Weekly Arizona journal-miner., 1907-05-29

TN several subsequent ballots, the
result was the same. Finally, afte, +.
great deal Of heated discussion. Ju,;n,
which, II is said, at one time, IL look cd
as though there was absolutely no hone
for verdict, two Of those voting for
acquittal were won over, leaving the
vote eight for murder in the first do.
gree, and four for acquittal.
Here the jury hung for the remainder
of the time up to the finding Of the
ultimate verdict Neither side would
yield, and IL looked as though It would
result in disagreement.
The foreman was appealed to. sbor,.
ly before o'clock, by one Of tbo.e
who was standing out for acquittsi.
asking if a compromise could not bc
reached. The foreman consulted with
the eight jurors voting for first degree.
and finally announced that they would
vote for what the four for acquittal dc.
manded, second degree verdict, with
recommendation for mercy.
The final ballot was then taken after
cacn man had written "sccond degree.
with recommendations for mercy" on
his slip, and the jury filed into the court
room, about 9:oO o. clock, rendering its
verdict Of second degree murder.
After the discharge Of the jury one
of the jurors was heard 10 declare that
the bitter attack upon the witnesses
for the Territory, several of whom were
personally known 20 some Of the jur.
crs, by Attorney Smith of Kentucky,
made some Of them "tired.'
"Thc majority of the jury" declared
this juror. Thought the address of At.
torncy Whtchcr was perfectly proper
under the circumstances, being merely
n splendid effort TO save his client, and
in accordance with the testi.
mony introduced from the viewpoint Of
the defense, but when Smith, getting
clear away from the evidence in the
case, plunged into n sca.hing dcnun.
citation Of the witnesses, Of whose char.
lctcr and testimony, we, alone, were
TO he the best judges, IL
made us tired. I can't say that this
'auscd any Of us to change our bal.
OTIS, however, rs we rendered our yer.
iict solely on the evidence introduced
n the casc.'
II is freely conceded, by many Of
hose who followed the ease through.
nut. that Attorney Smith was eloquent.
ven to the moving of somc II the
jurors, and many of the spectators, to
ears, in his sympathetic plea fer ale
licnt. but that he aroused antagvnism
the breasts Of many Of tho jurors
ghen he launched into an attack upon
he characters Of the several witnesses.
A few there arc who say that At.
orney whitcher's allegations concern
ng N plot among the witnesses to swear
way the life of his client, was too
frong, but the CONSENSUS Of opinion
Gems to he that he was merely using
very means nj his command TO make
good impression upon the jury in
ivor of his client, and that he sue
'edcd seems to be apparent, Judging
'om the remarks of the juror quoted
bovc.
That District Attorney Morrison's
liter dcnunciation Of the methods ON.
Dyed by counsel from Kentucky, in
- closing speech, did much to over
me any good impression that might
I'VE been made on the jury by eitaer
the preceding attorneys, is evident
ON the verdict rendered by tho jury.
Attorney whitcher announced last
'ening that motion for . new trial
nald be made at once, and that in the
'ent the motion was ovorruled No
ou!d appeal the case to the supreme
art Of the Territory.