Jasper County Democrat, Volume 9, Number 12, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 23 June 1906 — “TOM' NOW IN THE PENITENTIARY. [ARTICLE]

“TOM' NOW IN THE PENITENTIARY.

Found Guilty of Embezzlement, While “Old Mac” Is Acquitted.

HE TAKES MATTER PHILOSOPHICALLY !* 1 • ‘ - -.s. U •' —: i ~ - And Will Make No Appeal—-Is Now a Very Penitent flan.

END OF A NOTED BANK TRIAL. Eleven Jurors Voted to Convict Both Defendants, While One Held Out Twenty Hours For Acquittal. The jury in the McCoy trial brought in a verdict at 2:25 p. m. Saturday after over 20 hours deliberation. The verdict was acquittal for Alfred McCoy and conviction for “Tom.’’ We are told that a verdict of guilty would have been returned in ten minutes had it not been for juror M. M. Byroads of near Wolcott, who was the only one of the twelve' men who voted for acquittal. Byroads is 35 years old and is reported to have testified when examined as a juror that he had never sat on a jury before. Qe is said to have a jail record in White county. After working with Byroads from Friday evening to Saturday afternoon he agreed to a verdict of gnilty for “Tom” and acquittal for Alfred McCoy. It is reported that some of the other jurors have since stated that they feared he would go back on his verdict after it had been agreed upon, and when Mr. McHugh polled the jury he asked each man individually, we are told, “Is this your verdict, Mr. ,” calling the juror by name. On reaching the man who held out twenty hours for acquittal, he is reported to have asked. “Was-this your veidict, Mr, Byroads?” who responded “yes.” “Is it your verdict now?” the attorney is reported to have asked, looking the juror squarely in the eye. The latter is said to have shifted a little in bis seat and responded, “yes.’" This juror is the only one to whom the question was twice asked, it is said, and those who beard it are wondering why things were thusly. Neither of the McCoy women were in the court room when the verdict was returned. “Tom” took the verdict coolly, although he had no doubt nerved himself for the ordeal. The old man was more affected, and cried some. Contrary to the procedure in the Sherrick case 'at Indianapolis, “Tom” was not remanded to the custody of the sheriff pending the motion for a new trial, the State’s attorneys not asking that this be done. He went to Lafayette Saturday night and spent Sunday there, returning to Monticello Monday morning with his attorneys who were preparing their motion for a new trial. After making all preparations for pleading their motion for a new trial, defendants’ attorneys withdrew the motion and Judge Farber pronounced the sentence, fining “Tom” $96, double the amount embezzled from J. H. Cox, and sentencing him to the penitentiary for a period of from one to three years, the penalty invoked by law for embezzelement. “Old Mac” was discharged and has gone to Chicago, where he will reside and expects to seoure a position with Wood Bros., be stated, a stock yards com mission firm with whom he has had considerable dealings for the last 35 years. After sentence was passed “Tom,” in the custody of the sheriff was taken to Lafayette where he bid bis family good-by and closed up his business affairs there. Wednesday mornißg- he went to Hammond and Chicago with his attorney and the sheriff and closed

up some business matters, and Thursday afternoon was taken to the penitentiary. Latest reports say that it is expected he will be given a clerical position. He can be paroled after on& year, on good behavidr, but the sentence will hang over him for the full three years, and if paroled he must make regular reports to the prison authorities or board of pardons. The withdrawal of the motion for a new trial means that no appeal or further fight against the sentence will be made, and it is now asserted that his attorneys wanted “Tom” to plead guilty soon after the trial begun and throw himself on the mercy of the court, but he refused to do so. The defendant was quite penitent after he became resigned to his fate, and said that be cherished no animosity against the people of Rensselaer who had testified against him. It was thought perhaps an agreement had been made with the State’s attorneys to dismiss the other fifteen indictments still pending, but this is denied, and they will still hold over them and can be poshed at any time, and so far as the old man’s case is concerned, it is likely they will be. The general opinion here is that the elder McCoy was just as guilty, if not more so, than “Tom,” and there is considerable criticism of Deputy Prosecutor Leopold’s argument to the jury. After apologizing for appearing for the State, Moee said: “I have known Alfred McCoy since I was a boy, and he was my friend. I have traveled all over Jasper county with him and when he was sick I took delicacies to him. I have been the guest of Thomas J. McCoy at his home many times. In that awful disaster at Chicago, two and a half years ago, the terrible Iroquois Theatre fire, my sister was killed and ih that hour of sorrow Mrs. Thomas J. McCoy was the first at my house and the last to leave it."

Mose has campaigned over Jasper county with A. MoCoy and followed his sheepskin band, of course. Suppose Mrs. T. J. Mcr Coy was so sympathetic in the great affliction of the Leopolds. Why was she so? Mr. Leopold senior is a wealthy man and had much money to deposit, and when the McCoy bank failed he had SB,8000 deposited there! There were many others to whom the McCoys were very attentive and took up and made much ofp-but every last one of the people whom they noticed or banqueted either had money to deposit or had expectations of having some. Had the same calamity have befallen any other family in Rensselaer in moderate circumstances or who had no money to deposit in bank, or expectations of having any soon, the McCoys’ sympathy would have been conspicuous only by its absence. This is a well known faot to every resident of Rensselaer. Proceeding further, Moee said: “If I was a member of this jury I would say in my verdict that ‘we, the jury, find the defendant, Alfred McCoy, guilty as charged in the indictment and assess his fine at blank dollars.' I would say ‘we, the jury, find the defendant, Thomas J. McCoy, guilty as charged in the indictment and that his age is fifty years.’ ’’ The meaning of it was that the deputy prosecutor asked the jury to send Thomas I. McCoy to Slate prison and let his father go with a fine. Here was one of the State’s atterneys asking for the practical acquital of one of defendants, and the one for whom there is at this time the least sympathy in Rensselaer, for many people believe that had Alfred McCoy allowed his wife to sign over her interest

in the Jordan tp„ lands, T. J. McCoy would also have had his wife do the same. “Tom” was sporty, reckless and evidently gave no thought of what the result might be. The money was there and he helped himself to it, as did his father, but there are but few here who really believe that he ever deliberately intended to defraud anyone. With the old man it was different, and his abuse of aod cursing everyone who criticised their banking methods after the failure and of those whose testimony — while the actual not favorable to the McCoys, lost him the last spark of sympathy that may have been felt for him here. He reared his son “Tom,” and to a great extent is responsible for his being a spendthrift, the same as the latter is for the conduct of his own son Taylor. If Mr. Leopold wanted to plead for the defendants he ought to have got on that side of the case in the first place. The elder Mrs. McCoy took the conviction of her son very hard, and for a day or two is reported to haye eaten nothing and is greiving greatly over the matter. Of coarse it is a terrible thing for a mother to see her son go to the penitentiary, bat thousands of other mothers, good mothers, too, have had this fearful ordeal to pass through, and The Democrat sympathizes with all of them—rich and poor—who are by circumstances beyond their control compelled to undergo such an ordeal. This case occupied six weeks, the testimony aggregated 5,000 pages, or 1,750,000 wools, 200 exhibits were made, the oath was administered 235 times besides two affirmations, the jurors were twice sworn and there were 160 talesmen examined. The attorneys in the closing argument occupied 16 hours and uttered 78,000 words, each lawyer averaging 150 words per minute. Judge Farber’s instructions were of 3,000 words. The expense of the jury was about $1 ,000, and total costs of the trial j to Jasper county exclusive of indictments and attorneys’ foes is about 11,600. The grand total of costs to this county is probably about $3,000.