Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-04-13

other trial such a plea could not be sue
cesSfuily interposed in behalf of the
accused.
1T is evident if a change should come
over what is apparently the present state
of mind of the juror and. a result. a
verdict against the defendant should be
rendered, the court, in view of what has
happened in it's presence and of the obvi-
Gus incapacity of the juror to properly s.
charge his duties, would. on motion of the
accused, set the verdict aside, and surely
there is no rule of law which would require
the government under the circumstances to
proceed to such nugatory end.
Il therefore move that the jury be dis
charged from further consideration of this
caSe.''
The Courts Comment
Counsel for Watson had nothing to say.
Justice Pritchard was the next to speak.
''In view of the fact that the juror is
intoxicated" the court began.
Judge" Mr.. Orrison interrupted, ris-
ing from his chair.
''Sit down, sir,'' Justice Pritchard direct
ed, and, continuing from the point where
the interruption occurred, said, 'and there
fore, not In condition to sit in the box
the jury is discharged. The juror Will be
held in custody to report here at 1:3O
o'clock this afternoon and show cause why
he should not be adjudged in contempt.
II hope that an incident of this sort will
never occur again in this court, Justice
Pritchard added. II Will deal with this
juror in a manner calculated to impress the
community that such thing must never
occur again."
Deputy Marshal Springman escorted Mr..
Orrison to the cell room in the basement
and recess was taken. The turn afairs
had taken was the principal topic OF con-
versation about the city han during tne
remainder of the day. Counsel connected
with the Watson case did not seem to be at
all pleased with the unexpected discontinu-
ance of the trial, especially as the ground
already covered must be once more gone
over. when the case is again called for
trial.
Orrison's Examination When Sworn.
Arthur L. Orrison, having been duly sworn
to make true answers to the questions pro-
pounded to him by counsel and the court
during the impaneling of the jury last Mon
day was examined and testified as follows:
Mr.. worthington-"Have you formed or
expressed any opinion as to the guilt or
Innocence of the defendant?
Mr. Orrison-"No, sir. was away at the
time the charge was brought against him,
and did not read it thoroughly.
Mr.. Worthington-"Your mind is entirely
unbiased, then, on the subject"
Mr. Orrison-"Entirely. Everything de-
pends on the evidence"
Mr.. Worthington-"Do you know Mr.
Petty?'
Mr, Orrison-"No. SIR
were in the office there, either Mr.. Tweed
ale or Mr.. Donovan?"
Mr. Orrison-"No, sir; don't know either
one
Mr. Worthington-"What is your busi-
ness, Mr.. Orrison?"
Mr. Orrison-'"The drug business
Mr.. Worthington-'You have not had any
dealings with the District government such
as are involved in this inquiry?''
Mr. Orrison-.'None at all"
Assistant United States Attorney Turner
Where is your place of busness7'
Mr.. Orrison-"I am relief clerk. / re-
lieve different clerks.
Mrs. Watson in Court.
Mrs. Watson was in court promptly at 10
O'Clock this morning, taking her accus
toned place alongside her. husband. Seated
on the other side of the defendant was Mr..
Lee, relative by marriage of Watson's
brother.
The indications are that Justice Pritchard
will go to North Carolina next week, and
that the trial of Augustus Shaffer indicted
for the murder of his former wife, set for
next Monday will be postponed until Tues
day, April 26. This arrangement will post
pone the trial of John l.. O'Brien, accused
of embezzling a large sum of money from
Frank Hume, which has been set for the
2Jth instant.
In view of the foregoing. and by reason
of the fact that the trial of James N. Ty-
ner and Harrison j. Barrett. under 1nd1ct-
ment in connection with the Post Office De-
partment scandals, is set for May 2 1t is
clear that Watson's case will not be again
called for trial prior to the middle of May.
Concluding Testimony Yesterday.
After The Stars report of the trial closed
Yesterday. Assistant United States Attorney
Taggart showed former Auditor Petty, who
was on the witness stand, check dated
II. nd tn
whether he had ever seen it before. He
replied in the affirmative. Mr.. Taggart then
asked:
What is it?''
Il object" Attorney Worthington inter-
posed This is about a check not men
toned i'm the indictments.
Mr. Taggart contended that one of the
things that is always allowable to prove
is false entries. and the check in question,
he stated, had relation to that phase of the
case.
Il submit that it is not competent to
prove an offense of different character
about different transaction" Mr.. Worth
ington replied. IF you cannot prove en-
bezzlement without proving that the de-
fendant committed forgery, l think We had
better stop.
II do not think that is a just criticism,
Mr. Taggart commented. although 1t
might be competent to prove forgery in
order to prove embeZZement.
The court ruled that the testimony was
competent and the defense noted an ex-
ception.
Question of Watson's Authority.
The witness testified that Watson never
had authority to cash any check that was
given him to be deposited
The direct examination of Mr. Petty was
concluded at late hour and cross-exami-
nation was Immediately begun by Attorney
Worthington. The witness was first asked
to tell when he reported to the District
Commissioners that Watson had made
confession. The government contended
that the question had no bearing on .ne
guilt or Innocence of the defendant. The
question was held to be competent.
Attorney Worthington proceeded to cross
examine Mr.. Petty with the view of show
ing what were the relations between Mr.
Petty and Watson as bearing upon the
question whether the relationship was one
upon which embezzlement could be predi-
CO ted.
The cross-examination of Mr.. Petty had
not been concluded at the hour when an
adjournment was taken until 10 o'clock this
morning.
Movements of Naval Vessels.
The cruiser Prairie has been transferred