The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1903-10-23
FAILED TO CONVICT
POSTAL OFFICIALS
The Jury in the Miller ano
Johns Bribery Case Could
Not Agree.
WAS WELL CONSIDERED
Scenes in Court Room Were Somewhat
Dramatic During the Arguments
"A New Trial Will Doubt
less Be Held.

Cincinnati, o., Oct. 2O.-The jury In
the case Of Daniel Voorhees, Miller and
Joseph M. Johns, on trial in the federal
court here all week on the charge Of an.
alleged conspiracy to extort q bribe, re-
ported shortly before midnight that 1t
was Unable to agree, and was dis
charged by Judge Thompson.
The trial attracted unusual attention,
as 1t was the first one under the many,
recent indictments for alleged frauds
In the postoffice department..
-Four days We're devoted to the TAX
ing of evidence, and the fifth day to the
Attorney Mcpherson and Assistant
Attorney Derby for the government,
and Hiram D. Rulison and Charles. w.
Baker for TIE defendants. General.
lRobb and many clerks from the depart
iment at Washington, Chief Cochran
II many other p%ostOfffce inspectors
others from Washington We're here
assisting in the prosecution, and. the
charge to the jury was an unusually
strong one.
There We're dramatic scenes during
the closing day, when the wives of the
defendants and others Wept during the
arguments of the attorneys.
The scenes in the court room at mid
night were again somewhat. dramatic
as the members Of the families of the
defendants and their friends from
sTerre Haute and Rockville ~andSother
parts of Indiana gathered around them
The disagreement Of h jury was gem
orally regarded as somewhat favorable
70 the defendants as the government
had shown it's hand fully IN this trial
SO that the counsel for the defense
could not be surprised as much in the
next trial as was the case this week
and especially in the testimony of Wat
son, the secretary of General Bristow,
and the production of copies Of let
:ers and kilograms.
The jury was considering the case
for six hours and a half. 1t was I'M
3l1:10 o'clock when Judge Thompson
sent: for it and the jury asked for fur
.ther Instructions. Judge Thompson
then told the jury that he would in
structg it about any matter Of law, but
1t must settle matters Of facts.
He directed the jury to retire again and
submit it's request for further instruc-
lions in writing.
AT 1885 o'clock D. m. the jury came
in again, and in writing reported as
follows:
We find that we are unable to agree
upon a matter of fact"
Judge Thompson then questioned the
Jury as to the probability of reaching
IN agreement, and on being advised
that there was no such probability
without additional instructions he dis
charged the jury rom further consider
alton of the case.
While there were unconf1rnled reports
that the jury stood seven to five for
conviction, it was understood in the.
court room that the jury was unable
to agree on the matter Of fact as to
whether Miller had any connection.
with the dealings between Ryan and
Johns, or as to whether there was n
conspiracy between the defendants.
The defendants renewed their bonds
For a new trial and District Attorney
Mcpherson was unable to state wheth-
er there would be another hearing Of
the case set for the present term of
court. While neither side indicated any
qualification over the result, it was
evident that the many employees of the
government who We're present We're
disappointed. e