The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-10-29
NO VERDICT IS REACHED Jury in Randolph Case
 Still 0ut. RETIRED AT MIDNIGHT Third Day of Trial Given Over k to Arguments. Fermer Probate Judge severely Ar raisned by Deputy Solicitor seis-
 .is--A Mi~trsaI is Predicted
 Freely.

Tho first of the twelve cases charg- ing cmbexxiement against Frapcis c. Randolph, sometime Probate Judge of Montgomery County. rests with the twelve jurors empanneiied after much difficulty. At late hour last night the members of the jury had been un- able to agree on verdict and had re- quested cots and pillows of the Sheriff in order that they might retire.
 The case was submitted to the jury at 1880 o'clock yesterday. Since that time, the jury has dined. has supped and has considered its verdict for sev- eral hours. Friends of the accused stayed In the court room. determined to be present when the verdict was announced. but even the most faith fui of these quit the court house at midnight.
 The third day of the trial was spent in argument by counsel. The feature of this argument was the severe arr raignment of the conduct of Judge Randolph by William T. seibeis, Dep- uty Solicitor. in speaking for the State.
 Friends of Judge Randolph and the public expected an early verdict. His friends were confident that the trial was a mere matter of form and that the sympathies of the jurors for the age, the recent misfortunes andf the past good deeds of the accused would cause an early verdict of not guilty.
 A prevalent opinion among a num- ber of spectators was that a rnistriai would result and when the jury had been out for an hour this opinion grew.
 Judge Randolph appeared less con- cerned than any one in the court room. As soon as the case was submitted, ar- gued and the jury charged, he with drew from the court room.
 Another of the cases will be called Monday.
 The court convened at s:so o'clock yesterday morning Judge W. H; Thomas, presiding. Contrary to expectations when the State announced that their evidence was all in, lawyers for the defense announced that they had no witnesses to introduce.
 Solicitor seibels Severe. Arguments by counsel were immedi- ately begun. The speaking was open ed by William Temple Seibels, deputy l solicitor. Mir Seibels was sevre in his arraignment of the conduct of Judge Randolph. The court room was | crowded with spectators, who listened | eagerly to the arguments.
 MT. Sefbels in his remarks. declared | that Judge Randolph was entitled to less consideration at the hands of the
 jury than the county's most humble citizen.
 Judge l. M Chilton,> chief counsel | for the defendant, objected. The ob- | jections was sustained by Judge Thomas. The deputy solicitor explain | ed that he had been unfortunate in framing his sentence. The idea he in-
 tended to convey, he said, was that the defendant was entitled to no more con-
 sideration than any citizen of the coun- | ty. Judge Randolph. he declared, was
 8 man of fine intelligence, & man in whom the public had reposed implicit l confidence. He had betrayed a public trust, and Mir Seibels said the jury
 should consider his previous standing. 1 Mir. Seibels was followed by George
 M. Marks and Judge John NJ Chiffon for the defendant The attorneys for
 the defendant argued that the
 Ss.10o, which the defendant was alleged
 to have embedded from the State, as
 averred in the indictment, which was drawn by him fromNthe First National Bank on the night of his departure for Central America, was not the property
 of the State of Alabama and that the State in It's case had failed to prove that 1t was.
 MT. Dent Closed.
 Solicitor Dent closed the argument pHe said that. from early childhood, he had heard of Judge Randolph. He had heard of his deeds in war and in peace and that he was a man that he had always admired. But Judge Randolph had sinned against the State and as any other criminal is prosecuted, he
 considered that 1t was his duty under