PATRICK GALVIN CASE

Cortland Semi-Weekly Standard, Friday, July 1, 1898.

THE GALVIN CASE.

A JURY SECURED AFTER SIXTEEN HOURS’ HARD WORK.

Only One Man of the Original Panel Left After the Jury Was Sworn—The Jurors Are Abner Harrington, Adelbert A. Sprague, L. C. Greenwood, William Olds, Milo Homer, Frank Tarbell, John L. Smith, Eugene Maine, William Martin, Norman Bailey, Stephen H. Bouton and Homer Smith.

   It was just 2 o’clock Monday afternoon when court was opened at the courthouse by Crier G. S. Van Hoesen and District Attorney Edwin Duffey moved the trial of the case of The People vs. Patrick Galvin. The courthouse was packed to the doors, standing room being at a premium.

   The roll of trial jurors was called by Deputy County Clerk S. K. Jones. A special panel of 154 jurors had been summoned, including residents of the various towns of the county, and representing all vocations from bank cashier to sexton. All but five men answered to their names and they were out of town.

   After rollcall [sic] Judge Lyon asked all those jurors to appear before him who thought they had a reasonable and valid excuse for not serving upon the jury. He warned them, however, that their excuse must be a valid one. Inconvenience would be no excuse. It was inconvenient to hold court, but the defendant is entitled to a trial. Notwithstanding the Judge’s injunction no less than thirty of those on the list appeared before him and the following were excused: Edward Alley, Cortland; Charles Antisdel, Cortlandville; Edwin J. Boekes, Homer; N. L. Cogswell, Cortland; Frank L. Cook, Cincinnatus; Lewis H. Corning, Homer; George D. Daniels, Homer; Bert Givens, Virgil; Henry Hatfield, Cortland; Duray Hilsinger, Marathon; Horace Hiscock, Preble; Melvin Miller, Virgil; Austin Mooney, Willet; Thomas Park, Cortlandville; R. Wilston Rice, Homer; Adelbert Shattuck, Homer; Arthur F. Stilson, Cortland; Thomas E. Story, Homer; Miles Terrill, Cortlandville; F. C. Topping, Cortlandville; Wesley J. Towne, Homer; John White, Cortland; James Wright, Freetown. The excuses differed widely in character. Some were for age, and that of course was honored at once. One man had been on the grand jury which indicted Galvin and that removed him.

   At 3:15 Judge Lyon announced the impaneling of the jury. Clerk of the Court Jones announced to the prisoner his privilege of challenge.

   The drawing of a jury is by no means a simple and unimportant matter when a man’s life is to be left in their hands. To those unfamiliar with the procedure in the selection of jury a word concerning it may be of interest.

   The prosecution and defense each have the right to examine the juror before acceptance. If the juror proves satisfactory to both he is sworn and becomes a juror in the trial at bar. But if he proves unsatisfactory to either party they may challenge his right to sit.

   There are two classes of challenge known as general and particular. Under the class of general challenges would be found such objections to the juror as insanity, want of sufficient mental capacity or former conviction of an infamous crime.

   Particular challenges are those in which rejection of the juror as a right is claimed on the ground of prejudice. Prejudice is of two kinds: First that prejudice which a juror may entertain against the infliction of the death penalty and second that prejudice which arises from a previously formed opinion or business or blood relation with parties or attorneys to the action.

   If upon any of these grounds it appears on examination that the juror is unqualified to sit, he will be dismissed by the court. If the court refuses to allow the challenge the parties may then resort to peremptory challenges which allow the rejection of jurors without reason or for reasons other than those recognized by law as rendering a juror unqualified. In a trial for murder both prosecution and defense are each allowed thirty peremptory challenges.

   The first juror called was Wesley Chrysler who was examined by Hon. O. U. Kellogg, counsel for the prosecution as to competency and was accepted by them after Attorney John Courtney examined the jurors for the defense. The juror was asked as to his ability to give a fair decision in the case in which the People of the State of New York are plaintiff and Patrick Galvin is defendant. The examination of the juror covered in general way his past life, occupation and residence, his acquaintance or relation to the defendant, also as to whether the juror had business relations with the attorneys in the case. The juror was also asked whether he had heard or read anything concerning the case. He replied he had only read the account at the time published in the Cortland Standard. He was asked by attorneys on both sides if the account which he had read would prevent his rendering a fair and impartial verdict in the case. He answered that he thought it would not. The juror was excused by defense.

   The next juror called was Reuben P. Fish of Marathon. Upon examination he was accepted by the prosecution but excused by the defense.

   Abner Harrington of Cincinnatus, farmer, was accepted by prosecution and defense. Upon acceptance by both parties he was sworn. Thirty minutes was consumed in getting the first juror.

   Adelbert A. Sprague of Cortland, a hay dealer, was the next juror called. He had read the account in the Cortland Standard. He was accepted by prosecution and accepted by defense, and sworn.

   Edgar Pease of Cuyler next called. Read the account in The Standard and had talked with one Galvin in reference to the case since he was summoned and he thought that he could not render a fair and impartial verdict and was dismissed by the court.

   L. C. Greenwood, farmer, of Cortlandville was accepted by prosecution and defense.

   Anthony Nix of Truxton knew the defendant and also was acquainted with Lavan and had read the account in the paper and the opinion which he has formed could not be changed. The prosecution submitted to the court that the juror was not competent. The juror was excused on peremptory challenge of the prosecution, the judge refusing to accept the challenge on the ground of incompetency offered by the prosecution.

   William Olds, a farmer of the town of Cortlandville, was accepted and sworn.

   Richard B. Tyler, a farmer of Virgil, upon examination expressed a disapproval of capital punishment, but thought it would not influence his verdict. He was excused by the prosecution.

   Burgess W. Scott, a painter of Marathon, was excused by the defense.

   Elias Crampton, a farmer of Homer, had business with Judge Eggleston as surrogate, and was excused upon a peremptory challenge of the prosecution.

   Jared Fisk, a farmer of Taylor had read the account of the death of Thomas Lavan in Cortland Standard and Cortland Democrat. He did not care to say that he would not be influenced by the opinion formed if these reports were true. Prosecution submitted to the court the question of competency of the juror. Challenge allowed on the ground that prejudice against the infliction of the death penalty would, render it impossible for the juror to give a fair and impartial verdict.

   Byron Rounds, a farmer of the town of Cortlandville, in answer to Attorney Kellogg’s questions, said that he had some opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant which it would take evidence to remove. He entertains conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty. Dismissed by the court.

   Edgar Burlingham, farmer of Taylor, had read an account in the Cortland Standard. Upon question of Attorney John Courtney the juror admitted that evidence would be necessary to change his present opinion. The question of competency of the juror was submitted to the court by defense and allowed.

   A. W. Babcock , a mechanic of Scott, knew Thomas Lavan some in his life time. He read the account in Cortland Standard. He still retains an opinion formed at that time. The question of competency was submitted by Attorney Kellogg and joined by Attorney Courtney. The juror was dismissed by the court.

   George Stafford, a farmer of Virgil was called, but did not answer. The juror was dismissed by agreement of attorneys and court.

   James Stafford, a farmer of Virgil, had read the account in The Standard. Was excused by the defense.

   Thomas R. Space, a farmer of Virgil. He believed that his conscientious scruples would preclude his giving a fair and impartial verdict. Challenge of the defense allowed.

   Judge Lyon at this point said a recess would be taken till morning. He also said that the jury should be kept together. The constables were ordered sworn. Constable R. J. Roe of Solon and M. C. Flint of Willet were sworn and charged with the care of the jury thus far drawn until such time as the court shall again convene. Recess taken until Tuesday morning at 9:30.

TUESDAY MORNING.

   Court opened Tuesday morning with a well filled courtroom. At the outset communication was requested on a business matter between a juror and a third party. The privilege was granted if in the presence of attorneys for both sides. As soon as Attorney Courtney ascertained that it was a hay deal he made the remark, “We are not interested in hay,” and the interview proceeded.

   The first juror called was Milo Homer, a farmer of Freetown. He was accepted and sworn.

   Other jurors accepted during the forenoon were Frank Tarbell, a farmer of Lapeer; John L. Smith, a farmer of Marathon; Eugene Maine, a farmer of Taylor.

   Those excused during the forenoon were S. C. Dyer, Willet; Charles W. Sowls, Willet; Howard Muncy, Cuyler; Willis Johnson, Marathon; Ira Greene, Taylor; W. W. Hout, Cortland; W. S. Wilkins, Cortlandville; Eben R. Baldwin, Cortlandville; Jam es Davern, Marathon; Michael Riley, Cuyler; George Deland, Texas Valley; George Atchinson, Homer; A. B. Frazier, Cortland; Geo. W. H. Daniels, Homer; Geo. W. Eldridge, Homer; F. F. Saltsman, Virgil; Henry Bliss, Cortland; Charles Brainard, Marathon; Harry Green, Preble; Hermon Demon, Cincinnatus.

   Constables Rowe and Flin t were sworn and charged with the care of the eight members of the jury.

   Court then adjourned till 2 P. M.

   Only one juror was added to the list of the Galvin jury during Tuesday afternoon, and he was William Martin, the coal dealer of Cortland. That made a total of nine secured from the panel of 153 who answered to their names at rollcall Monday afternoon. When court adjourned Tuesday afternoon 104 jurors had been examined and rejected, nine had been secured and sworn, and forty yet remained of the original panel.

   So many jurors seemed to have conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death penalty that the presiding judge was led to comment upon that fact, and so many had formed a previous opinion as to the merits of the case that the judge suggested that if this thing were to continue it might become necessary to have a change of venue and transfer the trial to some other county where all the jurors had not formed an opinion that could only with difficulty be changed.

   Forty-five men were examined during the afternoon, Mr. Martin who was accepted being the ninth. Most of them were farmers who doubtless have pressing duties at home during this busy season of the year on the farms, but no one suggested that as a reason for not serving, but scruples and previously formed opinions were the two reasons which excused nearly all of them. There were a few peremptory challenges.

   The list of those excused is as follows: E. H. Benjamin, Cuyler; Lorenzo Conrad, Marathon; Horton L. Bates, Homer; H. L. Dennison, Truxton; Patrick Comerfort, Truxton; Ebenezer Ranney, Homer; Worden J. Tarbox, Harford; William M. Jones, Truxton; J. Denison Pierce, Cortland; William H. Maricle, Cincinnatus; J. J. Isaacs, Cortlandville; Silas B. Low, Virgil; Henry Curtis, Virgil; Harvey Frink, Cortlandville; Richard Phalen, Freetown; Delos Conrad, Willet; Charles H. Stearns, Homer; Joseph Reider, Cortland; Dell Gross, Cortlandville; Cory G. Eaton, Willet; Adrian Cummings, Preble; John B. Monroe, Taylor; Theodore Shepard, Cortlandville; Ernest Lewis, Virgil; Watson J. Block, Homer; A. F. Potter, Taylor; Smith Wright, Preble; Isaac Jones, Willet; Eugene Northrup, Virgil; Frank Burt, Cortlandville; Uri Pritchard, Solon; Edwin Cline, Solon; Willard Salisbury, Willet; Edward Kinney, Cortland; Clinton C. Johnson, Marathon; William N. Bliss, Willet; Samuel Rolfe, Harford; Henry Hatfield, Cortland; John K. Miller, Homer; Elias Fisk, Taylor; Charles Curtis, Truxton; H. P. Andrews, Cuyler; S. J. Barber, Scott; Duane E. Call, Cortland.

WEDNESDAY MORNING.

   During the session of Wednesday morning thirty-five more jurors were examined and only one of these was secured and sworn as a juror for the trial. This was Norman Bailey, a farmer of Virgil, and he was the second man examined. This makes ten jurors in all secured so far. At noon only five men of the original panel were left, with two more men to be secured for the jury. Ten of the men examined, including the one sworn, had read the account of the Galvin-Lavan matter in the Cortland Standard, two had read the account in the Cortland Democrat, one had read it in the Syracuse Herald, one in the Syracuse Standard and one in the Syracuse Post.

   The following were excused during the forenoon: Lyman Eisman, Cortlandville; John M. Davis, Freetown; John McAllister, Cuyler; C. B. Hall, Solon; Thomas C. Fairbanks, Homer; Charles S. Bull, Cortland; John S. Gates, Homer; C. A. Chubb, Cortland; Charles A. Smith, Homer; George W. Miner, Taylor; Philip May, Cortland; Albert R. Smith, Homer; William Woodward, Virgil; Willard Doty, Scott; Dennis Carr, Truxton; George Kingsbury, Taylor; Clinton C. Wakefield, Homer; Howard Cottrell, Virgil; Oliver E. Ball, Virgil; Charles Travis, McGrawville; Marshall Winnie, Homer; Charles L. Jones, Homer; W. H. Russell, Cortland; Michael Murphy, Homer; Eugene Johnson, Marathon; W. H. Moore, Taylor; W. W. Thompson, Cuyler; Charles H. Parker, Cincinnatus; G. Martin Brooks, Marathon; W. C. Crain, Homer; John W. Roe, Little York; L. D. Taylor, Cortland; William Atkins, Solon; Henry Bell, Homer.

   When William Doty of Scott was examined he said that he had conversation Tuesday night at the Dexter House with the correspondent of the Rochester Herald and he was at once dismissed by the court.

   The Rochester Herald correspondent was called to the stand and testified under oath in answer to the question of Judge Lyon that he did not know that the person with whom he was conversing was a person summoned to sit as a juror. After this explanation he was dismissed.

WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON.

   At the afternoon session four men were examined, two of them were rejected and two were accepted and sworn, thus completing the jury. Only one man of the original panel of jurors was left after the jury was secured. The eleventh and twelfth jurymen respectively were Stephen H. Bouton of Virgil and Homer Smith of Cortland. The two excused were Lee O. Randall of Preble and R. M. Hilsinger of Cortland.

   The impanelling [sic] of the jury was marked by the ability and care with which each juror was examined. The skillful manner in which Hon. O. U. Kellogg conducted the examination for the prosecution and Attorney John Courtney and Judge Eggleston for the defense insure the people and prisoner a competent and able jury.

   The opening argument for the prosecution was begun by District Attorney Duffey at 2:48 P. M.

   It was 2:48 o’clock Wednesday afternoon when District Attorney Duffey rose to make the opening address to the jury. He impressed upon them the importance and gravity of the duty imposed upon them. After a comprehensive definition and explanation of the crime of which the prisoner was charged he turned to a statement of the case. That matter is already familiar to readers of The Standard. He took occasion to explain how circumstantial may be the best evidence. The common idea in regard to circumstantial evidence is erroneous. It is well known to those conversant with evidence that circumstantial evidence is the best evidence.

JULIA LAVAN, THE FIRST WITNESS.

   The first witness called by the prosecution was Julia Lavan, the widow of Thomas Lavan. She testified as to residence at the time of her husband’s death. She last saw her husband alive at 11 o’clock in the forenoon. She said she would recognize the clothes he had on when he left home. Thereupon the trousers and overalls, under shirt, handkerchief, heavy overcoat, and under drawers, soft hat, outer shirt, vest, under coat, and rubber boots were exhibited to her in the order named and recognized. After which each was offered in evidence.

   Attorney John Courtney then cross-examined for the defense. Upon this examination was developed the relation of Galvin and Lavan. Galvin was an employee and frequent caller at the Lavan home during the twenty-two years which Julia Lavan had lived there. Mrs. Lavan testified as to the acceptance by her husband of the invitation of Patrick Galvin, which she overheard, to go over to his house on the day of the night of the murder. The defense further brought out the fact of the frequency of visits between Lavan and Galvin, which Mrs. Lavan said had been less frequent for a year before the murder. Her testimony showed that Lavan had stayed with Galvin three or four times over night. The defense questioned Mrs. Lavan as to her sworn testimony before the coroner’s jury in which she testified that “she never knew that her husband and Patrick Galvin had never had any trouble.” The sworn testimony was submitted in evidence.

   District Attorney Duffey resumed the direct examination and Mrs. Lavan testified that Galvin had quarreled with her husband. She described a quarrel in which Galvin attacked her husband at their house when she ordered him out.

   Attorney Courtney again questioned her as to the truth of her sworn statement presented to the coroner’s jury. She said it was true as to all she remembered at that time.

DANIEL O’SHEA.

   The second witness called by the prosecution was Daniel O’Shea who resides on what is known as South America road in the town of Preble. He knew Thomas Lavan in his life time as well as the prisoner, Patrick Galvin. He saw both of them on the 25th day of February, 1897. They had been to Preble. He saw Galvin driving a team of horses behind him. The next time he turned around he saw Lavan in the sleigh riding with Galvin. O’Shea asked “Tommy” to ride with him. At first he said he would, then he said he wouldn’t and sunk back in the sleigh. O’Shea drove on, and, that was all he saw of him.

   Mr. Courtney took up the cross-examination and developed that O'Shea had taken a load of wood to Preble and was on his return home. The last time O’Shea saw Galvin he saw Lavan with him near Galvin’s house.

JAMES DOROTHY.

   The third witness for the prosecution was James Dorothy. He lives in Preble and was at his brother’s house on Feb. 25, 1897, at Preble. He saw Galvin at Tully that day at 11 A. M. Next at 12:30 by his brother’s [house] driving. Thomas Lavan was at his brother's. Dorothy saw Lavan get into the sleigh and started east.

   Mr. Courtney on cross-examination developed that James Dorothy lived with his brother Robert Dorothy in Preble. James Dorothy went out and told Galvin that Lavan was not ready.

Segment of 1876 map of Preble, N. Y, showing P. Galvin's residence (bottom right).

 

ROBERT DOROTHY.

   The fourth witness for the prosecution sworn was Robert Dorothy. He lives east of Preble village. He swore as to his knowledge where Patrick Galvin lived on the day of the murder which was on the road to “South America.” He had known Lavan for a number of years. Galvin came to his house at 7 o’clock, Feb. 26, 1897, and said that Lavan was at his house frozen. On the way over to the Galvin house with Galvin he said he told Lavan that he could stay all night with him. When they arrived at the house Galvin pointed where Lavan was. It had snowed about an inch. In stating what he saw he mentioned the fact that he noticed a track. He was positive that it was the only track. He saw Lavan on the floor on entering the house. He was on the floor with his back against the bedstead near the front. The bed was in the northeast corner of the room with the head to the north. His feet were under a high hearth which projected out from a square stove. There was hard wood on the floor back of the stove. He described the appearance of Lavan, the cut on his forehead and his bruised hands. He saw the cut on his head and Galvin walked up and looked at it and said “There is, isn’t there.” He said that he remarked to Galvin as to the blood spot and his evident attempt to clean it up. Dorothy saw the rubber boots which had blood upon them. The boots were presented on trial and recognized by witness. On witness’ return to the Galvin house Galvin enquired [sic] if he had sent word to Mrs. Lavan. On his return to the Galvin house he saw a blood spot on the banking of the house and three or four feet from there he saw another small spot of blood. It was spattered around on a stone. On entering the hallway he saw another spot of blood on the floor. On the first visit he observed that Lavan was dead. He was asked what he said to the defendant as to blood spot on the floor which an attempt had been made to clean up with ashes. Objected to and sustained on the ground that it had been testified to. The witness identified the undercoat of the dead man which he saw on his visit. On his return in the afternoon he found a vest on the ground outside of the house which belonged to Lavan. Constable Dorothy recognized the overcoat which the defendant wore the morning he came to his house. The coat was presented and identified by him.

   A photograph of the body of Lavan was shown to the witness and he swore that it was a fair representation of Lavan as he lay there that morning when he visited the house. The picture shows the prostrate form with back against the sideboard of the bedstead with head bent back upon the bed. Photographs of the tree outside near which the vest was found were also recognized and sworn to be fair representations of the places taken by the witness; also a photograph of the kitchen stove and the coat by it was presented and recognized. The three photographs were offered in evidence.

   The witness says that there was a fire in the stove, the room was warm and that it was not cold without.

   On cross-examination by Mr. Courtney Constable Dorothy said he was one of Galvin’s nearest neighbors. Their land joined. He said he had seen them together at times drunk. He had seen them together one drunk and the other sober. He testified that the table, stove and bedstead were in their regular positions and the appearance was the same as times he had seen them before. The wood on the floor was in the same place where he had seen it before. The constable said that he talked with Galvin about the blood spot which Galvin said was some stuff which he had tried to clean up. He testified as to the blood he saw upon the banking outside of the doorway that the dirt was held in place by two boards and stakes.

   At 5:46 o’clock the jury was entrusted to the care of Constables Rowe and Flint and court adjourned until 9:30 o’clock, the next morning.

THURSDAY MORNING.

   9:33 entered District Attorney Duffey followed by prisoner and Deputy. Sheriff McKinney.

   9:34 entered constables with jury.

   9:35 enter Judge Lyon.

   Consultation between a juror and third parties permitted at the opening of court.

   Court opened by Crier Van Hoesen at 9:40.

   Mr. Robert Dorothy called to the stand to continue testimony upon cross- examination. Attorney John Courtney began cross-examination for defense. The witness testified that outside the door of the Galvin house for some 20 rods was rising ground. He testified that he did not look or notice ice on the ground. He was asked as to the block of wood before referred to. He said that the block was not very near the blood spot. The witness remarked to Galvin that Lavan looked as though he died game, as he observed him lying against the bedstead that morning and Galvin replied, “This is no time for fooling.” He testified as to the woody and bushy condition of the country in the neighborhood of Galvin’s house.

   Redirect examination: There are no woods immediately about the Galvin house. Witness testified that there were other neighbors’ houses besides his own in view of the Galvin house. There is a gradual rise from 8 or 10 feet from the door. Galvin lived there about three years. The weather in the morning was cool. It was a freezing temperature that night and morning.

J. D. F. WOOLSTON.

   The next witness for the prosecution was J. D. F. Woolston of Cortland, a surveyor. Mr. Woolston described the grade and roads from Baltimore to the Galvin house. A hill intercepts the Dorothy house view of the Galvin house. There is cleared land between Mr. Hartman’s house and the Galvin house, Dorothy’s house and the same. The land is clear on the west side of the highway. There is a piece of woods directly south of the Galvin house. The witness made a correct lineal map of the ground plan of the Galvin house. Surveyor Woolston gave a very careful and accurate description of the house, including rooms, windows and doorways, including their measurements and positions.

   Cross-examination conducted by Judge Eggleston brought the fact that the Galvin house is in plain view of the Hartman house. There is a hill 80 or 100 feet high in rear of the house with a gradual slope to the front door which was boarded up. He further testified as to the banking of the house on which the blood spot was found.

JAMES T. STEELE.

   James T. Steele, justice of the peace of the town of Preble and neighbor of Galvin, testified as to the position of his house as regards the obstructed view of the Galvin house. Then he told of his visit to the Galvin house the morning of Feb. 25, 1897. Steele asked Galvin how it happened and he said he didn’t know. He asked Galvin when he went to bed and Galvin replied about 11 o’clock. He asked if Tommy stayed all night and he replied that he did. Galvin in reply to Steele’s questions said that he got up at 5 o’clock and found Tommy outside; that he put the light out before he went to bed that night. The witness then narrated what he saw that morning in and about the Galvin house. He described the condition of the corpse as to position, dress and condition of the body, mentioning the cut on the lip. He saw the bruises and abrasions on the hands and wrists. The coat was presented and identified by witness as the one which hung behind the stove with blood upon it that morning which Galvin said at that time belonged to Galvin. When he came to the house he observed tracks in the snow in the new fallen [snow], light, about an inch in depth. He said the sheriff asked Galvin [if] he had any “old man’s cider.” He said he had some in the cellar and he might try it. Next the witness described the spot in the floor before referred to where blood was supposed to have been and had the appearance of having been cleaned up. It was about 3 ft. long and 2 ft. wide. The bloody boots before referred to were presented and recognized by the witness.

   Cross-examination: The witness is a practicing attorney of the county. Galvin said to the witness that morning that “it was a bad thing for him.” He said that Galvin told of finding him outside the door in the morning when he got up to go out and do his chores at 5 o’clock in the morning and Lavan lay there with his coat partly off. When he saw Galvin he did not see any blood upon Galvin or bruises. Steele was asked by Attorney Courtney if he was to receive compensation from the district attorney for testifying. He replied yes. He also swore that he received copies of the testimony taken before coroner and grand juries from the distrust attorney and that he had read the same. He did not take pains to notice the tracks on the snow; he had no thoughts about them at that time. He could not tell whether the vest was under the tree or not. He further testified as to the conversation between the sheriff and Galvin about the “old man’s cider” in the cellar and in reply to the sheriff’s question Galvin replied that they had obtained whiskey at Tully.

   Court adjourned until 2 P. M. in the afternoon.