Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1921-02-14
Opposed Capital Punishment


case" the prosecutor asked him.
IL was born in Moorcstown, y. J
he answered.
lie explained to the court that he was
opposed to capital punishment. but
would bind himself TO find a verdict ac-
cording to the evidence. lie was eX-
Cused
Nathan Nagec. laborcr. of Black
wood, was challenged for cause when il
was brought out that he had been called
i'll the James case Ms juror and eX-
cused because he had served on the
preceding vcnire. lie was excused from
the SChuck case for the same reason.
Christian Schrum. of Oaklvn. did not
answer when called, and it was ex-
plained that he had served on the grand
jury which indicted Schuck and there
fore was not eligible for the trial jury.
The question of the eligibility of those
who had served on the James jury was
called up when John X. Doughty, 425
/ Spruce street, Camden. was examined.
/ lie said he had been one of the jurors
who had convicted James of the same
crime on which Schuck is being tried.
Question Of Eligibility
81 believe members Of the James jury
should he eligible to try the present
Defendant said Prosecutor Wolver-
ton. because when separate trial
was granted Schuck the point was made
by his attorney that entirely different
considerations entered into his case than
entered in the James case"
Justice Katzcnbarh said hc had con
cludcd that it would not be proper to
let jurors who had served at the James
trial have anything to do with the trial
OF Schuck.
Both men are being tried on the
, same indiCtment.' h" explained. land
it may be properly said that in finding
James guilty these jurors have cx-
pressed an opinion on the case
Two others who had served on the
James jury were called and excused
They are Joseph Murray. of Black
wood, and William Ashton, "f 91S
North Eighth street. Camden.
The examination of tal"smen had
proceeded for an hour and twenty five
minutes before juror No. was
chosen. lie is John Siblcy. Of SO Line
street. Camden.
i Charles Hill. farmer "f Fish
House. was challenged by the common
wealth. He is said to be a cousin of
the man chosen as foreman.
Had Formed an Opinion
Jacob Reed, Of 4NG Arch street,
"i'"l'n' WIS '"unr"s'I 'u P'I'i"i''"ii ~,
Oy IA' '"ii'h"h"o"it"; ln >'I' Nv na',
S'FUl,i'N "0""t c"i'lt"I Pu"!H,i''n, an"
nav i"iIIl'u an TI'lnIon on ''.H v"s' =
W '''!unL ,,,nJ 'n .,. ,l ~. To- T'
NIGo. was 'n"'.'pE,n ~, i,,Ti'.o ~
"uu "H""''i H'I""S P''"'''' "7"'"''
'"rI'u' '"nlHIl'''cnl. t,a.ln, oo
ar, uLlTM, 'N'a'i'i,''.S ,,Ii!I ,I ~
the drf"ns" when he asked tn" tales
> mon, vino had announced that u" ana
not believe in rapItn PUNISHMENT
, whether h" would b" Wiling |" fhd Il
t verdict OF first d"grc" murder WIN q
| recommendation Tor mercy.
2 Jurors Nos. > and then W"r" chosen
quickly. They ar" Charles Meyers, ol
( P"nSHuk"n. and benjamin iiottman. OF
: 1923 Broadway. Camden.
I "Io you know I'll" defendant or any
. member Of his family" Mr.. W"Iy"rtor
asked Hoffman.
: Il think know his StcpnOth"r. the
Juror answered.
"IIavc You seen Lcr lately or talked
+ with her about this rusct
''Nu, sir: | never talked with h"l
I alout the case.
"Dtdn't Won speak 10 the defendant
. when YOU came into the court room: =
.uskrl Mr.. Wolvrrton.
"No. sir. did NOT -
g II rL.uyLr | saw Won nod YOUR hrai
- =, S,burE" said Mr.. Wolvcrton.
ID $50, Sir: did not" IIoffmau re-.