The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1910-11-17
Case Against Everett Mar
shall. Begun Today Before
Jury, Considered in an Inn
partial Manner.
MORNING WAS TAKEN
IN SELECTING JURY
Each Juryman Is a Well
Known Business Man and
Excuses of Formed Opin.-
ions Were Not Accepted.

A second case, an echo of the labor
troubles that have been on for some
time at the Robinson Machine works,
was called for trial In the city court
Thursday morning. As In the previous
case jury trial was demanded by the
defendant. This case IS that 81 the
State on the complaint OF Edward
Decker against Everett Marshall for
assault and battery. Marshall was
formerly an employe OF the Robinson
the present time, the feeling that
has caused the trouble having arisen
as result of the strike among the
Robinson moulders and their efforts
to keep other moulders from taking
their places. Marshall is represented
by Attorney Wilfred Jessup and Prose
cutor Ladd has the assistance cf A.
torney Ray Shiveley.
1t was made plain in the beginning
|of the hearing that the question OF
unionism or non-unionism was not to
figure in 1t in the least, bat 1t was
to be considered merely as case of
assault and battery. The fact that a
man selected for Jury duty might
have a prejudice one way or another
because Of unionism was not allowed
to affect his eligibility as q juror as
he was simply to render y verdict tn
accordance with the law and the eW.
dence in this particular charge OF ~
sault and battery without reference
to anything more than the actual con.
flfct between the Complainant and
defendant
Members 0f the Jury.
The morning was occupied In ~
curing jury which is composed. ~
finally accepted. Of well known busi
ness men. None OF them cared to
serve because OF interference with
their business. but no excuse for SER
vice was accepted unless It was OF the
most important nature. Tie Jury In,
cludes Sol Frankel, Charles Haner,
John Bayer, Newton Jenkins, John
Zwissler. Charles Y. Miller. John Shur-
ley. Will Quigg. HI. ]. Hanes, w. y.
Gloin. John r.. Mccarthy and Chas.
Sudho1 There was considerable ar
gument before Mr.. Bayer was accepte-
ed. because Of the fact that he had an
opinion previously formed as to the
case, and the state could not put him
on record as just how much evidence
it might take change that opinion.
As it was evident he would do his duty
under his oath to render 4 verdict In
accordance with the law and the evil
dence, he was accepted. Mr.. Frankel
had also formed an opinion but the
court held that It was not Of such Z
nature that he should be excused.
Charles Feltman was challenged and
excused because OF his friendship for
the defendant. ]. H. Menke was ex-
cused for the same reason and Chas
Magaw, druggist was excused because
Of the fact that he had no one who
could conveniently look after his
store. Douglas McLear asked to be ex-
cused because Of illness and the re-
quest was at first denied, but was I'M
ally granted through q preemptory
challegne by Mr.. Jessup, who had no
desire to work hardship on Mr.. No
Lear. nor did the others. for that mat
ter. Mr.. McLear convulsed the court
room when asked II he knew the de-
fendant traded at his store, BY reply.
ing, "he guessed be did, ~ nearly
Everybody else did George Deuker
was challenged and excused because
OF his friendship for the defendant
The work Of getting the jury made
| it evident that the public has pretty
well followed the developments In the
moulders' strike by reading the news
papers and by conversing on the sub
ject. Only one or two men were
found who had no information on the
subject. 1t was also made evident that
the business men have dread of jury
service and they would have been glad
Ito escape II there had been any rea,
sonabie plan to accomplish 1t, but
their duty az citizens held them.
White u Found Guilty.
At 11:30 o'clock the court adjourned
until 40 when the introduction Of
spectators in the court room during
the morning session
In the case Of the state against
Frank White for provoke brought
By James H Ward, the jury which -
tired late Wednesday afternoon,
brought IN verdict Of guilty after b.
ing ont m hour and = half and the
court assessed fine Of 81 and costs.
The Jury made no charge for IT. ser-
rSrca @1,na lnsnrSr1 @to rss.uxa - xIAx