The Mobridge news. [volume] (Mobridge, Walworth Co., S.D.) 190?-1917, 1912-08-23
BARROW ACQUITTED
MAN ACCUSED OF BRlBINC Mona
MARA JUROR is ACQUITTED OF
CHARGES AGAINST HIM.
DEMONSTRATION GIVEN
Jury Quickly Returns Verdict exone
ating Attorney in Dynamiting
Case.--Out Thirty-Four
Minutes.

Los Angeles, California. Clar'
ence S. barrow. the noted Chicago
lawyer, was found not guilty on the
charge of bribing a juror in the Nc
Namara case. The jury was out just
thirty-four minutes. Only one ballot
was taken by the jury.
Although warned against any dem
onstration by the bailiffs, there was a
spontaneous outburst Of applause when
Foreman NJ. r. Williams, in response
to the courts query, stated that the
jury had found a verdict Of mot
guilty
There was a rush to the side OF Oar
row, which was stopped by the bailiffs,
but it was renewed a few moments
later after Judge Hutton thanked and
discharged the jury.
Then ensued a remarkable scene.
barrow approached the jurors still in
the box to thank them and two of
them, Jurors Golding and Dunbar,
threw their arms about him and patted
his back. Other jurors reached for
ward and clasped hands with the at
torney.
The scene gradually resolved itself
into a reception for Darrow and the
jurors, and friends of the %erstwhile de-
PENDANT crowded up 10 congratulate
and shake hands with the jurors.
Darrow was plainly nervous when
he entered the court oom to try to
face the greatest crisis Of his life.
Judge Hutton mounted the bench and
the roll of the jury was called. The
court Immediately began reading the
charge. He said in part:
Gentlemen of the jury, the evidence
is all in and the arguments are over.
l now give these Instructions"
He urged the twelve men not to be
swayed by personal opinions expressed
by the attorneys for both sides, unless
such opinions were supported by the
evidence.
The court added:
If you find the defendant bribed
or aided others to bride or to corruptly
influence a juror. you must find him
III AOa III kOhN " I'll AN ~
timony of an accomplice unless such
testimony is corroborated by outside
evidence.
Il charge you that the evidence pre-.
scented in this case does not warrant
conviction on the first count in this
indictment. If you find that. through
an agent, the defendant approached
George Lockwood and gave him $500
for the purpose of influencing his de-
cision in the Mcnamara case, it will
be your duty to find him guilty"
Los Angeles, California. - An all
of uncertainty surrounds the DISPOSE
ton of the second indictment against
Clarence S. barrow, Notwithstanding
the announcement of District Attor
ney Fredericks that the Chicago law
yer would be tried again.
The second indictment alleges thai
Mr.. barrow bribed Robert F. Balm
the first juror sworn to try the Nc
Namara case.
District Attorney F'redericks reiter
ated his intention 20 bring barrow tC
trial on the Balm indictment but he
declined to say what date he would
recommend for the trial when oppos
ing counsel appeared before Judge
Hutton.
1t was announced that Judge Hut
ton would be asked to set the date al
once hut the district attorney SaiC
there might be some delay as he ha(
not definitely determined what reques'
to make. 1t also was probable, hi
said, that the defendant might have
some request.
The impression prevails that be
cause of the length and cost of thu
trial just ended and the rapidity will
which the jury reached it's verde
there will be no further trial of Oar
row.