The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1906-11-15
JURY SELECTED
FOR PE0NAGE
CASE TRIAL
Continued from First Page.)


apply. The witnesses for the govern
ment were then called by the mar
shall
Patillo Campbell was appointed OF
fetal stenographer to act in the case,
and Louis Friedman was appointed
official interpreter, the latter appoint
ment being necessary on account Oh
the fact that large proportion OF
the witnesses were foreigners.
The government announced ready
for trial, the defense having pleaded
not guilty. Defense objected to the
jury already called acting in the case
on the ground that the jury was called
! to the box before defense announced
ready The court Oyerruled the OD-
! lection, stating that the Jury had
been called regularly, previous to the
announcement of ready by defense.
| Counsel for prosecution asked that
jury be recalled to satisfy the cap
tious demands of the defense, ana
! this was done.
Defense reviewed objection to any
member of the jury sitting in the case
on the ground that their names had
not been drawn from the box in the
! proper manner. The court oVerruled
the objection, and defense noted an
exception to the ruling.
Examination of Jurors.
| Attorney for prosecution addressed
the jury with a view to ascertalnlnS
their fitness to serve. Juror Cark-
huff declared that he had formed
decided opinion as to the guilt or in
nocence of defendants and was ex-
cused by the court. Geo. w. Bombay
was called in his place. H. G. DeSilva
stated that he had read everything in
the papers regarding the case, but
had formed no opinion and believed
he could give defendants a fair trial
F. Z. Brawner stated that he had
read fully regarding the case, but
could render q verdict in accordance
with the facts. He knew the brothers
of w. S. Harlan but only knew the
latter gentleman by sight. Julius
lBoley was excused and William Tod
ford was called in his place. E. h.
Hartman was excused from duty on
account of a physical informity and
Blocker Forbes was called in his
place.
Mr.. Forbes stated that he had
read reports in the newspapers, but
had no bias or prejudice against any
person that may be charged with an
offense of this character, or against
the prosecution of such persons. He
believed he could decide the question
fairly. He had, however, been under
the care of a physician for the past
three months. and there being no OBJ
lection Mr.. Forbes was excused. John
G. Oliver was then called to the jury
box and the case explained to him by
the district attorney,
Mr.. oliver knew nothing about the
lease excepting that which he had
read in the newspapers. He had
formed no opinion and believed he
could give the case a fair and i'm
partial trial. He knew the defendant
Howell and, at one time had been on
friendly terms with him; Howell was
at that time doing blacksmith work.
In answer to a query Messrs. Draw
ner and -DeSilva stated that the firm
Of Blount & Blount had handled law
cases for them in the past. The gov
eminent then rendered the panel,
for the present" Defense objected,
and the court explained that either
side had the privilege of accepting or
dispensing with the services of any
juror at any time
Counsel for defense took the jury in
; hand and began by repeating a NUN,
Der of names, asking the jurors if
any of the jurors knew the gentlemen
mentioned, who were witnesses in the
case. None of the sjurymen knew any
; OF the witnesses, with the exception
of Mr.. Brawner, who knew one OF
them. Several had read the accounts
of the preliminary hearing in the
newspapers, but had formed no opin
ion as to the guilt or innocence Of
the parties on trial.
Attorney Loftin, before acceptins
! the panel for the defense, asked en-
lightenment regarding the rule of the
court relative to accepting juries anC
was informed again that either side
J. had, up to the moment of takins
testimony, the right to peremtorily
challenge, defense and prosecution
each being allowed three peremptory
2 challenges The defense then ten
" dered the panel for the present anC
4 the government peremptorily chal
: lenged +. E. Brawner. c. Hartman
/ was then called.
+ The case was explained to Mr.
4 Hartman by District Attorney Shep
E pard. Mr.. Hartman had read tn,
I papers and had formed ard expressed
: an opinion relative to the guilt OF in
nocence of the parties on trial. H.
a believed that it would take stron: