Show itibus 01 t ONY it SPIN dept I 1 hat hie tile new news has ilas to sa say y about it the tr J 3 this c case 1 aae wai was corn com minced on tuesday of last week hobt of ille time on Monday being consumed consume din in getting a trial jury abe indictments which were con were ere number and number the fini first was the same as the one trie tried d in 18 1880 8 61 U upon P 1 I the jury fuhei aart 6 A and 11 which c h over tile term terru and thy tile other aa variance fruik the proof wy wl wt ambes were botu C un in the part of the prosecution some froni from peca tor ill 0 utile fron and ic tc from dayi ion W teune T some from pierce ci iby ty lis idaho llo alid the rem Himler faiai ail ho aud so erne sono no docu lucu tary was we t howd ull all 91 1 give a chain chai n of evi leuce which it frettim IT at 91 0 to imperi bilth tho learn lug ug an aud d ability 1 tf lerp ea curnel the derville I 1 and tile reeled rested T the be fw t reasons bert bt knoop to thein helyes 1 declined to produce a any ny evidence cf but rented the defens de fenee tue judge then gave the law of the case to tho ry in ill a very very pertinent clare to th the jury lory ad the auty wt re ia luva to retire in it ran n officer with allow the jury to sep arate till the v nad come lu ft it verdict or found that an could coula not be had the jury were thue thus kept imprisoned frum front friday night ai ii 11 ll roc cockill kill till last aloud y afternoon when they came into court andie p arted an ag arrement rement of 4 pot X ot cuilty on ou indictment truent nu number bet foj 22 and a disagreement A smoer jt the J and d artl aneid er they dik greed reed upon ah the thet facts the u law or epou ane ur t that atiat they d z rem the law as to W whether ether UP epou or not the lacta proved forte 41 the 0 referred them to his instructions given and told theau they mut must take those instructions as the law of the case that it was not their province vince to discard those ae its the province Fro law w that if there was error in t those h ose instructions the defendant hd d big his remedy in a higher court ourt W with ith those suggestions the judge ordered them back to the jury room to re consider the case after the lapse of half an hour they came nto into court and after being polled they presented their verdict which was in substance not guilty on 0 indictment ini dic truent no and gUi guilty ltv on indictment no wit with a recommend nd to mercy to the th the e jury J waa was then discharged until tuesday moc morning ning the judge reserved sentence the areat majority who heard the ayi en dence in the case tae expect expected eJ no other verdict and hence appeared satis fied fled that the jury were true to their oaths and that thai he verdict ren dered dired was according to the law and the facts as shown to th the jury ejury |