Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1907-09-12
HUNG JURY IN
LUCERO CASE
Grand Jury lndicts Juan Garcia for
Murder Of His Brother-True
Bill Against c. Way.

and Clerk Francis C. Wilson at his
desk. Assistant United States Attor.
ney D. J. Leahy represented the fed.
eral government while District Attor.
ney c. Gortner and Assistant Dist
Attorney c. c. Catron represented the
territory.
Having failed to reach a verdict by
$3.50 o'clock this morning the jury in
the case of the United States versus
! Jose Refugio Lucero was discharged
J by Judge McFie. The jury was out
seventeen hours, having retired yes
terday afternoon at 4:30 o'clock. 1t
is understood that the jurors stood
| nine for conviction and three for ac-
quittal which repeated balloting fail
ed to change. In dismissing the wit.
nesses summoned in the case the
court ordered them to reappear on the
first Monday in March next year when
the spring term of the federal district
court will convene.
The Territorial grand jury is still
busily at work and may not make its
final report until tomorrow or Satur-
day. OF the seven indictments return
ed by the territorial grand jury last
Monday, one was for murder, one as
sault with intent to kill, one assault
with deadly weapon, one assault
and battery, one manning cattle, one
wife abandonment and one obtaining
money by false pretenses
Juan Garcia was indicted for the
murder of his brother Florencio Gar
cia which occurred on the night Of
November s, 1906, in front of the
formers home on College street The
body of Florencio Garcia was
found lying in the street in front of
John Garcia's home by several young
men returning home from a dance.
A bullet hole in the back bore mute
testimony of the manner in which the
deceased had met his death. Juan Gar
cia who was arrested, charged with
committing the crime, is over seventy
years of age and the brother who was
slain was two or three years older.
Insanity will be the plea of the de-
tense as it is alleged there had never
been any difficulty between the broth
ers.
Two of the true bills returned we're
against Jose Antonio Ortega, one
charging assault with intent to kill
and the other assault with deadly
weapon, Nicholas Macs being the
complaining witness. The alleged
murderous assault occurred on July
27, 1907. The weapons alleged to have
been used were knife and a rock.
Teodore Ortega is the defendant in
the assault and battery case in which
Marcial Urioste is named as the COM
planning witness. This is also said to
have occurred on July q, 1907.
The indictment for manning cattle
is against S. Olson and the crime as
charged in the bill is alleged to have
taken place on July 1S, 1907. Accord
ing to the Indictment S. Olson, whose
first name is unknown to the grand
jury, did wilfully, unlawfully, fe-
loniously and maliciously main and
dsfigure six head of neat cattle of
the property of one Francisco Mon.
tano."
Juan Sedillos was indicted on the
charge Of the abandonment of his
wife Francisquita Ortega de Sedillos,
on March Is, 1907. 1t is alleged in the
Indictment that Sedillos left his wife
destitute and without means of sup.
port.
Charles Way and wife are jointly
indicted on the charge Of obtaining
money by false pretenses. Henry s.
Kaune of the grocery firm of H. S.
Kaune and Company is named as the
complaining witness. A grocery bill
amounting to $21 II forms the basis
of the indictment.
In the suit for libel of Colone'
George w. Prichard vs. the Journal
Publishing Company, argument on the
demurrer which was interposed by the
defendant to the plaintiffs complaint
was taken up by the court at three
o'clock yesterday afternoon. Neill B.
Field, representing the defendant, be-
ing anxious to return to Albuquerque
on the afternoon train spoke briefly,
and Attorneys A. B. Renehan and w.
B. Childers, representing the plain
tiff, limited their arguments in order
to accommodate Mr.. Field.
In addition to the oral argument
made by the defendants attorney, he
filed written brief and argument, and
after the conclusion of the oral argu.
ment, the attorneys for the plaintiff
asked ten days time in which to reply
to the written brief and argument fill
ed on the part of the defendant. This
was allowed, and ten days were grant.
ed to the defendant for reply to the
written argument Of the plaintiff's s
counsel to be filed.
The Federal district court ad
journed this evening until October
when the grand jury will reassemble
| CALF FORNIAN HEADS
SPANISH WAR VETERANS