Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1914-03-11
CARE SHOWN IN
SELECTING JURY
TO TRY MARSHALL
CONTINUED from page one,

CONTINUED from page oue)
K. Grace. Elmer T. Winant, Edward
A. Jacobson, Walter c. Love, Frank A.
Bachelor. John Nunes, Donald NJ,
Ross. Charles Freeman and Rodney
X. Burgess. .....
The special venire of 10 ordered TO
appear tomorrow morning consists of
I Gladstone s. Leithead. Louis r. Me-
deiros, William w Chamberlain,
Charles Butzke, Henry B. Bailey. John
Effinger, James p. Lynch, Frederick
! C. Bailey, Robert NJ. Morton, Spencer
Biekerton, Rudolph Won S. Domko-
wicz, Archibald A. Dunn, William D.
McIntire, Reynold B. McGrew and
John S. Walker. .-. T..
The Jurors challenged for cause
were Cecil A. Mcintosh, John Traut.
Herman Bechert and Edward e.
BODICE. Those challenged peremptor-
lily by the defense were Charles A..
Simpson. Charles A. Reynolds. w.
Spencer Bowen and John H. Jones.
The fight to save Marshall promises
to be hot one. While the prosecu-
ton is said to have a powerful array
of witnesses and evidence against the
accused man, and promises to leave
no fact undeveloped that will show
his criminal intent. the defense al
ready has shown its intention to bring
to bear every legal point and techni-
cality, as we'll as evidence, in the pris-
oner's favor. s
When II men had finally been pass
ed for cause and the point for the ex-
ercise of peremptory challenges was
reached Attorneys Thompson and Mil
verton strenuously objected TO the
method of using these. The law re-
quires that these challenges shall be
exercised alternately by counsel for
defense and prosecution. But as the
defense is entitled to twelve chal-
|lenges and the prosecution to only six,
the local court has interpreted the
law to mean that the prosecution shall
exercise one. then the defense two,
then the prosecution one, and SO to
the end.
Thompson and Mflverton declared
the law must be interpreted literally
that the prosecution must actually ex-
ercise every alternate challenge. The
effect of this would be. in the present
case. that when the government had
used its final challenge the defense
would really have seven challenges
remaining. The court overruled their
objection. to which the defense noted
an exception This gives them point
on which, if they lose in the trial,
they may appeal to the supreme court.
Charles A. Reynolds. owner of rent
automobiles, and 3 who WAS removed
from the jury box on peremptory eflal-
lenge by the defense. had been first
challenged by them for cause. In an
swer to queries be said he had heard
at first-hand from Eddie Miller the
story of the shooting affray at Madam
Puahi's hula-house, which occurred
the night of August 10 last. Miller
was member of Charles r. Guert-
ler's party that night, and at present
is in Reynolds employ as chauffeur.
He probably will be one of the wit
nesses in the present trial.
Cecil A. Macintosh, who was excus-
ed for cause. said he didn't believe in
capital punishment. He also said,
however, that he believed an indict-
Inent against man had some weight,
and that it was up to the defendant
to explain his actions.
John Traut. linotype operator,
confessed an abiding aversion to cap
ital punishment. saying he had fought
against the capital punishment law in
the. states before coming to Hawaii
10 years ago. j.
Charles A. Simpson, an e1npieye of
A. E. Arleigh's stationery store,
caused some argument between Cath
cart and Thompson over the defini-
ton of the words impression and
''opinion." Simpson said Eddie Miller
bad told him the story of the ARRAY
shortly after it occurred, and that he
lad gained an impression OF the affair
at that time. He didn't think it was
strong enough to be an opinion. He
was finally passed for cause, but was
the first man peremptoriiy challenged
by the defense later. IL.
Herman Bechert, German 81 years
of age was removed for cause, when
Attorney Thompson, by a series of d.
verting tests. proved that he was
afflicted by deafness to an extent that
would prevent him from hearing some
of the testimony of witnesses e.
Edward E. Dodge was removed for
cause when he declared that after a
talk with a member of the Guertler
party he had formed a firm opinion
which would require much evidence
to remove.
-