The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1922-11-21
CHOSE JURORS
TO HEAR CASE
OF ]. P. DILLON
Trial May Continue
Several Days
Especial to The Pa1ladium.)

Especial to The PaIladium-)
WINCHESTER, Ind, Nov. 21.-Ques-
tioning of jurors to hear the case OF
James P. Dillon, former superintend-
ent of the Richmond Municipal Light
plant, who is charged with the mis-
use of public funds, started in the
Randolph county circuit court here
Tuesday. Judge A1onzo L. Bales oc-
cupied the bench.
Will w. Keller and Henry o. John
son, both of Richmond, and Fred Cald
well of Winchester appeared for the
defense. Paul A. Beckett prosecuting
attorney Of Wayne county, VIII Kelley,
city attorney OF Richmond, and Thom-
as Hutchins of Winchester, repre-
sented the state.
Most of the morning was occupied
by the questioning of Jurors by the at
, torney for the defense. Up to moor
Tuesday the state had had no oppor-
tunity to question any Jurors. Indica-
tions were that the trial would last
several days. All of the jurors were
asked about their church and lodge
affiliations.
Witnesses Present.
Matt Won Pein, president of the
. Richmond board of works under the
Zimmerman administration; Baltz Bes-
cher, city controller during the same
administration; Frank Bescher, in
charge of the light plant accounts,
and Miss NJ. e. Abbey, an employe of
the light plant during the time Mr.
Dillon was light superintendent were
all in Winchester as witnesses.
Following are the names Of jurors
selected by the defense up until a late
4. hour Tuesday:
George H. Brooks, retired farmer of
Winchester; Oscar H. Humphrey, own
er of farm near here; John H. Bark
allow, farmer; David E. Lamb, farmer;
Alvan Miller, retired farmer; Will ].
Glunt, of Union City; Alvan Renbar-
ger. oil dealer; Leonard Chenoweth
and Leonard Slusher. both farmers of
this community, and James Beard, re-
tired farmer.
Confident of Outcome
Prosecutor Beckett In a statement
made before the court convened for
the afternoon session expressed him.
self as confident of the outcome.
Questioning the jurors by the state
will not be so long drawn out as was
he case during the morning when the
defense was examining. We have
about one question to ask them. They
will never acquit Dillon"
What the one question the state pro-
posed to put to the jurors was not
revealed by Prosecutor Beckett
Court officials expected that Tues
day evening would see the completion
of the selection of the jury and pos
sibly the opening statement of the
case. This would permit the first wit
ness to appear Wednesday morning.
The manner of Mr.. Dillon as he saS
at one side of the judges bench dur
ing the morning session was one OF
quiet confidence Henry U. Johnson
and Will Keller. attorneys for khe
defense, occupied seats near their
client.
Push One Count
That the state was basing its case
on one count of the seven against Mr.
Dillon was indicated in the opening
question put by Prosecutor Beckett al
the beginning of the afternoon ses
sion.
Would it influence anyone of you Il
evidence should show that the amount
involved was approximately 1922" ask
ed the prosecutor.
The sum named was one certified tc
by Mr.. Dillon in the payroll of July
1921. "If Dillon is convicted on this
count it is likely that the other counts
will be dropped said Prosecutor
Beckett in a private discussion. 'Ii
he is not convicted the state has the
other six counts upon which to rely.
he pointed out.