendenhall notified the judge that it
had agreed on a verdict. The defendant and
his attorney were notified and the twelve
men filed into the courtroom. Foreman
Thomas Amos handed the verdict to the
clerk and every one in the courtroom felt
that Griswold had got all that could be
given him.
Attorney Spahr will file motion for a
new trial.