Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-01-13
JUROR WANTS RELEASE
Objects to Further Service in
Smoke Gases.
SAYS LAW is A BURDEN
TOLMAN LAUNDRY MANAGER
FINED FOR A VIOLATION.
Hotel Regents First offense Calls for
Penalty Of $1o-other
Cases.
SAYS LAW is A BURDEN

During the progress of the trials for vio-
! lation of the smoke law before Judge Scott
| In the Police Court this morning Maurice
Hoffman, a member of, the jury, asked to
| be excused from further service in that ca
densome.
The court refused to excuse him.
number of parties were before Judge
Scott in the Police Court today to answer
to charges of violating the smoke law
John A. Schneider and Charles F. Schnei-
der, trading under the firm name of c.
Schneider's Sons, and owning the Union
| iron works, at 212 10Th street, were the first
defendants arraigned.
The firm was represented by Attorney
Mather. who asked that the case be called
when two other charges are tried by jury.
Assistant Corporation Counsel Pugh eX-
pressed a desire to try the case at once. in
accordance with the request of Mr.. ]. A.
Schneider. It was developed, however, that
| Mr.. Schneider had withdrawn the request
| on the advice of his attorney.
Judge Scott passd the case, and the
charge will be tried before a jury later.
jury was then called for the cases
| which had been docketed for today and
Frederick w. Mckenzie, manager of the
Tolman laundry. was arraigned
Inspector Wollard of the health depart
ment told the court that he had the stack
of the laundry under observation from
o'clock till dark the evening of December
%, and that during that time dense gray
smoke had been emitted at different times
aggregat1ng five minutes. the periods aver
aging one minute. Mr.. WoIlard stated that
watched frOm ha Of tho
District building, which is about 100 feet
from the laundry stack
Mr. Mckenzie then asked whether the
smoke was black or gray and the reply
was that it thick gray smoke Mr.
Mckenzie also asked the inspector whether
he had observed the stack on other days
than that mentioned. but Mr.. Pugh OBJ
Jected and the objection was sustained by
the court. tr-.. -
Could you see through it, Mr.. Wollard?"
asked Mr.. Mckenzie
No Mr.. Wollard replied
MI. Hickerson's Testimony.
John w. Hickerson. who had been en-
ployed by Mr. MCKENZIE to watch the stack
and report to him when smoke was OBJ
servabie. was called to the stand, and
stated that he had seen no smoke come
from the stack duripgahis term of service.
MI Mckenzie Z heu made statement to
the jury. IN which be- said that the inspec-
Tor had charged that the stack of his laun-
dry had emitted the smoke for period Of
| hve minutes. but that he had Installed
smoke oevice and had remedied the evil.
Mr.. Push objected. and the jury was in
structed not to consider this part of the
s s,arement relaHns to- the devices being in
Judge Scott asked Mr.. Mckenzie about
the particular date that was charged b,,t
ne did not know whether or not the Law
mac been violated at that time
Mr. Pugh addressed the Jury saving that
n Ia "a
OF law is alleged to have occurred was De-
cenber ~ Inspector Wollard has stated
upon the stand, Mi. Pugh added. that the
a% was VIoiated at the times mentioned
anu that MI. Mckenzie is the manager in
| charge of the plant -
MI. Pugh stated that under the law there
- n1tnlng LOT the jury to do but render a
verdict of guilty
You must not disregard a government
witness, said the prosecuting attorney.
and let your feelings enter into the case
h ho"eyer unpopular this law may seem to
De, winch is more seemingly than really"
The members of the jury were told by the
attorney that they must not disregard their
pain, out should render a verdict on the
| testimony and not allow the defendant to
| law. ~ ZIG
Judge SCOTS Charge.
Judge Scott read the act to the jury and
stated that 1t was passed in February, 1899.
and did not become operative for six
months thereafter
What you are to consider" added the
Court ARE the following points: Is there
such a building as the ToIman laundry?
Dtd smoke come from that stack December
~? 1t matters not whether it was thick,
black, dense Or gray smoke"
The jury returned and in five minutes the
court was notified that a verdict had been
reached.
Guilty" answered the foreman when he
| was asked for the conclusion.
Judge Scott entered fine of $50 against
Mr. Mckenzie which was paid.
Juror Asks for Release
Juror Maurice Hoffman at this point ask
| ell Judge Scott to excuse him from further
service on jury which was trying smoke
| cases. as he believed the law to be bur-
| zen unjustly imposed upon the business
| men OF the community. and that he did not
want to serve upon jury to determine the
guilt or innocence of any one brought into
court upon the charge.
MI PuSh asked Mr.. Hoffman whether or
Hot he could arrive at a just verdict not
~lthstanding his prejudice against the law.
ana the reply was that he most certainly
could but he did not want to be on jury
'hat, was enforcing such an unjust law.
/ regard my oath and the Instructions
OF the court, but am against the law and
do not want to bea.a unit in its enforce
ment." SAID Mr.. Hoffman.
Prosecuting Attorney Pugh thereupon ad-
| uicSseu tHe court, saying lnat Mr.. Hon-
man is just thel kind or Juror that is need
ed for the enforcement Of the law. and
asked Judge Scott to refuse the request.
Ihe Judge told Mriaioffman that in the
| Judgment of the court he is an excellent
juror and refused tpsexcuse him.
Regent Hotel Case.
| The case of Bebert- II. Fatt, manager of
| the Regent Hotel at 18th and Pennsylvania
avenue northwest. was called and Inspector
| Wollard testified that in the afternoon of
| December 10. 1904 there was violation of
the law at the hotel for two minutes. Mr..
| the first offense.sf D
Judge Scott entered fine of SO. but told
| Mr.. Fatt that the Lpenalty would be greater
the next time he appeared in court.
An Apartment House.
Edward NJ. Duncan. who was formerly
manager of the Chaplin apartment house
| on Chaplin street. was next before the
court.