The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-09-24
j. S. FARNUM FACES
A RICHLAND JURY.
Continued from Page One.)

G. H. Spires. J. {. Brazelle, l.. n.
Hornsby, H. S. Cochran, D. 7. Sharp,
j. H. Shannon and H. ". Desportes.
Jury Locked Up.
Tonight the jury is locked in rooms
at Wright's Hotel. Judge Memmin-
ger announced at the closing hour that
he deemed it best, owing to the i'm
portance Of the case, to have the jury
secluded during the course OF the
trial in this manner.
Two depauies were Immediately
sworn in and the jurors were taken 10
the hotel. They will have every COM
fort during the time they are occupied
with this case. Judge Memmlnger
cautioned the jurors against speak
ing to any one about the case or al
lowing anyone to discuss the matter
with them. Every precaution Will be
taken and the jury will be guarded
from the outside world.
Following the empanelllng OF the
jury, Attorney Stevenson, at the re-
Guest Of Judge Memminger, explained
the Indictment against the de-
fendant. This was done after the in
dictment had been read by Solicitor
Cobb and was for the purpose of max
ing clear to the jury the nature OF
the charge, inasmuch as the cumber-
some verbiage Of the Indictment might
not have been perfectly clear to the
laymen on the panel.
Farnum Oh Hand.
There was the most intense inter-
est in the move Of the State. The
short time consumed in the empanel-
ling Of the jury brought every one IN
the Court room face to face with the
fact that the cast was about to be tried
The defendant, James S. Farnum, was
in the court room, seated near his at
torney, just back of Messrs. Nelson,
Cochran and Hammond, who are con-
ducting for him the active defence
Mr.. Farnum appeared to be IN the
best of spirits during the progress OF
the preliminary work Of the trial, and
this afternoon exhibited much inter
sAst when the jurors were being Sc
lected, and later when the first two
witnesses for the State were put on
the stand.
Lawyers Engage in Conflict.
Attorney B. L. Abney, for the State,
stirred up the defence when he read a
notice which, he said, had been sent
to the defendant to produce certain
papers. The papers included a draft
for sl,575 to Henry Samuels, through
a local Charleston bank; a draft da-
ted September -l5, 1906, on the Con-
sumers' Beer Bottling Establishment,
to Henry Samuds, for 81, ,125; draft
to 3. NJ. Wilson for $500, dated De-
eenber IA, 1906; one to H. Samuels,
dated October 9, 1906, for $500; an
other to samuels, for 1888, dated No.
;y7ember IA, 1906. Mr.. Abney also
stated that two men, K. q. Wilkins
and A. S. Kulinski, had been ordered
to appear and bring certain doeu-
111nenss. He called upon the defence to
state whether the order had been com
piled with, or what response they mad
to make.
This statement brought Mr.. ,Coch-
ran. Of counsel for the defence, to
his feet. He stated that Mr.. Abney
had read notice in which certain
papers were to be produced, and that
the defence was to make response
thereto. "Our constitutional right IN
this case has been violated" exclalm-
ed Mr.. Cochran. "Counsel has tol-
lowed the wrong practice, and he has
vitiated his whole case by this ac-
tion.'' Mr.. Cochran claimed that the
defendant would be damaged by the
statements made by Mr.. Abney IN
that the jury was present, and the
conclusion might be drawn that the
defence, if it did not produce the doc
uments, could not produce them, ana
that in this way the defence would
be injured, which was not in accord
anee with the established rules OF
practice.
Didn't Comment on Notice.
Judge Memminger indicated that
new trial might be granted IN case
where comments were made IN man.
nor that might prejudice the defend
ants right with the jury, but Mr.:
Abnev disclaimed any Intention OF
upon the notice, and sta