The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1908-11-24
JURY IN JONES
CASE DEl|BERATES
TWEN1Y-ONtH HOURS
No Agreement Was Reached
As to Guilt or Innocence
And Court Discharged Body
This Morning.
STANDS AS BLOW TO
"BLIND TIGER" LAW
Thought 1t Will Have Influence
In County Local Option
Fight Conviction Seems
Impossible.

After having worried with the case
of the State VS.. Jones since 1 o'clock
yesterday afternoon, and petitioning
the court to be relieved, alleging they
could not agree. the jurors upon poll
at 10 o'clock this morning declared
they could not agree and the court dis
charged them. DR.. Arthur Jones of
Whitewater was accused of violating
the liquor laws under the blind tig-
er" section of the statute. The jury
took twenty-five ballots and the vote
fluctuated from eight to four for con-
viction to the same standing for &C.
quittal. The majority of the votes
were for acquittal, the total vote be-
ing 1873 to 1875.
Prosecutor Jessup announced that
he will try Jones again on the same
charge. The court has fixed the date
for the retrial as Friday, December IL.
The failure to convict Jones is re-
garded as blow at the blind tiger"
law and probably will be of influence
in the combat against county local
option. 1t has proved impossible in
this county to convict a man charged
with operating a blind tiger" In
most instances the Jurors have balk-
ed at the proposition of sending the
defendant to Jail. In most cases no
matter what has been the nature OF
the evidence, it has been found that a
jury or even the court, refused to con-
vict under the statute. because there
is no alternative but s0nd to Jail.
In an important case tried recent
ly in the Wayne circuit court, involv-
ing the blind tiger statute, the at
torneys for the defendant proposed to
the prosecutor that plea of guilty
be entered to the charge of selling liq.
uor on Sunday, or any other clause
of the law excepting only that known
as the blind tiger. The prosecutor
refused, holding he believed the man
guilty and should take his punishment
as provided for by the law. The case
went to trial. was heard and after la
boring for many hours upon the mat
ter, the jury announced it could moi
agree. 1t was sent back to reconsid
agreement could be reached. Thereup
on the court ordered 1t discharged.
Arguments Presented.
1t now is being. held that these fail
ures Of juries to agree in cases involv
ing the blind tiger" statute will have
their influence in this county, If the
proposition ever comes to a vote fol
wet or dry under the local option law
Opponents of the option proposition
have maintained it world be better tc
have licensed saloons than blind tig
ers' running in the corner groceries
drug stores and doctors offices pro
miscuously about the county. The in
ability to convict a person charged
with violating the blind tiger law i:
pointed to as providing a safeguard
that would be taken advantage of b,
the illegal operators.
The agitators in favor of county 10
cal option had strong hopes that the
jury would return verdict of convic
ton. The fact that the jury failed
because of the out and out refusal o
some members to believe in the gull
of Jones, is pointed to as damaging II
the prospects of the option agitation
in this county.
The prosecuting attorney made al
able effort to bring about the convic
tion of Jones but nearly all the cour
room attaches EXPIRE essed the opinion
that a disagreement would be the re
suit. Previous experiences showed
that jury would not be likely to con
vict and it was commented repeated.
in the court room that no agreemen
would be likely.
Friends of the prosecutor have sug
gested that he let the blind tiger
cases now pending drop, because o
the past failures, but he asserts ht
will not. He recognizes the obstacles
but maintains he did not make tn,
laws and if jury adheres to the Law
and evidence it will convict in eacl
case.