The New York Herald Newspaper, July 16, 1872, Page 3

\- ‘ NEW.YORK HERALD, TUESDAY, JULY 16, 1872—TRIPLE SHEET. DISAGREEMENT, The Stokes Jury Unable to Find a Verdict and Dischayged from Further Service. ‘The People in Court Dying with Excitement. THE GREAT TRIAL ENDED. The Jury Seven for Murder, Three for Acquittal and Two for Manslaugh- ter in the Third Degree. POLLING THE MEMORABLE TWELVE. Stokes Dissatisfied and at the Tombs. The Causes Celebres of Mrs. Canningham, Polly Bodine, Michael Cancemi and Their Present Parallel. Violent Discussion Among the Jury and Subsequent Interviews with Them. ANOTHER TRIAL FOR STOKES. The Stokes trial was closed yesterday. Twenty- one days of medical, legal, direct and gross-exam- ination; of charges to the jury; of summing up on behalf of the prosecution and the defence—all of this turmoil and trouble came to an end at cleven o’clock of yesterday morning. The crowds in Chambers street were great enough to have made the Gilmore Jubilee a success at any time when there was a default of spectators. There was great doubt about the jury. To breed a doubt about any great question of public interest in this city is equivalent to creating a crowd to wit- nese the solution of the doubt. And consequently there was a large number of people yesterday in waiting to hear the verdict of the jury as to whether Edward 8. Stokes was to die or be liberated. Long before the Court was called, Stokes, accom- panied oy his father, who had determined to be present when the fate of his son was to be decided, were in the ante-room of the Oyer and Terminer Court. Sheriff Brennan was present, together with Deputy Sheriff Shields and other oficials connected with the criminal jurisprudence of the city. The jury had been locked up all night, but they Were not without food, as many people imagined. The cooks of the Astor House had provided them ‘with the meats and vegetables and a dessert of the best quality. Three meals a day were sent to them, and there was no complaint but one from the twelve men. The law does not allow that beds and bedding should be brought into a court room, and the undecided men had to sleep on chairs and lounge on the judge’s desk for two days and nights. The jury were very much dissatisfied at being Jocked up 60 long, and in the jury room discus- sions on this point divided the interest with the @iderent ballots which were taken on the questions of murder, manslaughter or acquittal. With but three exceptions, all the men of the jury were married, and wanted to go home., Some few of these gentlemen had never been absent from their wives and children a night before_in their lives. Stokes, who had been paying thirty-five dollars a week for board in the Tombs, was anxious to hear a verdict. Yesterday he was dressed in a suit of white linen Guck—coat, vest and trousers being of the same material. ‘When he came into court he sat down in his easy, careless way, and looked at the jury a moment after ‘with the greatest anxiety. Mr. McKeon, his ardent counsellor, took a seat Deside Stokes and examined all the surroundings ‘with a careful eye. This little man has in this case proven his mettle so effectually against tremendous odds that hereafter none but the most credulous can doubt his strength and earnestness. Mr. Tre- main, his associate, the cool-headed lawyer and corrector of magistrates, sat on the right of his ¢lient, Mr. Daily and Mr. Townsend were also pres- ent. The District Attorney took a seat at an angle of the Judge's desk. Mr. Garvin was attired in Diack, and never looked better than on this occa- gion. The ladies were as numerous as ever in court, ‘and were in the same seats as usual. The female admirers of Fisk, 1n gay attire, and the ladies who Wanted to merely get a look at the face of Stokes gat side by side as usual and quarrelled recip- Tocally. The female jury, self-clected, did not take any ballots, unlike their masculine brothers inside the court room who were waiting to be loosed from confinement, but they were as fully deter- Mined to manifest thelr opinions as any jurors in ‘the land. On the jury there were two keepers of hat stores, one lace maker, a bookkeeper, a corn merchant, a dandy clerk, a tailor, @ stationer, a wool merchant, ® jeweller, an enamelier and a paper maker. They Were all respectable men and responsibly con- nected. The names of these jurors to be handed down to all time are as follows :— L bo bed Homberger, jeweiry, 383 Broadway. 2 erick Hogan, hats, 374 Bowery. 3. Bennet Williams, laces, 773 Broadway, 4. Nehemiah N. Cornish, wool, 60 Lispenard t. 6. ree F. Stone, bookkeeper, 23 Great Jones 6. Theodore Flamme, corn merchant, 23 Uni- versity place. 7. Jonn Edwin F. Bond, clerk, 261 Broadway. 8. Peter E. Hopkins, hats, 446 Broadway. 9 John H. Thompson, tailor, 508 Broadway. 10, Joun A. Lefferts, enameiler, 417 West Thirty- fourth street. 1L Henry C. Whittie, stationer, 653 Fighth av- enue. 12, John Tucker, paper maker, 313 East Forty- first street. At the moment just before the jury came in the Judge took his seat and looked all around the Court. Looking as he did he saw a sea of excited faces upturned to him, the great fountain of justice and of law. Looking to the left and away from the public and the lawyers and the Court officials, who ‘were scattered all over the room vainly endeavor. ing to quiet the morbid people, he saw twelve empty chairs, soon to be filled. He saw the green grass growing in the Park and the boughs of the scanty trees, the leaves hanging from them and moving with a slumberous midsummer breath. Looking still to the left, he saw seats occupied by prominent Erie men, who were ‘ethirst for a conviction, Mr. Fullerton came into Court to look at the Jury. He was close to the District Attorney. When the Jury marched in, one by one, they were ‘watched by the audience as @ cat watches a mouse. ‘There had been so many rumors in relation to the ‘Way that they stood upon a@ verdict that even if they had stated, by the mouth of the foreman, that it was the wish of the twelve that the Court should order the burning of New York city the spectators would have said to each other, “Well, after ali, they could not do any better.” ‘This time the jury did not look as they did on the Occasion when they came in to ask for Fisk's linen and clothing, and to know what time was neces- sary for premeditation. Then there was a fame of Dlood in some of the jurymen’s eyes, On Saturday daror No. Five and Juror No. Four and the Foreman not dare to Jurors No. Two and No. Twelve and faced the music. They had made up their minds when they heard the defence, and could not be changed. Yesterday, juror No. Seven, when he came in was very much frightened, and his splendid blonde whiskers were very much wilted by the two nights of unrest and weariness, with nothing to console him but cigars of a bad brand. Juror No. Nine, ®& quiet, sallow faced looking gentleman, was in evident good spirits, and took his seat as if he had performed his duty with whole heart, and jas- tice to prosecution and prisoner. Juror No. Four seemed most uneasy of all the twelve, he turned right and left in his seat and lookea at judge and prisener with a benumbed expression. Judge Ingaham, addressing the jury ina terse and measured manner, said, “I suppose, gentle- men, you have not agreed ?” Foreman (Mr. Myer Homburger)—‘“No, Your Honor, we cannot come to any agreement what- ever.” Judge Ingraham—‘Gentlemen, you have been kept together a proper time and I am satisfied that your disagreement must be on some matters ‘of principle which are material. After the length of time you have been here and con- sidering the state of the weather, it is proper for me that I shoulda discharge you, and you are, therefore, discharged. 1 deemed it necessary to keep you together for the time I have as the case is one of much magnitude and has occupied so much time that I thought it was not proper to dis- charge you. You are now discharged from farther attendance.” The moment that the foreman of the jury had de- livered his remarks every one in Court rose up to witness the behaviour of the prisoner. He seemed to take it quietly enough; but his counsel were ex- ceedingly rejoiced, and manifested thetr feeling by going to where he sut and shaking his hands warmly. The father of Stokes, a venerable old gentleman, displayed his feeling by clasping the hand of his son in a frantic manner. The people in Court poured over railings and chairs, and ran in every direction to get a look at the prisoner. A number of ladies desired to shake hands with him, but Sheriff Brennan and Deputy Shields escorted aim to the ante-room, and he was soon hidden from sight. Stokes expected to be acquitted, and did not manifest any great joy at the disagreement of the jury, although he expressed his thanks roundly and in hearty tones to the three gentlemen who had declared for his acguittal in the jury room. He said that it was hard that he should be kept in confinement again after his long and weary term of nearly seven months in the Tombs; but still he was regardful of the kindness shown to him by his friends and those who had been steadfast enough to regard the evidence instead of the wild cry of popu- lar prejudice. A short time after the discharge of the jury Stokes was escorted to a carriage by Sheriff Bren- nan and his deputies, who marched in solid file behind the prisoner. The Qourt House was crammed with policemen and spectators, and the former had made a passable lane through the ranks of the latter for Stokes. Not an utterance was made against the prisoner as he passed out through the great living mass of people and de- scended the lofty steps into Chambers street, where a carriage was in waiting for him. The crowd surged this way and that way, butno ex- pression of malice or hatred was heard. In fact, every one seemed to be glad that Stokes had got a respite, and he was pitied rather than contemned as he stepped into the carriage, with Shieids, Jarvis and Dempsey to escort him. In the Jury room, however, there was not mani- fested the peace and quietness which might be ex- pected to result from such a verdict, Five persons in disagreeing wanted to let the world know how they felt, and a HERALD reporter was present to re- cord their sayings and to chronicle their “display of feeling.” All the jurors agreed that there was not in their belief any premeditation of killing in Stokes’ mind when he saw Fisk on the, staixs, To the question puttothem by the HERaLp reporter they all an- swered in the same key. And yet seven of them were for murder by their own personal acknowl- edgment, two for manslaughter in the third de- gree and three for acquittal. A jury is agift to mankind, yet it is strange how seven men could be willing to convict of murder in the first degree; and yet every man whom the HERALD reporter spoke and in the jury room stated explicitly that he did not believe that Stokes meant to kill Fisk on the stairs of the Grand Central Hotel, and furthermore to muddle matters they could not see any evidence in the clothing shown to them as Fisk’s clothing of his having had a pistol when he was killed. None of the jurors would talk until Mr. Jacob Vaien- tine had been summoned to give them his views about. being interviewed on their ballots. He told them that there was no law to hinder them from speak- ing, but that they must be governed by their own judgment and discretion in the matter. The first man questioned had occupied the seat of the twelfth juror on the trial. He was Mr, Tucker, a well-known downtown merchant. Mr. Tucker observed :—‘Now, what amI to do in this matter? The reporter wants to know if I shal! give him the names of the men who voted for ac- quittal and why they did so." Whereupon Valen- tine replied:—“You can do as you please about that, Mr. Tucker; it is a matter for your own con- sideration and discretion.” “And,” said Mr. Tucker, “I won’t say anything.” Mr. Hamburger, a Jewish-looking man, re- marked :—‘‘Ah, we were seben fur confiction und fife far mansiaughter in the third degree.” “No, you were not,” said Mr. Tucker; “you were seven for conviction, three for acquittal and two for manslaughter.” At this stage Mr. Roderick Hogan came forward, with a fan in his hand, and looked at Mr. Cornish, while Mr. Bond at this moment continued to pre- sent a pale aspect, “We were polled four times,’ said Mr. Tucker after, “but I don’t like to say anything about this matter, Ihave been away from my’ family nearly three days, and I would like to go home. There are some young men here who can stay a little longer. I have my business and my family to at- tend to.” Mr. Roderick Hogan here remarked, “We were seven to five on the first poll. The seven were for murder in the first degree——” A number of Jurors—“We could not find any pre- meditation from the clothes. We could not state whether Fisk had @ pistol or not. There was no belief in our minds that Stokes did go into the hotel with the design to kill Fisk, That’s just what we quarrelied about.” This remark was made by seven or eight, and others came up and assented to it, “We have done the best we could under the cir- cumstances we were placed in,” observed Mr. Thompson, one of the jurors, ‘There was nothing definite from the Judge, and we didn’t know what to do.” Mr. Lefferts was one of the seven jurors who voted for a conviction. He was inclined to make & compromise with the three men for acquittal, if they would come over, but the three men steadily refused on the ground shat if there was no premedi- tation there was no murder. Mr. Hopkins, who has @ medical look, it is said voted three different times in as many different ways. The jury seemed dissatisfied with each other; but there were two men on theljury who would not change, and the other ten “obstinate” men had to give precedence to their strong will. And thus this great trial has ended, It is not possible that a jury will ever again be procured to try Stokes in this county, and the District Attorney acknowledged a8 much yesterday in conversation with @ gentleman who related the fact to feporter of the HERALD. It wiil be hard to find tweive men to face again a twenty-one days’ trial and the com- ments of the press in this city. Human nature is weak and likes to be let alone. The rumor that the counsel of Stokes were to apply for bail this morning for their client is untrue. Stokes re- mained in the Tombs yesterday and had a good sleep. He says that by advice of his counsel he must decline all interviews with reporters, but ad- mitted that he expected an open acquittal from the jury, A number of his relatives called upon fora week. This trial has been the greatest tri- umph ever won by John McKeon in any of his nu- A PEEP INTO THE JURY ROOM. fate cit A ‘What the Jurors Have to Say About the Doings Behind the Scenes, How the Ballots Were Taken and How the Deadlock Occurred. The disagreement of the jury in the Stokes case yesterday of course threw the general public into @n extremely inquisitive mood as to the sayings that were said and the doings that were done “‘be- hind the ecenes”’ in the jury room. Indeed, at first, in the absence of all definite information as to how the jury had stood at each balloting, the most absurd rumors were set afloat, such, for instance, as that which became quite current in uptown saloons, near the Hoffman House, that A “T038-UP” between three of the jury who were in favor of one Kind of verdict and two who were in favor of quite another kind, had led to the deadlock, which finally compelled the Judge to dismiss the jury entirely. Under the circumstances it was deemed best by a HERALD reporter (who, shortly after the jury were given their bye-bye, sallied out in search of gene- ralas well as special information concerning the agreement to disagree) to pay a visit to each of the jurors. The task was not an easy one. They had, one and all, become so heartily tired of the trial and everything that was in the remotest man- ner connected with it, that the mere men- tion, after they got home, of “jury,” “Stokes,’’ or “Fisk” was suficient to create a family riot. At least so said the wives of the married members. ‘The delicacy, not to say anything about the danger, of the reporter's mission can therefore be easily imagined, It must be said, however, that every one of the gentlemen was courteous in the extreme ‘and quite communicative when called upon, even though two or three, at the time of THE REPORTORIAL VISIT, were enjoying the luxury ofa bath and, with the ald of soap and coarse towels, endeavoring to get rid of the dust and dirt of the court and jury rooms and make “Richard himself again.” THE FIRST RALLOT. Mr. John £. F. Bond, who was the sixth juror chosen, was.found at his office in Broadway. He looked rather wornout, and, as he had a carpet bag in his hand at the time the reporter met him, it ls reasonable to suppose that he was about start- ing on a trip to the backwoods or somewhere else for the balance of the summer, where the jury sys- tem is not much in vogue, or ifin vogue, not often called into practice. “I understand, Mr. Bond,” said the reporter, after arather abrupt introduction, “that the jury stood seven for murder in the first degree to five for manslaughter in the third degree.” “That is correct, sir.”” “And I learn that they stood as follows:—For murder in the first degree :— Homberger, Bond, Williams, Hopkins, Cornish, Lefferts. Stone, For manslaughter in the third degree :— Hogan, Whittle, Flammé, Tucker.” Thompson, “You are right again.” “Was a ballot taken the moment you all fot into the jury room, after the Judge’s charge and before you began a general discussion of the caser’’ “We did; so as to see how we stood.” “And was the result as given above?” “No, not exactly. The ballot showed seven for murder in the first degree, two for manslaughter in the third de; , and three for aqulttal.” “THE THREE FOR ACQUITTAL were ‘Thompson, Whittle and Tucker?” oF sir. «What induced these three to join with the other | two who were for manslaughter in the third de- ec “Well, you see,after the first ballot there wasa good deal of discussion, and the question naturally arose ag to whether Fisk did really have a pistol or not. The discussion on this point became rather warm, and it was finally decided lo send for Fisk's clothes. Mr. Lefferts put them on, and in an instant every one became convinced, from the holes made by Stokes’ shots, that Fisk could not have had a pistol in his hand as described by Stokes.” This conviction once beyond removal from the minds of us all, another ballot was taken, and then the vote stood 7 to 5, as before described, Thomp- son, Whittle and Tucker joining with Hogan and Flamme for manslaughter in the third degree.” “And how stood THE OTHER BALLOTS that were taken after this?” “Just the same, 7 to 5. Neither side coula be con- vincea by the other that either was not right; and so the matter stood to the end.” “Then the seven who were for murder in the first degree remained to the last of the same opinion as to what verdict ought to be given?” “They did. Myself and the six others who on the first ballot voted for murder in the first degree be- came, during the discussions which followed, not only not shaken in our views, but all the more con- vinced that we were right.”” THE FIVE FOR MANSLAUGHTER. Mr. Theodore Flamme was the next juror called upon. “How did Saeed stand in the palloting?”” was the Teporter’s first query, as Mr. Flamme, fresh and blooming as a rose, came down from his bathroom with not the slightest sign of the trouble and labor of the last ten days visible upon his genial counte- nance. “I voted all along for manslaughter in the third degree.” ‘What bp ga differ from the seven who were in favor of murder in the first degree?” “f had many doubts in my mind, which were given rise to by certain portions of the evidence, which prevented me conscientiously joining with these seven. The words of Fisk—‘He's been too quick for me this time’—and the evidence of Henry, who swore that the pistol he saw in the hotel the night of the shooting was not the one produced in court, made me rather uncertain as to whether I should be justified in giving in my adhesion to mur- der in the first degree.” “Did you put any faith in the assertion of the prisoner that Fisk drew a pistol on him?” “Not after we had examined the clothes worn by the deceased at the time he was shot. After a thorough examination of the cape or cloak every one of us dismissed the idea from our minds that Fisk drew a pistol on Stokes, as the latter asserted in his evidence, for we saw that it was AN UTTER IMPOSSIBILITY for Fisk to have had his hands in the position de- scribed by Stokes and the bullets from Stokes’ rae to have penetrated the cloak the way they “Then what was it that led the seven for murder in the first degree to differ from you and the four who agreed with i, or you five to disagree with the seven. Put it either way, just as you like it,’’ THE QUESTION OF PREMEDITATION, “The turning point between us was simply this: Did Stokes, when he fired the two shots, intend to kill Fisk ? Did he premeditate murder? The seven were convinced he did, We were convinced he did ae rather, to put the matter more correctly, we had a serious doubt as _to whether he did or did not premeditate killing Fisk. Having that serious doubt, we gave the prisoner the benefit of it, as we were in duty bound to do.” “Were you all aware what the penalty for man- slaughter in the third degree is ¥”' “We were. You see the Court charged that we could not, under any circumstances, bring in a ver- dict of murder in the second degree, ang the next highest verdict we could give was mai ughter in the third degree. We believed the prisoner deserved eae for his act, but we did not believe that is act was murder in the first degree. Had we been at liberty to have given what verdict we saw fit, I know that the four who believed as I did and acted asIdid would have voted, as I would have voted, for murder in the second degree. Between murder in the firat degree and manslaughter in the third degree there was too wide a gulf to be bridged, and so you can readily see how strange it would have been for either party to have gone in a body over to the other.” A OOMPROMIBE THAT WAS REJECTED, “Did the seven gentlemen who were from the start for murder in the first degree at any time make offer to the five to compromise the verdict in some nd “They did.” «What was the compromise?” “Finding that we were determined to stick to our view of the case, they suggested that we might ba Roe de ang me oe of murder in } iret legree lendum recommending the pris- oner to the mercy of the Court.” : “What did the gentlemen in favor of manslaugh- ter do at this?” * me “They refused make compromise, simp!; because they felt that the recommendation ‘would amount to nothing.” “And go the two parties remained from the time Fisk’s clothes were examined in the jury room ‘until this me just as the, it Fae a morning } y stood at the second “Gallote were frequently taken, I pore, “Ballots were “Frequently ; wi i¢ same result.”? ‘note only difference of opinion between the seven on the one side and the five on the other was ‘the question of premeditation 7” “that was all After the examination of Fisk’s ‘a pistol on were removed, We felt satisfied that Fisk could not have drawn a pistol and his have been pierced as it was. course, this view of the matter once settled, the question of premeditation was the only thing WE COULD REALLY DIFFER ABOUT, we five, who believed there was no premedita- to kill on the part of Stokes, believed so con- scientiously and acted accordingly.” THE SOLE GROUND FOR AOCQUITTAL. Mr. Henry C. Whittle was next calied upon. “How you vote, Mr. Whittle’ was the first question put to him. “T voted at first for acquittal.” “On what ground? might I ask.” “Well, I rather inclined to the belief that Fisk had drawn @ pistol on Stokes, as the latter averred; and, in second place, I did not believe that Stokes when he fired intended to kill Fiak.”” “What made you change your opinion, or rather recede from your position in favor of acquittal to Manslaughter tn the third degree ?”” “When Fisk’s clothes were examined, and the cloak was put on one of the Jurymen, so that we could get a better idea of the deceased’s position if he did draw @ pistol when he saw Stokes, we one and all decided that the assertion that Fisk had drawn @ pistol was not sustained.” “And what did you do then ?? at when the next ballot was taken I voted with Measrs, Hogan and Flamme for manslaughter in the third degree, being convinced that Stokes did not premeditate the killing; that, in other words, when he fired he did not mean to kill Fisk.” THE FOREMAN’S STORY. The foreman, Meyer Homberger, a very intelligent German, was visited. He state: “When we went out of the Court room I proposed @ ballot right away to determine how we stood. The ballot was (referring to the original record before him) not galley, one; justifiable homicide, two; manslaugh- er in the third degree, two; murder in the first dogree, seven. After the baliot Hogan was the first to speak. He said he thought the shooting was done in the heat of passion, Thompson thought Stokes was justified in killing Fisk. I then asked Whittle’s opinion, and he to be the most few saw on a4 jury. He id not seem to know what justiflabie homicide meant, He finaily said he would vote as Mr. Hogan. r an inter- change of views Mr. Tucker consented to vote for manslaughter in the third degree, The second ballot was then taken. [Ballot already given in Mr. Bond’s statement.) The subsequent ballots showed the same result. Flamme and Whittle afterwards said they would have voted for murder in the first degree if there had been any hope of ‘Thompson, Tucker and Hogan doing so. From the conversation I think Hogan would have voted for murder in the second degree if we could have ren- dered it according to the law.” “Then the final ballot stood as you have given it boa ab for manslaughter and seven for mur- jer “Precisely. We found it useless to ballot, Some said Hogan and Tucker wotild have voted for murder if Thompson had not held out. At one time on Sun- Be we proposed to send for Judge Ingraham and ask if we could not record a verdict of murder in the second degree; but Mr. Hogan said it was use- less, that we could not agree,” “But were ALL IN FAVOR OF PUNISHMENT FINALLY 9?” “Yes, all; we only differed as to the severity of it. Some were very settled in their convictions that | the shooting was not premeditated until the men | accidentally met on the stairs.” Mr. Tucker was found at his residence in East | Forty-first street. | “Mr, Tucker,’ sald the reporter, “you were one | ofthe gentlemen on the Stokes jury Who was orig nally in favor of acquittal; can you tell me why you a0 voted??? “Certainly, sir. I had grave doubts about the justification for the shone and I wanted the Judge's charge reviewed, mn the first ballot 1 voted ‘justifiable homicide,’ on the ground that I believe’ Fisk had a pistol on his person. On the next ballot, after more careful cousideration, I went for beg yey ote in the third degree.’ ” “Was that after Fisk’s clothes were examined by jury??? “I do not recollect now. The twelve jurors came to the conclusion that as far as they could sec by the evidence up to the moment of the shooting it ‘Was not premeditated, and the question in their mind was where to draw the line—how long the shooting must be premeditated to constitute mur- der, Vhen it came to that very fine point I thought it impossible for the human mind to draw | @ parallel and decide whether the shooting was or Was not premeditated. That was one of the rea- | sons I asked the Judge during the trial about the | length of time @ man should be held re- | sponsible, Lrec that the Judge and coun- sei asked us to give the prisoner THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT, andTdid so. I thought if the law permitted it we | might agree on a verdict of murder in the second degree. It was too much of a jump from man- eh in the third degree for some ot the jurors e. Mr. Roderick Hogan was visited and stated in substance that after the second ballot the three for acquittal consented to manslaughter, Each one expressed his views freely in speeches, 0’ about ten minutes, with the gzeption of one, who talked very long, , After that re was the change that resulted in those for manslaughter and acquittal whiting. The subject finally settled down and the discussion ceased. We gave THE MEDICAL TESTIMONY ng consideration at all. That was not at all complimentary to the doc- ors. ; but such is the fact; nor did we consider the question of premeditation previous to the en- counter on the stairs. All believed the meeting was accidental. The whole question hinged on whether there was premeditation on the instant of the ipoting.. Seven thought so and five fett other- wise—that the shooting was done by Stokes on the spur of the moment, when he had suddenly met @iman he had looked upon as a great enemy, who, he wapversd, was a dangerous man; for if he had not then a pistol the evidence shows he was in the habit of carrying one. Some of the jury thought Fisk had a pistol on the day in question, others that he had not. From the testimony of | Stokes, Dr. Trippler, Henry, the parlor man, and the coachman, Moore, some of the jurors thought he was armed.” “Did the examination of the clothes affect the change in the minds of those who were for acquit- ¢ “Some did examine Fisk’s clothes and it may have influenced some. Ithink it did Thompson. My view was that the shooting was done on THE SPUR OF THE MOMENT,” “Do you think the jury could have united on a verdict of murder in the second degree ? The fore- man thinks you were inclined that way.” “No, no; I would have gone for manslaughter in the third degree; not murder. Some one of the jurors wanted to ask the Court if such a verdict could be rendered, but the idea was abandoned.”” “Do you think any of those in favor of a verdict of murder would have compromised on manslaugh- ter in the second degree *”” “Yes, as far as I can judge, two would have done so to get aconviction. Some were afraid the case would be removed for trial to the country if we did not agree, and it would be woe for the prisoner, Two or three of those murder stated they had not settled convictions until the Judge said premeditation could be formed on the instant. ‘This seemed to be the turning point with them.” ALL OF A KIND. Mr. Bennett Williams and Mr. Lefferts, who were among the seven in favor of murder. in the first degree, tell the same pest! as Mr. Bond, who voted as they did about the sayings and doings behind the scenes; and Mr. Thompson, who was one of the five in favor of manslaughter in the third degree, makes the same statement as Mr. Flammé and the three who voted as they did. Several of the jurors could not be found and so their statements could not be obtained. THE COMFORTS OF THE JURY LOCK-UP. It is only necessary to add that the jurymen say they all had about as much sleep from Saturday night to Monday morning as most men enjoy on hard benches, and who are not accustomed to fats RS it. “Did you have all you wanted to eat?” asked the reporter of one of them, “Oh! yes; the Astor House furnished us all we wanted.” “Plenty to drink also?” “Well, I don’t know about that,” said the jury- man; “I don’t know what kind of drinkers we had on the jury, all told; but, fora joke yesterday, we ordered @ bottle of wine, and ‘were rather astonished on finding the order filled a few minutes afterwards.”” “Of course the bottle was not opened 1” “Oh! dear no,” was the juryman’s reply, as he put his finger to the side of his nose in a Knowing ‘way and stepped into his dining room to enjoy his first dinner with his family since the 4th, CAUSES CELEBRES. ‘Will Stokes Be Bailed Out While Awaiting a Second Trialt—Parallel Cases—The Italian Can- cemi, Polly Bodine and the Buckhout Trials—Probable Change of Venue— An Incident in the Burdell- Canningham Case, ‘The trial of Edward 8. Stokes for the murder of James Fisk, Jr., on the sixth day of January last, at the Grand Central Hotel in this city, will pass into history a8 one of the causes célébres of these actual examination of witnesses testifying to what they knew of the shooting, the alleged prowlers lying in wait, and the hostile feeling entertained by the prisoner against Fisk on the part of the prose- cution, and the threats as alleged made by Fisk against Stokes, the daily and hourly danger the the latter, his reason therefor testified to on the defence, and the prisoner's own statement ot an accidental and not premeditnted meeting and the shooting in self-defence have all been detailed in in each day's report during the trial. No similar case for many years has excited such Widespread = public attention and inter. times. The result of the trial, after eighteen days’ greed, the prisoner be! cemi HERALD 1e latter was in from dtrect or indirect assault from | St#te that the jurors summoned, but not adm ten o'elook, ne wn for Cunningham for the murder of Doctor Burdell. The jury on the first disagreement in the Cancemi the fina) catastrophe, the shooting and the death of Fisk, the parties had brought their quarrels into the Courts until they had become ad nauseum. But it was little thought during the long contro- versy that ensued that a tragedy so terrible was to follow on the heels of the oil refinery and Jose Mansfield comedy. Fisk had been for years @ myth or a sphinx to the general public. AS PRINCE OF ERIB he was to the general public a person to wonder at and talk about; as the commodore of the splendid fleet of boats that plied up the waters of the Sound, with their gorgeous fittings, and the Plymouth Rock, that floating palace with unexcetled music on board, that conveyed New Yorkers from the city to Long Branch through the summer months, and a8 colonel of the Ninth regiment, he was becoming one of the most generally known men in the city. Stokes in his connection with the living Fisk was also becoming familiar to the general public, As one of the uptown “YOUNG BLOODS” he was well known to a large circle of kindred sports; but as the rival of Fisk and his opponent in the courts as the champion of Josie Mansfeld he, too, was also, if not a man of note, one a good deal spoken of and easily recognized in the streets. In connection with the dead Fisk he has made his name notorious in the annalsof our criminal courts for all time. ‘ THE RESULT OF THE TRIAL yesterday, in which the best information given us shows that seven of the jury were for conviction of the capital offence and five for the minor offence of manslaughter in the third degree, raises the ques- tion among the uninitiated as to whether STOKES SHALL BE BAILED OR REMAIN IN PRISON to await another trial. Upon this point there is no special legislation and no actual precedents to make either act positive or imperative. In this case, according to the tally given of the jury at their return to the Court, though not strictly om- cial, it appears that seven were for conviction. ‘This is a majority of the jury, and may prove sufl- cient cause to the District Attorney to hold the ac- cused m person between this time and the time that maybe fixed upon for anew trial, Under similar circumstances the party charged has gen- erally been HELD FOR TRIAL WITHOUT BAIt. There are instances, even where the oifence com- mitted was not capital, when the accused, on disa- greement of a jury, has been held without ball fora second trial, If the prosecuting officer in such a case refuses bail it would hardly follow that in a murder case greater laxity of rule would be ad- mitted, But, as before stated, there is no special legislation provided and no precedent one way or the other. It is left to the prosecnting officer for the people to determine whether the application for bail to the Court be sanctioned and aliowed on his part or opposed by him. ‘he courts are gov- erned entirely by the action of the prosecuting officer in this regard, The District Attorney, dh i j ent this —_Fisk-Stokes Before Wis revive wietes: Sereree coe 8y Ce him and greetea him warmly. He thanked them ia ve ha’ previoway auto Saks bari ara est «as case. ook at the prisoner as they | all round and took the first sound sleep he has had of course, will be governed by his own Knowledge of all the facts in the case—the knowledge gained b: him of the main points of a defence which, if he had known before, he could probably have upset, or may think he can, by some information which "he could. not use on the first trial, but which would be available on a second; by the public feeling as to the crime itself and the actor or actors in it. All these go to determine the mind of the public prosecutor and the Court’s in granting or withholding bail from a person charged with the serlous offence of murder. ‘he amount of bailis also determined by the Dis- trict Attorney, though the Conrts, in their discre- tion, have not fixed the amount at the maximum figure claimed for by the prosecution, In criminal cases the Courts here are guided by what 18 called the com of England, BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS State such parts of the common law of England, as were in force in the y of New York on the Joth day of Apri constitution of 17 were by th coustitution, ex had been repealed or altered or were repugnant to the constitution, continued as the law o1 this State, subject to such alterations as the Legislature should make concern- ing the same, The colonists have been considered as bringing with them only such parts of the law of the mother country as were applicable to their own situation; and the particular laws and customs of special districts of England were, therelore, never adopted by them. In crim- inal cases, therefore, our Courts follow the laws, rulings and precedents of the English Courts in like instances, There the precedent maintains that in a capital offence, where the » MAJORITY OF ‘A JURY are in favor of conviction, the prisoner is held for retrial, without bail. The Judges of Assize were in the habit of sending recalcitrant or disagreeing Juries to some lone part on the verge of the county, under the stricvest surveillance, depriving them of all but su/ficient nourishment to maintain Ife, and perhaps of all means of light through the weary night but what a RUSHLIGHT would afford them. In some cases, where the treat- ment failed in its effect and juries had to be dis- charged, special commissions have been appointed to try the accused. This was only resorted to when public feeling had been greatly aroused by THE ATROCITY OF THE SINGLE CRIME ITSELF, or where crime of such a character was rife in any articular county or locality. But while specula- ion is at work as regards the action of District Attorney Garvin In the case of the disagreement of the jury and the probable bailing out or being held for another trial without bail, we can state here that without bail STOKES WILL BE HELD and will be put upon a second trial in the October term, The question is, Will the venue be changed? Upon the two points—the holding for trial without bail and the change of venue—we have one notable precedent in the case of the people of this State against POLLY BODINE, tried on Staten Island, Richmond county, before Judge Edmonds in 1844." Polly or Mary Bodine was arraigned on five indictments—one for the murder of her brother's wife and of his child; for arson of her inhabited dwelling house ; for burglary, and for having received stolen goods. . She was tried on one of the indictments for mur- der in the county of Richmond, and the jury, not agreeing, were discharged. Another “attempt TO TRY HER was made on the same indictment tn that county, which failed because of the impractibility of ob- taining an indifferent jury, The indictments, four in all, were removed into the Supreme Court, and Sy that Court sent down to the New York Circuit to be tried. On the 20tn day of March, 1845, the pris- oner was placed at the bar to be tried on an in- dictment for the MURDER OF EMELINE HOUSEMAN. The prisoner, by counsel, objected that the said Court had no futhority to try the issue, upon the ‘ound that the case had been removed from the yer and Terminer of the county of Richmond,to the Supreme Court by a orart issued on the part of the - prosecution and _ al- lowed by the Circuit Judge of the First Circuit; that the allowance of the said writ of certiorart by a Circuit Judge was illegal and void, and that the said issue was not depending in the Supreme Court, whereupon the District Attorney of the county of Ricnmond produced and filed in open court a certified copy of a rule of the Supreme Court in the words following :— Indictment for the murder of Emeline House- man. Indictment for the murder of Ann Eliza House- man. Indictment for burglary. Indictmeat for receiving stolen goods, Indictment for arson. A motion was made to change the 1 pend of trial of the prisoner upon these several indictments, and that the body of the said Mary Bodine be commit- ted to the custody of the Sheriff of the ctty and pati he New York until the said indictments have been held or disposed of according to law, or until the further order of the Court, ie motion was overruled and the empaneliing of a jury to try | the case was proceeded with; but. AVTEK THREE WEEKS’ EFFORT TO OBTAIN A JURY, and not succeeding therein, counsel for the prisoner stated that now a reasonable effort to ob- tain a jury had failed; and, as THE STATE OF PUBLIC PEELING, as disclosea by the examination of the jurors, just fied them in believing that the diMculties in ob ing @ jury were on the increase, they moved Court to suspend the trial and discharge the jury, and grant them the necessary certificate to lay be- fore the Supreme Court in’ order to procure a change of venue. ‘The venue was afterwards changed to the county of Orange, where the prisoner was tried and ACQUITTED OF THE CHARGE OF MURDER. were then entered on the other indictments, and she was set at liberty. During ail this time the prisoner was held in close custody, all applications for bail being denied by the Court. The case of the ITALIAN, CANCEMT, may be remembered. He was tried before Judge Roosevelt, in this city, for the murder of policeman Eugene Anderson, and three times the jury disa- held in close confinement ween the dates of extending over from Se, tember, 1867, to December, 1858. He escaped halter éventually, the verdict being manslaughter in the first degree. AN INCIDENT—THE BURDRLL-CUNNINGRAM CASE. At the final sdjournment of the Court in the Can- Judge Roosevelt, as reported in the that date, requested thi re be sworn try the indictment ist Can- trial stood aa the Stokes jury are supposed to have stood—seven for conviction of the capital offence and five for mansiaughter. ‘THE BCCKHOUT CASR, or Sleepy Hollow tragedy, is one, however, more to the point. All the of that double, circumstances and attempt at triple, murder are familiar to the Over two years d from his friend and guest dead, on the first day of January, 1870, in his (Buckhout’s) Lg maimed and disfigured for life young Randall, an iminediately afterwards beat oat his wife’s brains with the double-barreled gun he had done such fatal and deplorable havoc with upon the Randalls. Three times he was put upon his trial at White Plains, the defence being insanity. The prosecution was ‘however, not to be foi and, though justice slept for a time, the rosecution neither changed the venue nor tho ine of the prosecution until they had secured twelve jurors who were determined that, 80 far ag their verdict Went, justice should be done, snd Buckhout was eventually executed, All this time he was kept in close confinement, all applications for bail being denied. IN THE CASE OF FANNY HYDE, whose trial took place afew months ago in Brook- lyn for the marder of Watson, the jury disagreed, and she awaits a new trial—on bail to be sure. But in this case ten of the jury were for acquittal, only two holding 1t out for conviction. Specniation, after all, and the searching out of precedents for the action of PROSECUTING OFFICERS AND COURTS. in murder trials, becomes in this (Stokes) case Um necessary, as the District Attorney is determined to hold ‘the accused for trial without ball. ‘The probabilities are that, in view of the reat expense of holding another protracted trial in this city, with the difficulty of securing an ‘in- digerent” jury on murder trials, as particulart; seen in this and the McFarland case, the District Attorney will move for ‘A CHANGE OF VENUE to some other county, as was done in the Ranma 4 Bodine case, where, alter three weeks, they fale to get a jury in this county. ‘he long econy of the trial is, however, over for the present, and people can turn their thoughts to more pleasant subjects on reading the HERALD each: morning than the Stokes-Fisk murder, GENERAL GRANT'S MOVEMENTS. The President Entertaining Yis Old Time Friends—General Porter on the Chappaqua Chief—Leading Democrats for Grant. LONG BRANCH, July 15, 1872. ‘The Branch was lonely, not to say solemn, to-day. President Grant did not even “walk on the terrace this morning,” nor did any member of the Prest- dential family appear outside of the railings of the Presidential cottage. About one o'clock, however, the Presidential carriage and brass-mounted horses and liveried servants drove down from the rail- way station, loaded with a number of ladies and gentlemen who were evidently new to the Braneb. They proved to be a number—a large number—of OLD FRIENDS OF THE PRESIDENT, who came all the way from Missouri to pay their respects to the gentleman whom they had privately and personally elected to be the occupant of the White House for the ensuing four years. They were heartily received by the President and Mrs. Grant, and were entertained at the Long Branch’ White House—which is not being painted white, notwithstanding contrary rumors—until late in the evening. Neither the President nor Mrs. Grant Was visiMte to anybody during the stay of the dis- tinguished Missourians. Strange to say, nobody at the Branch, not even the few newspaper repre- sentatives, were able to oscertain the names of THE HONORED PARTY. The list, however, was read over to the HERALD representative, but he could fix on no one name that was worth asking the general reader to re- member. The whole party broke mp rather early in the evening, the President being obliged to go to Washington early to-moriow on a piece of oificial business that could not be called important, From the Presidential cottage I drove to the much handsomer cottage of General Porter. The youthiul-looking General was seated in the vi > @a in front of his imposing frame house, and received the HERALD representative, who opened the conversation by expressing his surprise that General Grant was not industriously working up his CHANCES FOR RE-ELECTION, after the untiring manner of the Sage of Chappae qua, The General scornfully deprecated what he considered the undignified and demagogic dodges of Horace Greeley, and said that if his tactics would insure an election the American people would un- doubtedly be to blame, as they would be entirely responsible, There were no trees, he said, to be chopped around Long Branch, and even if there were he did not believe General Grant would he demagogue enough to go and chop them for the amusement of curlosity seekers. Of the prospects of Gerieral Grant's re-election General Porter had no#onbdt, He has Po reason to think, he says, that the democrats 3 THOROUGHLY DISGUSTED with the nomination of Horace Greeley. “We have received several letters,” said General Porter, “from leading democrats—no mere _ political soldiers of fortune, but demodérats of great stand- ing and life-long reputation—who have announced tl intention of taking the stump for ‘ant against Greeley, We cannot let their uames’’—this in reply to a direct question of mine—“be known to the general public just now; but they will be known in a few days, and the Herap will have a full list of them before they start on their self-im- ed mission.” f Here the rain came down, scarcely giving time to the HEekaLD representative to get to his hotel without a decent open-coach drenching. THE HERALD AND DR. LIVINGSTONE. vo oel Ts {From the Oxford (Ala.) Chronicle, July 11.) That the great African explorer has at last been discovered admits of no doubt, and the honor of that discovery is entirely due to an American mes- senger of an American journal, England, the home of Dr. Livingstone, had abandoned him to the jun- gies of Central Africa and the terra incognita of the Mountains of the Moon, and it is not certain had the HERALD rescuer not reached out his arm of Salvation whether the bones of the great adven- turer would not now be bleaching amid the acacia groves of the elephant and cameleopard. (From the Sait Lake Herald, July 10.) The New YorK HERALD of July 2 contains the first letter from Stanley, chief of the HERALD ex- ploring expedition in search of Dr. Livingstone. The remarkable feature of this expedition is that while the scientific world was wondering whether Dr. Livingstone still lived or had fallen a victim to his adventurous spirit, and while a slow attempt was being made in.England to fit out an expedi- tion with much wrangling and no inconsiderable exhibition of parsimony, @ single American journal solved the problem by sending at its own cost an exploring party and finding the great African traveller. That England should first learn of the fall of Magdala before its troops, through a New York HERALD correspondent, has been often repeated, and was an illustration of American journalistic enterprise not confined to one journal. And this Jast triumph py the HeraLp shows again that nothing ts too dificult to be attempted and few obstacles that cannot be overcome in the great work of gathering news and keeping the world tn- ormed of what {a passing in the world. {From the Brooklyn Heruld, July 13.) ‘The London papers praise our contemporary the New York HERALD, for ite enterprise and lavish- ness of expenditure in searching for and finding out the African explorer, Dr. Livingstone. They could certainly do no less, The HERALD has, in this mat- ter, seemingly capped the climax, beaten every other paper, and proved that private means directed to a certain end will accomplish objects which even governments are afraid to attempt, LIBBIE GARRABRANT IN STATE PRISON. Yesterday the Paterson murderess arrived at the New Jersey State Prison and commenced her life servitude. She appears to be in per fect health and unconcerned at her fate, which, according to all human calcula. tion, will be an imprisonment for many, many years. She does not look like one that will rapidly “shuMe off this mortal coil’ by sickness, and the late action of the Court of Pardons in her case gives no hope of future pardon. The first few hours in the female portion of the State Prison may be pleasant, but there comes the terrible monotony—one day succeeding another, and yea every day alike ; one ceaseless round of daily dui and that for life, And yet at first sight the female department of the State Prison looks by no means uncomfortable. It is kept es lously clean, and is comparatively silent, save th whirr of a few sewing machines. The lynx-eyed matron detects the first signs of disorder. Outside the de ent is @ flower- garden in which pris- oners pe, ee eae ae or } The garden is surrounded by a very high stone wall, which shuts the Yas el from the busy world, and here 1s. the future home of Libbie Garrabrant. Yesterday afternoon Gasper Kasted, Edward Flood, Edward Wrignt, Edward Henderson and Pat, Campbell were arrested for rescuing two fe- males from Biackwell’s Isiand. They were locked up in the Twenty-third vrecinels