Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1908-09-24

A. Jones in the Luzerne county court
this morning. The case is being tried
before Judge John Lynch.
1t is very evident that the remark
able history of Peter Dietrich's case
is we'll known IN Luzerne county at
least in Wilkes-Barre and the interest
is manifest. The large contingent from
Montour county. which arrived on the
8 80 Pennsylvania train, was sufficient
in itself to arouse some curiosity.
FROM MONTOUR COUNY.
The Danville party, mostly witness
es, were as follows: Dr. W. r. Paules,
DR.. R. S. Patten, Joseph r. Patton,
A. L. Delcamp, J. @. Mincemoyer,
John Grier Voris, John Woll, Andrew
Rogers. William Deutsch, Lewis By
erly, J. W. Mckinney, John Ross,
George Ross, Mrs. Martha Jones,
Thomas G. Vincent, Horace O. Blue.
Jacob Swayze. S. NJ. Dietz. David
Jones. D. D. Williams, Hon. II. NJ.
Hinckley, District Attorney @. P.
Gearhsrt, Thomas Q. Welsh, Esq, DR..
G. A. Stock, r. W. Bedea, Adam
Mayan, John Doster, Harry Fields,
William Childs and f. NJ. Gotwalds,
representative of The Morning News.
DRAWING JURY is SLOW.
The case was called n court room
No. /, where after Districh Attorney
@. p Gearhart, Hon. II. NJ. Hinckley
and Hon. Grant Herring were formal.
ly admitted TO the Luzerne county bar,
the court proceeded to impanel jury.
In county as large as Luzerne where
the rank and file of the population
would be supposed to be unfamiliar
with the details of the killing of James
A. Jones, one would have thought that
the impaneling of jury would be a
simple process and would consume but
little time. 1t soon became apparent,
however, that each side intended TO
exercise its full prerogative as to chal
lenge and to labor zealously to the end
that no man might find his way into
the jury box who by utilization of any
sort, prejudice or temperament is dis
qualified for rendering a verdict fully
in accordance with the evidence
1t was 10 20 O. clock when Peter Die
trich was formally arraigned. The de
fendant pleaded not guilty, As is ma
tural after his long confinement Die
trich begins to show the prison palor:
he seems selt-possessed, however, hope
full and in good health.
AT the outset il was understood by
the court that the Cp.Yu 0uwea!th will
not press for auyttjl" higher than a
second degree verdict.
In impaneling q jury 'aca man caI-
ed was placed nude. oarA and tie Us.
ual questions were asked as to wheth-
er he had read or heard of the case.
formed an opinion as to the guilt or
innocence of the defendant. In addi.
tion he was closely questioned as to
his relations with people in Danyille
to determine whether he might be con.
sciously or unconsciously influenced
On the list of Jurors are three news
paper men W. B. Cleary, of the Times
Leader; Eugene Giering, editor of
the Wilkes-Bs Record; Gallie
Evans, editor of the Pittston Gazette.
BY noon after 2l jurors had been
a1 MI 1 haI
the jurors rejected only a few were
challenged for cause. One of the jur.
ors was excused on the novel plea that,
owing to the pressure of his business
affairs, he felt sure that he could not
give his undivided attention to the
evidence or as he put it THAT his
mind would run in another channel. "
Judge Lynch admitted that it was est.
ablishing precedent to excuse the
juror for such a reason, but he said
the man was intelligent and no doubt
fully understood the operation Of his
mind The man who was thus excused
was E. Laird, merchant, of Avoca.
The men selected as jurors by the
hour of noon were John Kischbaugh,
laborer, of Foster township; Griff
Prichard, engineer, Lehman: Robert
Pritchard, conductor, Wilkes Barre
Thomas Stoneham, fireman, Plymouth.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Court convened at 1 80 O'Clock this
afternoon and Immediately resumed
the work of impanelipg the jury.
LINE OF DEFENSE.
John 7. Lenahan, who examined the
jurors for the defense, plainly indicat-
ed by his questions what the main
line of defense would be. He repeat
edly asked the jurors whether in case
it could be shown that Dietrich was
nervous and broken up-with impaired
will power-in short in condition of
delirium tremens-as O result ofIdrink
whether in that case they would
give any weight to the testimony, or
in other words accept such facts as
defense.
The answers on this point were var
ious. Some were undecided others
were quite sure that they could not
aonank T..