Chicago Daily Tribune Newspaper, February 1, 1874, Page 1

VOLUME 28. WANTED, TANTED BY THE " nted States Life Tusurance Com- tany of New Yo, - Gemeral Agen i —FOR— NORTHERN ILLINOIS. With a gentleman who can give satisfactory references, \ who thoroughly understands \ the business of Life Insurance, I who knows the territory and \ has the business capacity B —E T needed for the position, liberal T —C—————— B (=1 7 B g g g : g | Address, or apply in person, on Monday and Tuesday, Feb. 2 and 3, at the Pacific Hotel, l Chicago. . © JOHN L DE WIIT, TPRESIDEMNT. TINTED-L BOOKKEEPER Familiar with the hardware business, bya hardware honse ia sn interior city: mnst be of undoubted charscter and industry. Address, with referenco, ¥ 8, Tribune office. PARTNER WANTED, Either Activo or Special, in a lished business. A party who is fully com| tand o olice bislucsa proferred. Address ics. REAL ESTATE. FOR SALE. 833 Lots at Avondale on the N. W, B. R, four miles from the Court House. 222 Tots at Melrose, = 111 Tots in various parts of_the city. Also, Houses and Lots_for sale cheap and on liberal terms. Will exchange Houses and Lots for property suitablo for subdi- viding. ‘Wo are In the market all the time, ready to negotiate either to purchase or sell. Will now sell some blocks that 100 per cent profit can be realized on within the noxt 12 months bralivedealer. J.B.BRADLEY, or GEO.J. SHERMAN, 82 Washington-st. AL ESTA TOR SALE_Wabssh.av., 50 fect, east front, mear Thirty-second-st., choay SUBURBAN LOTS— to lelrose, $100 each, intercst. ot fo at. Tribune are prices and terms. Addition $25 down, and threo years, without. ABEL1L & HOTCHKISS, 142 LaSalle-st., Room 3. " For Sale--Very Cheap. Octagon stone-front Residence, two stories and besement. excellent location, West Side. HENRY WALL: s JT.s Room 4, 86 Washington-st. WATCHES, JEWELRY, &o. WATCRES | TEWELRY ! ‘We are_constantly re- ceiving New Goods, in all Departments, direct fromthemanufacturers, made to our order and of the latest styles. ‘We call attention to our extremely LOW PRICES, Fine Watches repaired and adjusted. Y. VATSON & (0, State & Monroe-sts. FINANCIAL. LOOK COUNTY SAVINGS BANE, Corner Clark and Madison-sts. Interest on Deposits at 6 Per Cent. Money can be drawn at any time between 10 and 3, DIRECTORS: REDMOND PRINDIVILLE, N. 8. BOUTON, GEQ. TAYLOR, M. D. OGDEN, BENJ'N V. PAGE, E, 8. WADSWORTH, F. 0. TAYLOR. . D. OGDEN, Prosident. F. O. TAYLOR, Vice Presidont. O. H. MULLIKEN, Cashier. DRAFTS ON ALL EUROPEAN (TTIES. DITRAES BANE, 'W. B. OGDEN, s ORE: INE/ %OI Exclusively a 105 CLARK-ST, Meliofist Chureh Blok. Stz per cont compound tnterest on dopogita. | Pasabooks free. Money also iuvested for others on Bond aud Mot age in small sums at, 10 por cont interest; no o to londer for abstract or logal examination of title. GEQ. 5COVILLE, President. . ExLsey Ri N Dariag the rhceat pewic, this Bank has paid all cont pe: doposita on domsnd, witboat notize: v 16 FIRST NATIONAL BANE, (Buocessor to THATCHER, STANDLEY & C0.), Central City, Colorado. J. A. THATCHER, Pres., OTTO SAUER, Vics Pres., FRANK C. YOUNG, Cashier. Caplel, $300000. _Pal , $50,000 Rofer to Chemical National Bank, New York, Lucas Bank, St. Lonis, Third Natisnal Bank, Chicago. fections receive prompt personal attention. DDIEIGT A large increase of business compels us tomove our main office to Now York. Our patrons and the business public il find our faciities for prosccuting claims un- Rimited, snd_promptusss, encrey, and thoroughness characferizing our efforts.’ No collectinns, no charges. FRASIRS SERCANTILE GOLLECTION AGENGY, 145 Madison-at. TO RENT. Chamber of Gommereg OFFICE TO RENT. As we shall move to No. 8 Merchants® Building sbout Feb. 15, our present office, No. 38 Chamber of Commerca, is for rent. WM. YOUNG & CO. South Chicago. Wo offer bargzins in this growing suburb._Also tcre. 2 S vichnty and [ othef part of Hrde Park rored azd 2t Kenwood an BleParks . CHAOH 5 ABRLLY 18] Denrbarm:at. BUSINESS CARDS, [OHMISSIONER OF DREDS, &. The undersigned is Commissioner of Deeds r all the States and Territories, obtains assports, takes proofs of claims in Bank- Tuptey, and as U. 8. Commissioner hears cases for viclation of U. S. Laws, Attorney- -Law, Passport Officer, and Notary Public, 198 TaSale-st, Republic Life Building, Room 5, First Fleor, SIMEON W. EING-. (OMFQRTERS! I will offer to-morrow a few dozen of the best quality of Comforters at retail, at cost. SPENCER H. PECK, Carpet Store, 195 & 197 Wabash-av. CHINA, CROCKERY, &c. BANKRUPT STOCK CONSISTING OF CHINATEA SETS,VASES, Bohemian Toilet Ware, Laya Smoking Sets, Imperial Statuetios, Tays, &Coy 1088 S04 33 Pr Cont Less Tuan Whalssale Pricss. ” A. PICEK, Prov’l Assignee, s=Eset Randolph.st.. between Dearborn and State. MISCELLANEOUS. STORE FOR RENT On Franklin-st., between Hamlin, Davey & Co. and J. V. Farwell & Co., 48 feet front by 73 feet deep, 5-stories and basement, first~ class Steam Elevator, with steam furnished for power and heating. The most desireable Jocaiion for the Hat and Cap, Boot and Skoe, or Clothing business in Chicago to.day. In. quire of HAMLIN, DAVEY & CO. TO RENT. ‘The large, douht-houu. 54 and 5 Fourtkt-av., near Van Bt st. ‘This a zew building, 60270, three-storics Pl lih o fng crllus nnder the whole, xbd 3 diriding Gobtre brick wall the entiro helght, through wiich are The house is, Xc., & arctrod openings connecting halls e Tho hoas bas about 30 rooms, with water-clasets, Sellareanged for & small Botel o bosrding bor and boing noar tho business ceatro of tho city will make s fing location for a persen calculatad to keop and taka cars such & howse. ' VWill be resdy to occapy when tzi; puinters arch or ) 52t b Hubbard-court. TN L WARNER. TO REINT. cery or dry goods stors, The best stand for fami wm;u::c_vmrnbl?vnenaxs:{x S stte-sie. Possetion atoncs. Noaebutfirstclzss. Inguirs | PRINTERS.STATIONERS, &o. BANKERS' SHEARS POCKET SCISSORS, AT WHOLESALE AND RETAIL, BY CULVER, PAGE, HOYNE & (O, 118 & 120 MONROE-ST. BLANK BOOKS! STATIONERY and PRINTING furnished promptly and at fair prices, by J. M. W. JOINES, 104 AND 106 MADISON-ST. WEST SIDERS Ask your Newsdoaler for THE WEST CHICAGO. T0 THE RIGHT PARTY, b rutcient capit “ al, an **A 17 opportunityis open to Teare mr&zgx;l: and 1;.(“:‘-::_.,«.??:::'@ nad domes. = o ors s dential, "Address . O Box 25, Chicago. - NOTICE. Feobraary 1, 1674, the premiam upon parchase of 24X OERTIFIOATES, hold by the clty for city taxes of R ¥ b rateed to 5 PER CENT. Jax. 9% 14, 8, 5. HATES, Oempirelior, ring elsewhere. HINDLE & JEN s o e SN Siationers. Printere, and Blak ONSUBERS will find ¢ profitable o get our pri NRIN Book _Mannfacturers, 165 Clark-st. HOTEL. ANTCERSON’S EUROPEAN HOTEL, 145 & 145 Madison-st, bel. Clark and Lasaile. tel in the Northwest. Accom- a ot o Hark rooms. . Eooma from The finest Koroj ‘modation for 20 1 to £2 per das. S Riaaran cefing the largost "The Basber Shep and Cut canmot be O connected 1s the most popular, and re- oatronage of aay in tho city, s g onnacted wit TR ot ke mes only s CHICAGO, SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1874—SIXTEEN PAGES. COAL. SOFT COAL REDUCED. G COAL, HOORING 0 $6.50 a Ton, in Yard. $6.50 a Ton, Deliver'd. ‘We are the only Deslers in Chi- cago owning Hocking Coal Mines, which enables us to sell BETTER Coal st LOWER prices than any other Dealor. All kinds Hard and Soft Coal at lowest market rates. MINER T. AMES & C0,, 134 LaSalle-st., CORNER MADISON. “FRANKLIN” COATT Free from Slate or Clinker. Chestnut, Range, Small Egg, Large Egg, Well Screened and Delivered at Lowest Market Rates. Lehigh, Blossburg, Cannel, Briar Hill, and Illinois Coals. ROGERS & (0., 144 MARKET-ST. WILKES-BARRE COAL ANY SIZE, $10.00 g Ton, Delivered. $9.50 a Ton, in Yard. Until forther notice, we have advanced our rates to the abovo prico. BLAKE, WHITEEOUSE & CO., 18 Chamber of Commerce. Yards—Twenty-socond-st. Bridgs, and Indiana st. Bridge. INSURANCE. PECPLE'S INSURANCE CO., OF MEMPHIS, TENN. STATEMENT JAN. 1, 1874. CASH CAPITAL -e----$300,000.00 Cash Surplus after deducting un- paid losses and all other claims.. 102,064.86 Cash Assets over Liabilities...$402,064.86 DAN M. BOWMAR, Agent, 171 LaSalle-st. REMOVAL. REMOVAL. On Monday, Feb. 2, the Gexeral Office of the American Express cumpnn; will be re- moved to their new building, 73,74, 76 and 78 Monroe-st. TREIGHT DEPARTMENT In rear building. Truckmen will enter through alley from State and Dearborn-sts. BRANCH OFFICES: Corner, Clark and Washington-sts., 60 South Halsted-st., and 973 Wabash-av. B. G. SEATON, Agent. ARTISTIC TAILORING. TWENTY-SIXdays more in which we sell our goods at 10 PER CENT DISCOUNT, Our Spring Goods are now arriv- ing, and our Spring Fashions are issued. “A word to the wise,” &c. BELY & CO. (Establishef]. 1854.) P. CHROMOS, &c The cheapest place in town to buy Chromos, Engravings, Lithographs, Family Bibles, &c., is at HOWISON’S, 995 South Clark-st., near Yan Buren, EASY PAYMENTS. MERCANTILE AGENCY. CEICACGO MERCANTILE AGENCY, 162 WASHINGTON-ST. Affords superior facilities fox_tho protec- tign b:nd %’dv&\:cdement_ggma trade. ubscribe and rocei TSTER, DAILY MERC g R 'ORBRTS. 1=_Cluim= for collection receive prompt atten- tion. O SAT.=. terest of the late G. H. Hatchins {a the late firm n(TChl::g‘:fl;anMn: ‘::m:flmg of one-half h%r!n i Planiog 34ll, Box Flclog, MubLnufi'. Horses, Wago! Fiatures, kumber, &0, unhér ;l&r (‘:‘l‘-‘ifik taguize o o Jry v, sod Gosrgrat RAFFERTY. The Supreme Court De- cides His Case. The Motion for a New Trial Is Refused, and He Will Be Hanged Feb. 27, Justice McAllister Delivers the Opinion of the Court. The Action of the Deputy Was Repre- hensible, but Does Not War- rant a New Trial, The Dlegality of the Warrant Does Not Matter, in View of Pre- vious Malice, Disgsenting Opinion by Mr. Justice Scott. Rafferty Receives the News with Great Equanimity. And Declines to Answer Any Questions ‘Whatever, Special Dispatch to The Chicago Tribune. 8SearNorizLp, Jan. 31.—The Supreme Court met this morning at 9 o'clock, and finished the business of the term, adjourning to the term in course. Mr. Justice McAllister announced the decision of the Court aflirming the judgmentof the Court below in the case of Rafferty v. The Peo- Dle, and fixed the 27th of February for the exe- cution of the criminal. Mr. Justice Scott dis- sented. T OPINION OF THE COURT. This case bas been before us, upon writ of error, on two former occasions. On the first, tho conviction was revived upon the ground that the Criminal Court of Cook County erred in deuying the prisoner's application, upon a suffi- cient petition, for a change of venme. This Court held, in secordance with the views of the profession and Circuit Judges all over the State, as shown by the general course of practice, that the application was not addressed to the discre- tion of the Court, but, upon a proper application being made, the prisoner was entitled toitasn matter of right. For depriving him of that right, the judgmont of the Court below was roversed and the cause remanded. Rafferty v. The People, September term, 1872. THE BECOND TRIAL. Upon the second trial, in the county to which the venue was changed, evidence was given by Scanlon, directly tending to showthat he and O'Meara, the deceased, at the & wetho-lstter was shot, were attemptlng to arres”,the prisoner upon a warrant not in the hands of O'Meara, but Scanlon. Whereupon the prisoner's coun- sel gave evidence showing, without contradic- tion, that the pretended process upon which sucl arrest was attempted was a blank taken from a number which the . Police Magistrate had signed in blank, and which, on Aug. 4, 1872, had been filled out by s mere Police Sergeant, in tho absence of the Magistrate, by inserting the prisoner'’s name, but dated as of Aug. 5, 1872. When the evidence of the illegality of the process was given, the Court, on motion of the State’s Attorney, excluded it from the jury, to which the prisoner’s counsel except- ed. This evidence having been excluded, the case was then submitted to the jury by the Court below, upon the ordinary presumption of implied malice, and a8 if nosuch element as an illegal arrest being attempted at the time of the homi- cide was in the case. ILLEGALITY OF THE WARRANT. The prisoner was coovicted of murder, and sentenced to suffer the pepalty of desth. An application was made, upon a franscript of the record preserving tho evidence and rulings of the Court, for the allowance of 2 writ of error from this Court, which was granted, and that brought the case befors us a second time. As the case then stood, not having been submitted to the on the ground of ex- press malice, and the evidence tending to show O"Meara's participation in an intended arrest, and the evidence excluded showing that the sup- posed warrant on which the arrest was being made did not afford even the color of justifica- tion, because it was not issued in the course of justice at all, but fabricated by a mera Police Sergennt, we could not pass upon the merits of the case, becaugso a portion of the evidence affectivg the merits had been excluded. It 18 true the fact of the homicids was established beyond doubt ; but every killing of a human being is not neceesarily murder; the character of the act depends upon tho attending circum- stances. ‘Tho proprioty of the ruling of the Court in excluding that evidenco waa therefore before us, and we conld not escape it decision. We held, as wej havo no doubt properly, and in accordance with all the decisions in England 2nd this country, that if a public officer be re- sisted and killed by a person whom be is at- tempting to itlegally arrest, without color of au- thority of law, the killing will be manslangater only, unless the evidence shows previous or ex- press malice. Rafferiy v. The People, Beptem- ber Term, 1873. EVIDENCE WRONGFULLY XXCLUDED. As we have before snid, as the caso was then presented, there was evidence cleatly tending to prove O'Meara’s participation, and the evidence excluded would have shown the warrant uterly void, a8 we have stated, then it foliowed, upon principle and aathority, that the exclusion of the evidence was wrong—was projudicial to the legal rights of the prisoner. For, when it ap- peared that & question could be properly raised as to the legality of the -arrest which Scanlan was undoubtedly attempting to make, and thoe svidence tended to show de- ceased was aiding him, the obmoxious and proper course was to let the excluded evidence g0 to the jury, and they be required, by the di- rectionsof the Court, to find whether deceased was in fact puticipating ic an attempted ar- rest by Scanlon, under the supposed warrant, if such was the facts; and then told that if the prisoner resisted such illegal arrest and commit- ted homicide, it was mansiaughter only; but, if 1o was actuated by previons or express malice, it would nevertheless be murder. This was the only proper course to have been‘pursued by tho Court below, and the departure from it was so plain a departure from established principles of criminal jurisprudence. that we, 8a a Court of last resort, could not do otherwise than reverse the conviction and direct & now trial. In the opinion then filed, it wes annovuced if whea the question wes made a direct issuc in the cause, 88 to whether O'Meara was .in fact, par- ticipating with on in : the stiempt- ed 1llegal arrest, it shonld be found that he; was mot, the rmle leid down would not apply ; or if, on the cther hand, the avidence shonld show express malice, then it would be murder, at all eventa, THE THIED TRIAL. The case was sent back under these ruliogs, and again tried, with the same result as before.. A transeript of the record daly certified, with an assignment of errors, was presented in vacation, for the aliowance of a writ of error. It was al- lowed, and the case is now before ua for a third time. THE RULE A8 TC REVERSAL. The evidencs as to the illegality of the sup- ‘was made a direct issue in the cause whether or not O'Mearn was participating in the arrest, and whether the prisoner was sctuated by previous or express malice, The prisoner's counsel ear- nestly insists that the evidence would sustaina conviction for manslaughter only, and that this Court should reverse the finding of the jury up- on the evidence and set it aside. It istrae the statute has clothed this Court with 8 revisory poser over the verdicts of juries in criminal, as 1t has in civil cases, and it ia also truo that tliere is some difference between tho two classes of cases ; for in criminal cases the guilt of the ac- cused must be established beyond a reasonable dqnb& whilo in civil cases the issue is doter- mined by preponderance of evidence. In the latter class, it is the eatablished rule, if the ver- diet is wholly unsupported as to any necossary element, or if there is eidence upon both sides, and the verdict appezrs to be manifestlyagainat the clear weight and preponderance of the evi- dence, we set it nside. In criminal cases, this Court has, & yet, established no fixed, dofinite rule, andit is doubtfal if_any case can ba estab- lished farther than this : If, ‘when the evidence is all carefully considered and weighed. it ap- pears that it is wholly wanting in respect to some necessary element of the crime, orif thereis a conflictof evidence, and there issucha clear pre- ponderance of evidonce against the verdict a3 to suspend the judicial mind in serious doubt as to the guilt of the accused, then in either case we ought to grants new trial Qustions of the credibility "of witnesses are peculiarly for the jury. Asfor instance, supvose the conviction rests solely qun the evidsnce of an accomplice. If the jury choose to believe him, we could not reverse, when that fact was the only one affect ing bis credibility, although we may believe that faith should not be reposed in wuch a witness. Bat when a verdict rests solely upon the av dence of a single witneas, and direct ovidence of jmpeachment is introduced to such an extent as to lead to the conclusion that the jury were actuated by pussion or prejudice in disregarding such impeaching evidenice, then we ought to set thia verdict aside and direct a new trial. NO INTCRFELENCE ALLOWABLE. . We are satisfied that under no rule which ought to govern in reviewing the verdicts of juries in crimiral cases can we consist- ently interfere in this case. The evidence is different from what it waa when the case was last beforo us; it fails to ehow that decessed was, in fact, participating, in any degree, in an sttempt by Scanlon, to arrest prisvner upon the supposed warrant. But it 18 said Scanlon has committed porjury in teetifying aa he did: that his testimony on the’ former irial was in- troduced, from which it sppears that the da- ceased was snndh;g against the door with a slung-shot suspended from his wrist, to prevent egress by pnsoner from the 1oom, and was thereby assisting. It is true such evidence was introduced, but that evidence only tended to affect the credibility of Scanlou ; was competent for that purposo only, and could not be used to prove the facta previously sworn to. This was & part of the prisoner’s defense to bs establisbed by him. The question of Scanlon’s credibility was for the jury, aud the evidence opposed to him was vervalight. ILLEGAL ARREST PUT ON ONE SIDE. Bat there is also another view of the evidence which would entirely override the question of ii- legal arrest, or O'Meara's participation in it; and that was the evidence of previous or express malice. Oanly some three days previously, the prisoner declared, in substance, that no Bridge- port Fohcemlm should arrest him while ho hada pistol, 1t appears that, although finding him in the saloon was a matter of pure accident, he was alrendy prepared with the very weapon alluded toin his threat. These officors were Bridgeport policemen ; and it appears that he did not uae it upon the deceased merely because he was pro- venting his egress from the saloon, but when he had shot him through the breast, then, withou$ offering to go out of the door, he instantly tarn- ed around and fired two shots at O'Meara, who was back of him, and had no agency in prevent- ing egress from the room, either by personal violence, or consstructively, by guarding the door. In Rex v. Patieone, 7 Carr and Payne, 775, the prisoner was indicted for stabbing William Beechy. It appeared upon the trit before Parke B., that Jobn Beechy was s Constable of Witney, and had a warrant for the spprehension of the prisoner; he employed his two sons to take him. 5 sons, ome of whom was William, went in pursuit of the prisoner, while the father stayed behind. They found himlying under a hedge, about a mile from Witney. " He had an open knife in his hand, which he wns Trunning into the ground. William laid hold of him, whilo his father was in sight, about a quarter of a mile away. Parke B—* That was not a lawful arrest. You had better examine as to whether he bad prepsred the knifo before the witness took him by the collar.” The witness then stated: ‘‘The prisoner said that if I did not let him go he would cat my flogers off. He stabbed me with the knife. When I first came up ho had the knife in his hand and was running it into the ground. He had got up from the ground to ran away. I had collared him before he wounded me, but not be- fore he hind begun to run away. I first sas him a quarter of 2 mile off, and he was then running the knife into the ground.” z ‘ Parke B.—* The arrest was illegal, as the father was too far off to be assisting in it, and there is no evidonco that the prisoner had pre- pared the knife beforoband to resist_illegal vio- lence. If a persou receives illegal violence, and be resists that violence with anything he hap- pens to bave in his hand, sod death ensue. that would be manslaughter. If the prisoner had taken ont this knife on sceing the young man come up, it might be evidence of previous mal- ice; but that is not so, a8 we find that the knife wa8 in his hand when the young man first_came in sight. The prisoner must be acquitted.” PREVIOUS MALICE. R Now this case, though not parallel in its facts, illustrates the principle. For there is no difference upon tho question of previous malico between the fact of taking out the knife upon secing theso young men a proach, and that of prisoner providing himself with a pistol for the purpose of resisting any ar- rest, whether legal or otherwise, sttempted by Bridgeport policemen. Itis true that evidence of o threst previously utteredis a kind of evi- dence which, under many eircumstances, ought to be received with caution. Hfilé, when that is taken in connection with the undisputed facts that prisoner bad farnished himself with a pis- tol, and no other reagon is shown for his doing 10, and that he used it in the manner stated, be- fore any violence was done him by either of the policemen, the threat seems natural, andno other conclusion can be arrived at thau that of previous or express malice. Wa think the jury were entirely justified, by the circumstances in evidence, in 80 finding. THE INSTRUCTIONS. Therao is no assigument of error for the giving of instructions on behalf of the people. Dut we have examined those given, and think they cor- rectly presented the law of the case to the jury. Complaint is, however, made, and error assigued, for the rofusal by the Court of the twelfth in- struction ssked on bebalf of the prisoner. Itis 4 follows: “ On the question of express malico, the Couct instructs the jury that the alleged dec- laration of a person accused of crime should be received with extreme caution by them, In & caso involving the life of a fellow creature. In this spirit the jury are enjoined by the Court to pass upon and determine the just weight to be given to the testimony of the witness Dedcll, relative to the alleged declaration of the defendant to said witness on Fridag, the 24 of Auguat, 1872. ‘This caution should b more especiaily observed, if the jury find, from the ovidence, that there is 10 other testumony in tho case which tends to show express malice on the part of the defend- ant towards said_O'Meara.” W think this instruction was properly refus- ed, on the ground that it wonld trench upon the province of the jury. If the undisputed facts of the case tended to show, independently of any threat, a provious determination on his part to resist any attempt of Bridgeport policemen to arrest him, and the preparation of a pistol for that purpoee, the threat was & natural one, and e aro unablo $0 perceive any resson why the trath of the fact of his having made such a threat shonld not be considered in connection with the other evidence without any injunction from the Court to rcceive the evidence of the threat with cxtreme caution, the same as the truth of any other fact in the case. It is a gen- eral rule of evidence that atleged declarations, made by 5 prisoner out of cours, should be re- ceived with extreme caution; but sometimes they ara made with such deliberation and free- dom from extraneous influence as to amount to evidence, of the most satisfactory character. Wo are disinclined to recognize the right of the Court_to deaignata tbe evidence of » witness who is uot s acknowledged sccomplica, and caution the jury against giving cmSanca toit. If it conld be proporly done in case of a witness for the people, it could also in thatofa witness for the Caating the influence of the Court against the testimony of & partic- ular witness, or the character of the evideace posed warrant was sdmitted oo chis trisl 3 ‘ndulhnglreu,n:m susual wsy of either affecting e Chicage Daily Teibuwne, the credibility of witnesses or the weight of the testimony, COMMNUNICATION TO THE JURY. The ounly remaming point we deem worthy of consideration arose upon the motion for & new trial, and was based upon an alleged communi- cation made to the jury by the Deputy Sheriff incharge, whilst they were deliberating upon their verdict. It appeared by the affidamit of such officer, that on Wednesday evening, Nov. 26, after tho jury had been out about eight hours, the officer was sent for by the presiding Judge, who was then at his hotel, and instruct ed by him to inform the he would moet them at j';xry o'c:rl»‘:: the next morning, being _the 2th, that doponent nnderstood the Judge to say to bim that he, the Judge, eru'dad it 55 is nrym- lege to adjonrn until Monday morning, and to so inform the jury; and he states that he did so inform the jury; that it was his understanding, and he belieted the jury also understood, that, un. loss a verdict was rendered by 7 o’clock the nexs morning, the jury would be kept together until the ensuing Monday ; that the jury finally came to an agreement within & very few minutes to 7 oclock the ensuing morning: and deponent knouws that such agreement of the jury was has- toned by the knowledge. on the part of the jury, that unless they agrecd they would be kept to- gether for several days longer. 1t appears, by the record, that at about 9 o'clock P. m. of the 2th day of November, 1873, while the jury wore deliberating in their room, the Judge of said Court, with the consent of both tho Btate's Attorney and the counsel for pris- oner, sent word to the jury, by the officer in charge, that he would meet the jury at 7 o'clock the next morning, said Judge being, at the time, at his {odg\ngs, and the prisoner not personally present. It has been held by a court of tho highest ro- spactability that, when the Court sdjourns, the Judge carries no persons with him to his lodg- ings, and has no more authority over the jury than any other person; sand any direction to them from him, either verbal or in writing, is improper. _Sargent v. Roberts et al. 1 Picker- ing, 837, This is doubtless sound and judicions doctrine. If the words sent by the Judge from bis lodgings wore of a charictor to probably operato to the prejudice of the accused, the fact that his counsel, in his absence, consented to it, would not, in s capital eaas, cure the error. Although ; the messsge was improperly sent, yet _if by no possibility it could work an'injury w the prisoner, it ought not vitiate the verdict. ‘The message, a3 sant, would be understood by the jury aa simplyshowinga proper consideration for their comfort, by lessening the time of their confinement. 1t was sent at 9 o'clock in the evening of the 2th, and merely assumed that they might agree within ten hours. With fensi- blo men, of whom the jury are presumed to have been composed, this could not hasten their verdict. McIntyra v, The People, 38 Xllinois, 619. 1f this were all, the question would be fres from dificulty. But, a8 one irregularity is likely to load to others, 8o hers;the officer went beyond the scopo of the message sent, and informed tne jury that he understood the Judge as saying thag it was his privilege to adjourn court until the next Mondsy morning ; that he so told the Jjury, and koow it hastencd their agreement to a vordiet. The 27th of November was Thursday, and Thanksgiving-day. It was the expectation that they would be kept together until the next Monday morning, if they did not agres by 7 o'clock Thursdsy morning, which is suppossd to have had the effect of hastening the verdict. THE DEPUTY REBUKED. This communication on the part of the officer was bighly improper; we are unwilling to give tho slightest sanction to such practices; and, this being o capital case, if the evidence of guilt had been less clear, in any substantial degree, weshould not hesitate to set the verdict aside on account of the probable prejudice the mes- sage might bave occasioned by hastening the verdict of the jury. But here all legal evidence offered by the sccused had been admitted; the fact of the commission of the homicide by the prisoner and the attending circumatances were uncontroverted, except morely as to the extent to which the decoased was participating in the attempt by Scanlon to @ an arrest which, although illegal, had not proceeded to any vio- Jence on the part of the ofiicers. There was ex- idence as to tho attending circamstances and previous threat wholly wncontroverted, which strongly. tended to show previous or express malice ; indeed, the inforenco of such malice, a3 the record now atands, is almust irresistible. * JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. ‘This was the third trial of the case, with the same result each time. Neither the prisoner nor hus counsel can haveany jus cause of com- plaint that this cause has not received, at the hands of this Court, all the pationt attention and carofal consideration demanded by the great and solemn issues involved. Abrolute exemp- tion from error is unattainable. Tilere has been no error in respect to tho bringing the whole scope of the case bofore the jury. They, after considering it eighteen hours, returued the ver- dict they did. The prisonar's counsel had the right to poll them, but did not ses fit to do go. Under the circumstances, we do not 1ind it our dnty to set the verdict aside for the irregulari- ties indjcated, and must afirm the judgient. Judginent afirmed. St = THE DISSENTING OPINION. Mr. Justice Scott presented a dissenting opin- ion, which is as follows : I joined in granting asupersedeas in thiscause on the ground that a PATAL IRREGULARITY occurred at the trial in permitting the officer having charge of the jury to carry to them = message purporting to come from the Judge of the Court. I find no resson to change the jndg- ment then deliberately formed. Thse law is well settled that the Judge at his lodgings has no control over the jury, and that it is improper for him to scnd them any communication, no matter what its character may be. If it become important for any ressonto communicate with them, they should be brought into open court in the ' pres- ence of the parties. Any other rule is liable to great abuse. Whether the officer in thisinstance obeyed his instructions or not, is wholly imma- torial. The messnge delivared to the jury was given as coming from the Judge, and was no doubt received in that belief. The effect, there- fore, was _the satae, had the Judgoein fact sent the identical message delivered by the officer. 1t is conceded, in the opinion of the majority of the Court, it was & GRAVE ERROR that such a communication was J;"u'en to the jury. Whether it was sent by the Judge or not, cannot be tolerated by iaw ; but the judgment is affirmed, on the ground that the evideaco shows tho sccused was guilty beyond s reasonablo doubt. This docs not answer the whole objec~ tion, The conclusion would be mors logical, and could be more easily maintained. if the punish- ment in such cases was absolutely fixed by law. Such is not the case. Under our statuto, in all capital cases the jury are imvested with » discretion to say what the punishment shall be,—whother it ehall be death by hanging or 1m- prisonment for life in the Penifentiary. The evidonce in the record leaves no room to doubt THE JUBY WERE HASTENED in their finding by the message delivered to them by the ofticer. In view of this fact, the measure of punishment to be inflicted in case of conviction was in the discretion of the jury. Who can_say they wera not hastened -in their verdict, to tho prejudice of the accused ? It is the right of svyone charged with crime to bave the calm and deliberate judgment of the jury selected to try his cause, and the fact that their deliberations may have been in- fluenced by any cause whatever, is error so pre- judicial in s case like this, that it ought to be » ground for the reversal of the judgment. It is Dot & mere irregularity. It may have injurious- Iy affected the merits of thocase. For the reasons indicated, I feel constrained to enter my disgent to the judgmont about to be pronounced. g CHICAGO. THE PIRST SEWS. The fact that the Supreme Court had affirmed the verdict of the jury in the case of Baferty, snd fixed the day on which he is to be haoged, became known in this city about 10 o'clock yeaterday morning. The State’s Attorney was the firat one who received information about it, getting the following dispatch : SrEnGrIzLD, 1lL, Jan. 31—9:30 2. m, . Reed, State's Atiorney mfl:’m‘; i eing Feb. 1. dudgment afirmed, Scott only dissenting. W. H. RICHARDEOXN. It was not long before every ons around the Crimioal Coure knew of the decision, and the news found its way into the jail a quarter of an hour after thedelivery of the tzlegram. RAYPERTY 18 INFORMED. Jailor Foltz beard of it. and went 1o cell No. o soriy had beon locked up for some B 3 toid him about § l NUMBER 162. L understand a dispatel hus been rsceived, and that the Supreme Conrt went against you." “Is that 802" queried Raffarty. “Yes" replied the Jailor. “Well,” gaid the murdeser, *thatis whatl ex;)ected." t seems that Rafferty thought his case would not come up beforo the September term of ths Supreme Court; and, when his counsel told bim it would ba before the Court daring the present term, he did not like it, bolieving that hurrying up mastters woald result prejudicially to him. PRECAUTIONABY MEASURES. As stated, he has been in Cell No. 4§ for some time, There was a blind door on this cell. and at night he could do anything he pleased without being observed. Althongh no one imagines ke will injure himself or attempt to defeat tha law. Jailor Foltz considered it best to put him in No. 37, where he can he seen at all times by the turnkoys and watchmen. HE IS INTERVIEWED, A reporter called on him yesterday afternoon for the ‘parpose of learaing how bo felt, aud was received coidinlly. Rafferty, asis well known, bas always been vory reticent; and the sight of & mnote-book causes bim to keep his mouth closed and to breath through his nose. Therofore tho interviow sabjoined had to be wrtten without his knowledge, the notes being tsken in the reporter's overcoas pocket. Reporter—Well, Chris, how do yon feel? Ratferty—I feol first-rato. Reporter—What do you think of the decision of the Sapreme Court? Rafferty—I have nothing to say about it. Reporter—Do you think Mr. Small will ges you & pardon? SENHIBLE, Rafferty—There is no use of & man talking to you fellows. Roporter—Why not ? Rafferty—Oh! you put in ten words for ane that is said. Reporter—If you would talk more, that the poople might know how you feel and what you ttunk, none of the papers would misrepresent you. Rafforty—I don't blame you. You are paid to :;k questions, but I am not paid to answer em. Reporter—Have you heard from Mr. Small yet? Rafferty—No ; he hasn’t been to see me. Be?pnrtor—linu any reporters been in to sss you TOTAL IGNORANCE, Rafferty—Yes, lots of them. I am not going to answer any questions, I don't think itis good policy. s o Keportor—When aro you going up to Wau- egan ? Raferty—I don't know angthing about it. Reporter—Have you been treated well haro ? Rafferty—Well, yos. Reporter—Will you be sorry to leave here ? Rafferty—I don't know whether I will or not. I don't care about telling you anything. Roporter—If you do tell me anything I will got it straight, and wor't exaggerats what yon 2ay. Rafferty—I have nothing fo say to anybody. Reporter—Don’t yon think you have been treated fairly 7 Rafferty—I have nothing at all to say abont it. Raporter—Nothing whatever 2 Rafferty—I haven't 8 word tossy. If I had I would tell you. THE BRIBE PAILS. The reporter Lero handed Rafferty & cigar, and tried to_coax him into expressing his views about himself, bat he refused to ba commuaica- tive, and further interviewing had to be aban- doned. It is understood that he will remain in the Cook County Jail until about the 20th of February, as he will be much safer thore than at Waukegan. A close watch will be kept upon him, and the friends who visit him. It is doubt- ful it the Goveruor can be prevailod upon to COMMUTE THE BENTENCE, but efforts will be made to that end by Ma Small and others. The punishment is meritea, and the general opinton now is that Rafferty will not again escape from the hangmaa. MB. BEED. The State’s-Attornoy, though not sbsolutely gleoful at the result of his labors, could uot sup- Prees his pleasure. ab.the fact that the opinion was delivered by Judge McAllister. k- felrd¥n- fident that this was an end of tho case, and thero as not a particle of doubt that the execution of the sentence would be carried out on the day desiguated. From couvcrsations he had had with Gov. Beveridgo, ho felt surs that that offi- cer would not interfere in the matter. He con- sidered that the execation of Rafferty would have as baneficial an effect on the poace of the city as the addition of 200 men % the polica force for a period of five years, which makes the valuoof Rafferty’s exccation to the public, in hard cash, st his estimate, reach the sam of exactiy one million dollars! CONTEMPT OF COURT. The Macoupin County Supervisors Decline to Purge ‘Themsclves--The Final Order of the Court Withheld. Special Dispatchto The Chicao Tribune. SrrxerieLp, 1L, Jan.31.—The Board of Su- pervisors of Macoupin County wero arraigned to-day at the bar of the United States Federal Court, Juige Treat on the Bench. They are Andrew A. Atkins, Beatty T. Burk, John Brown, George W. Barnett, Frederick 0. Cross, Thomas J. Lukins, Robert Bacon, Nicholas Chailacombe, Demsey N. Solomon, James B. Vancill, Richard Cromwell, William Panhorst, John Craggs, Moees Eldred, William C, Edwards, Edwin Henderson, Edward Holme, James P. Willoy, Edward Way, Alexander Binclair, and N. T. Hamilton. They stood charged with contempt of court for rea- sons heretofore given in these dispatches, and were called upon to purge themselves of the contempt. They stood up uncovered in the awful presence and were informed by the Conrt that if they would in any reasonable time pro- cecd to make the levy of "tax on the property in Macoupin County, as directed, be would hold them guiltless of contempt; but if not. ho plainly indicated, though he did not so state, that the severest penalty of the Court would ba visited npon them. They asked and obtained leave to retire to comsnit, snd, after s shors time, they roturned and, throngh their attorner, B. 8. Edwards, of this city, notitied the Court that they woald not oboy the mandate, and therefora they did not ask for further time. It was expact- ed that this declaration, in view of theultimatum offered them, would cause an immediate con- tence, but it did not. The Court said he was sorry that they had resched such a conclusion, but did not think it neceesary to make his final order now. He would do 8o before the end of this termof Courc. Thoy could return bome, aud they would bo informed of the time whea the order wonld be made. ‘The parties wero oot recognized, but are held to be cnn'akmullre!v in tho power of tho Marshal. Judge Trest said e wanted to consule with Judge Drummond be- fore making his ordez. If Judge Drummound bad been hero, it is belioved that be would have jailed the whole party, =nd it is thought snch will be the final ordor. Tho Supervisors etato thas thoy had arrangod their personal and busi- ness affairs, expecting to go to jail. Theyre- turn to Macoupin County to-night. SUICIDE. Spectal Dispateh to The Chicags Tribune. Guraxp Rapips,Mich., Jaa. 31.—The Coroner’s jury at Oaksield, this conaty, has rendered 3 vez- dict that Miss Marths E. Treags, in that town, died from the effects of strychuine admizistered by berself. Sho had been determined on self- destruction for several months. Although not married, she left a child 2 years old. Speciat Dimpateh to The Chicago Trbune. WASHIXGTOS, Pa., Jan. $1.—Christisn Garreit, # farmer living in West Bethlehem fownship, it. Baidhes “Qhris, this county, committed suicide last eveninz, b7 hanging himself in the spriug-honse, He had becowe financially embarrassed, and his proper- ty was levied npon by the Sheriff, which led aim to the commision of the deed. MORTUARY. PrLADELPHIA. Jan. 31.—The faneral of tha Iate Chief-Justice Thompson took place thin af- ternoon from his Iaie residence, Spruce street. 1t was attended by a large concourseof relativas, friends, and members of the Bar. The following were tho pall-bearers : Chief-Justico Agnorw. a3- Chief-Jnatices Woodward snd Reed; Justcce Bhaw, Wood, and Mercur, and Judges Porter and Parsons, OCEAN STEAMSHIP NEWS. New Yorx, Jan, 31.—Arrived—Trinacris, from Giasgow, and C. F. French, from Antwerp. New Yoex, Jan. 3l.—Arrived — Btcamship Californis, from Glasgow.