Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1906-05-31
PROCEEDINGS OF
MAY COURT

ner on the bench. Court Immediately
got down to business and proceeded tC
dispose Of the usual routine work pre-.
liminary to a busy session.
The cOnstables made their returns.
None reported any violation Of the law
with the exception of W. E. Young,
constable of the First ward, Danville.
who reported the Pennsylvania canal
bed as a nuisance. In regard to the
latter Judge Evans referred the matter
to the district attorney, whom he dir
ected to take such action as might be
necessary.
The list of jurors was called. all re-
spending to their names. Clarence
Rishel was appointed foreman of the
grand jury, after which Daniel B.
Fetterman, a grand juror, was excus-
ed. Judge Evans proceeded with his
charge to the grand jury, which was
very lengthy and explicit, carefully
reviewing the legal processes by which
bills are brought to the grand jury, the
duty of the latter body in the pre-
misses. the law covering their action,
&c.
G.. w. Bennett was chosen tipstaff
to wait upon the grand jury and W.
E. Young and B. B. Brown tipstaffs
to wait upon the court.
A large crowd was attracted to court
by the two homicide cases in which
Peter Dietrich and John Sees are the
defendants. Both of these were
brought down to court by Sheriff
Maiers soon after 10 O'Clock. Sees
father was i'll the court room, while
several of Peter Dietrich 5 old friends
took occasion to shake hands with
him. Mr.. Dietrich seems to have borne
up under his ordeal very we'll. To all
who met him he had pleasant smile
and "A warm handshake, which showed
that he heartily appreciated the temp
orary release from the monotony of
prison life.
Mr. Dietrich was called before court
and upon hearing the Indictment read,
entered plea of not guilty.
John Sees was next called before the
bar, who likewise pleaded not guilty.
Neither of the homicide cases will
be tried until Thursday and the wit
nesses in each were excused from at
tendance at court until that time.
In the case of Commonwealth VS..
Francis Woll the defendant was seIft-
enced to pay the cost of prosecution
and to stand committed until the sent
ence was complied with.
The first case attached was that of
Frank Morrall, in which a true bill
was found by the grand jury during
the forenoon. Morrall pleaded guilty.
His attorney, Ralph Kisner, made
strong plea for clemency, urging that
sentence i'll the case be suspended.
Morrall was called before the court.
Judge Evans told the defend ant tina
he had pleaded guilty to most SER
ious offense, for which, if the full
penalty We're imposed, he could be
sent to the penitentiary for three years
in the present case the court was dis
posed to be as lenient as possible and
that therefore the full penalty would
not be imposed The sentence of the
court was that Frank Morrall be sent
enced to pay the cost of prosecution, a
fine of 500 to the Commonwealth and
to undergo imprisonment in the East
ern Penetentiary at separate and solit
ary confinement for period of fifteen
to be computed from the pre-
sent date.
The next case taken up was that of
Commonwealth VS., William Renner,
the eleven year-old-boy accused of
breaking into the department store of
5. Lowenstein & Co., with intent to
commit felony on Sunday, May,
18th. The defendant being without
Ralph Kisner was appointed
by the court as attorney for the de-
fense.
The plea of not guilty was entered,
after which Joseph Lowenstein, S.
and Officer John Grier
Vorls were called as witnesses. All
hn oir xt-hi inl f,llx-
set forth in this paper, at the time of
their occurrence, are still fresh on the
minds of our readers. The case was
soon disposed of, scarcely five min
utes being consumed by the opposing
attorneys in addressing the jury.
Judge Evans was also brief in his
charge and the case was given to the
jury at 3 20 o'clock.
At four o'clock the jury returned
with verdict of guilty as indicted
but recommended the defendant, Will
liam Renner, to the mercy of the
court.
The next case attached was that of
Commonwealth vs.. Daniel Kennedy,
another juvenile case, in which the
defendant was accused of forcibly af-
fecting an entrance into the first ward
school building with intent to com
nit felony on Saturday, May 9th.
There were three witnesses in this
case, Ambrose Robinson and Robert
who said they detected Ken
nedy in the act, and William Renner,
the defendant in the preceding case,
who alleged that he was with Ken
nedy when he broke into the First
ward school building, Young Renner
said they were both in the school
building-that they effected an entr
ance through the window and that to-
gether they went through several of
the rooms. He told what articles were
pilfered and his story corroborated the
preceding testimony of Masters Robin