11

ELEVEN IN THE JURY BOX

MEN WHO HAVE NOT FORMED OPINIONS.

Judge Field Announces a Change of Opinion That Has an Important Bearing.

It Will Materially Prolong the Work of Securing a Jury- The Job Will Probably not be Completed Today.

An Endless Succession of Journal Readers
Hear ye! Hear ye! The honorable district court is now in session pursuant to adjournment.

Mrs. Sheedy had just been brought into court, leaning upon the arm of her uncle. Mrs. Morgan accompanied her and sat at her right, while her uncle took a seat at her left. She cordially greeted her attorneys, each of whom came forward to grasp her hand. There was an apparent apathy, however, in each movement and tone of her voice. Mrs. Dean was not present during the morning session.

Monday McFarland had come in somewhat earlier, accompanied by Captain Billingsley and was greeted with a handshake from Colonel Philpott.

Mr. Snell was somewhat late and Mr. Lambertson was not present when the examination of jurors began, coming in after the first juror was examined. The rest of the attorneys were present, and there were probably 200 spectators in waiting, when court opened. The audience increased regularly throughout the forenoon.

The first juror called was J. H. Worley of Twenty-third and N street. He was not oppoesed to the dealth penalty; had formed an opinion from reading THE JOURNAL and Cull and from conversing with others. He was doubtful as to his ability to render a verdict according to the law and evidence, and was challenged by the state and excused.

Judge Field thereupon ordered a call of jurors from rhe special panel, whereupon Mr. Stearns offered a motion to quash the special panel because N. T. [Ewan?], D. W. Jackson, Andrew Sipp and W. D. Miller, members of the regular panel, did not respond and had not been examined as jurors. The motion was overruled.

Mr. Stearns renewed the motion made yesterday in relation to the regular panel, claiming that the special panel should also be quashed, owing to alleged irregularities in the manner in which it was drawn, and alleging also the unconstitutionality of the new jury law. The motion was supported by affidavits, as before. This entailed another delay of almost an hour to permit the state to prepare affidavits in opposition to the motion, which were filed without having been read. They were exactly similar to those filed in the case of the objections to the regular panel.

The defense asked that Mart Howe, county clerk, be sworn to show that the box from which jurors are drawn is kept unfastened in the vault in his office so that anyone having access to the vault could put names therein which might be drawn for jurors. The defense claimed that Mr. Howe declined to make an affidavit to that effect. Judge Field said he would not order anyone to appear and furnish oral testimony. If the defense had any documentary testimony to offer, it would go into the record.

At this point Mart Howe strolled into court and Colonel Philpott insisted that he be sworn. The court declined to subject him to the oath.

The motion was overruled and the exmanination proceeded after a lapse of upward of an hour, during which time the court room had filled with spectators.

John Cathron of Oak precinct was the first man called from the special panel. He was firm in the statement that he could not convict any one of murder in the first degree on circumstantial evidence and was excused.

J. M. Cameron was called, but when he said he was opposed to the death penalty and could not be convinced by circumstantial evidence, he was excused on the state's challenge, defense excepting.

Hugh McEachron said he had conscientious scruples against imposing the death penalty, but supposed he would be governed by the law. He thought he would refuse to return a verdict that would entail the death penalty on circumstantial evidence. Excused on the state's challenge, defense excepting.

Hiram Duling of West Oak precinct couldn't say that he was opposed to the infliction of the death penalty, and could rely upon circumstantial evidence for its infliction; had no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused; had read in all the Lincoln papers what purported to be testimony of witnesses before the coroner's jury and in the preliminary examination. Didn't know as what he had heard of the case had made any impression in his mind; couldn't presume the accused to be innocent: therefore must have an opinion. He didn't know as he had formed an opinion as to whether Sheedy was killed by a blow or was poisoned after he was struck; had formed an opinion as to whether or not defendants were connected with a conspiracy to kill Sheedy: it would take evidence to remove that opinion. He couldn't presume the defendants innocent and was excused on the challenge of the defense.

J. W. Castor was called.

Mr. Snell- Have you any conscientious scruples against the imposition of the death penalty?

Mr. Philpott- I object to that as not a proper question, as the entertainment of such scruples is no cause for challenge under the law.

Colonel Philpott meant the new jury law, by the provisions of which certain safeguards of the defense were knocked out on the day before.

The court overruled the objection and announced that he had undergone a change of opinion during the night on the question of the disqualification of jurors who had formed opinions from reading the newspapers, and expected to have some of the jurors already passed recalled for examination on that point.

Mr. Castor had no scruples against the death penalty and could convict on circumstantial evidence; and formed no opinion, although he had read the accounts of the murder. He was passed for cause.

Charles [Spears?] of North Sixteenth street, a real estate and loan agent, was not opposed to the death penalty; he had formed and expressed an opinion based on what he had read in the newspapers and upon the theory that it was true. He had read what purported to be testimony and didn't think he would make an unbiased juror. He was excused on the challenge of the defense.

Alba Brown jr., of Oak precinct, thought he could return a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree, the penalty being death, and that upon circumstantial evidence alone if strong enough; had formed and expressed an opinion on what he had read and heard, and still had that opinion; had read what purported to be testimony and had formed an opinion as to the truth of the newspaper statements. It would require evidence to remove the opinion. The juror was excused for cause.

A. M. Bartram, health officer, had formed an opinion of the truth or falsity of the statements he had read, and had an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused, and had those opinions still. He was excused.

John Franklin of Lincoln, a farmer and stock raiser, was not opposed to the infliction of the death penalty. He thought he could convict on circumstantial evidence. He had formed an opinion on what he had heard and read as to the guilt or innocence of the accused, and had that opinion still; thought he could render a fair and impartial verdict on the law and evidence. He had read THE JOURNAL, but had talked with no witnesses. His opinion was fixed as to how Sheedy met his death and it would take evidence to remove it. He had formed an opinion as to whether Sheedy was poisoned after he was assaulted, but had no opinion as to a conspiracy or as to the guilt or innocence of these parties; could pressume the accused to be innocent until proven guilty.

Court: "Didn't you state, Mr. Franklin, that you had an opinion as to their guilt or innocence?"
"Yes, sir."
"How are you know?"
"I am of the same opinion still."
"The juror is excused."
Stearns: "Give us an exception."

[I?]. M. Hill of Firth didn't "believe in murdering no way." He would never give his consent to taking the life of a citizen under any circumstances, although he believed himself a law abiding citizen. He was excused.

[Ell?]. Ferry lived ten miles northeast of Lincoln for a month past; lived in Rock Creek precinct two years; had no scruples against the death penalty and could be convinced by circumstantial evidence alone, if strong enough. Had formed an opinion of the guilt or innocence of the accused, but didn't retain it still. He had read the confession, and was excused.

Charles B. Anderson, a carpenter of South Lincoln, worked in the B. & M. shops for ten years.

"Have you any conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty?"

"Well, in the first place, I don't understand the English language very well."

Upon his failure to understand the next question he was excused.

C. N. Crandall said that when he had first read the accounts published in the daily papers here he thought they were both guilty.

The answer created a sensation and even the fair face of the prisoner broke into a smile.

He had read the confession and might have made a remark that he thought it was so. He had expressed an opinion as to the guilt of Monday McFarland.

Mr. Crandall was excused and court adjourned until 2 p. m.

Afternoon Session.