All from National Archives (Suitland)
Records of U.S. Criminal Court of District of Columbia 1849
U.S. v. Tom Hand aka Jacob Shuster
-----
Criminal Court Minutes
United States ) No. 238 Apps
) Jury Sworn Verdict
v )
) 16th April Discharged by order
Jacob Schuster, alias ) of the Court
Tom Hand ) 6 o'clock P.M.
1. Joseph H. Daniel for U.S. for Def
2. Alfred H. Boucher Jno. Varden D. Ratcliff Esq
3. Charles H. Lane Chs. Stott M. Thompson
4. William Lord Edmund Burke Geo. Potts
5. James Murray Willis Blaney
6. William North Jas. R. Atkinson
7. Joseph M. Beck J.H. Goddard
8. George Crandell T.H. Kanouse
9. George Savage Saml. Lewis
10. James Larsby Hy. B. Jones
11. Thomas T. Harkness Sidney H. Stewart
12. Charles Stott Francis Jones
The Court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.
-------
[Judge was the Hon. Ths[?] Hartley Crawford]
United States ) No. 238 Apps
) Jury Sworn Verdict
v )
) Guilty
Jacob Schuster, alias )
Tom Hand ) Verdict rendered 28 Apr 7 o'clock
1. Charles F. Wood For U.S. For D.
2. John H. Semmes John Varden John Duncan
3. William H. Perkins Willis H. Blaney T.W. Hughes
4. Henry Thecker Charles Gilpin Charles Mann
5. Nelson Robertson Charles Hinkle Tho. W. McKinley
6. Joseph Bryan A.M.C. Smith Geo. Potts
7. Harvey Crittenden Joseph Atkinson Charles Hall
8. Peter Hepburn Henry B. Jones Forrest Sturdevant
9. Charles P. Warnell Hon. E. Burke J.M. Stone
10. Almon Baldwin Alex Provost Simmes
11. David M. Oyster Henry Cline
12. Washington Adams Henry Bernum
Tho Denobo
W. Thompson
Coe W.W. Seaton
John Davis
-----
8 May 1849
Affidavit of Jurors
Cover Endorsement:
238
United States v Shuster alias Hand
Affidavit of
Charles F. Wood
Harvey Crittenden
Charles P. Warnell
David M. Oyster
Peter Hepburn
James H. Simms
Joseph Bryan
Henry Thecker
Washington Adams
Wm. N. Perkins
Nelson Robertson
Filed 8 May 1849
Washington County
On this 7th day of May in the year of our Lord eighteen
hundred and forty nine personally appeared before me a justice of
the peace in and for the county aforesaid Charles F. Wood, Harvey
Crittenden, Charles P. Warnell, Peter Hepburn, Joseph Bryan,
Henry Thecker, Washington Adams, John H. Sims, Wm. H. Perkins,
David W. Oyster, Nelson R. Robinson, and being duly sworn on the
Holy Evangelists of Almighty God depose and say that they and
each of them were jurors upon the second trial of the case of the
U. States vs. Jacob Shuster alias Tom Hand, that after leaving
the jury box they retired to consider of their verdict and from
that time to the rendition of the verdict, or at any time
whatever, there was no prejudice or bias of any kind whatever,
either in favor of or against the prisoner that influenced their
judgments, arising from any matter which they did not receive as
jurors in the jury box, and from sworn witnesses on the stand who
testified in the case; and that their verdict was rendered
according to their conscientious judgment with a full
understanding of the nature and solemnity of their oaths taken
before they were empanelled, to wit, to give this verdict by the
law and evidence.
First, no improper influence has been attempted to bear upon
their minds and that the verdict they rendered was the result of
mature deliberation and of unburdened judgment.
That during the trial of the case they never discussed from
day to day -- that whilst they had returned to consider of their
verdict some of the jurors to wit: John H. Sims, Charles F. Wood,
Wm. H. Perkins, D.N. Oyster, Henry Thecker, Nelson Robinson and
Washington Adams read certain parts of the annexed papers; John
H. Sims, read part of the annexed paper marked A and all of the
paper marked B. Charles F. Wood read the paper marked B. Wm. H.
Perkin read both A and B. D.W. Oyster read paper marked B.
Henry Thecker read the paper marked B. Nelson Robinson does not
recollect having read anything in the papers about Shuster's
trial. Washington Adams read the paper generally. The jurors
herein mentioned further depose and say that they read the papers
generally, and that their attention was not particularly or of
purpose directed to the paragraph's relating to the trial, and
they also say that the said paper and also the portions relating
to the trial, had no sort of influence on their judgment, but
their verdict was rendered as aforesaid stated.
Thus they read also other papers, to wit the daily paper, of
that date, but they do not recollect that they contained anything
about the trial, with the exception that the jury stood 7 to 5,
and it was expected they would not agree, but that it had no sort
of influence on their minds.
Charles F. Wood
H. Crittenden
Chs. P. Warnall
D.N. Oyster
Peter Hepburn
Jno. H. Semmes
Joseph Bryan
Henry Thecker
Wash. Adams
W.N. Perkins
A.R. Robertson
Sworn to and subscribed before and in my
presence Wm. R. Woodward J.P.
A. Baldwin
Sworn to in open court by A. Baldwin May 15, 1849
-----
2 May 1849
Affidavit for new trial and reasons thereof
Cover Endorsement
238
U.States v. Jacob Shuster
Affidavit for new trial and reasons thereof
Carlisle Ratcliff
filed 2nd May 1849
Jacob Shuster )
v. )
The United States ) Indict. for larceny
In this case the traverser having moved for a new trial,
files the following reasons therefor
1st because the jury were tampered with in this; that while
the jury were in consultation, having returned on Thursday, and
shortly before they agreed upon a verdict they being at that time
divided, the bailiff having charge of the jury handed to one of
the jurors a copy of the New York Police Gazette containing
various statements of alleged facts touching the said larceny and
inculpating the traverser as the principal felon, and commenting
upon the refusal of the former jury to convict the traverser, in
a manner calculated to influence the jury then charged with the
case, and which paper was read by the jury and used to influence
their verdict.
2d [Withdrawn and crossed out]
3d That upon the second trial of this indictment one of the
witnesses for the United States gave new and material evidence
which had not been given at the former trial, viz, that in the
morning the larceny was discovered, a certain instrument called a
Colt was found in the room where the larceny was committed and
had apparently been there and then in the possession of the
thief, and that the said evidence took the prisoner by surprise,
that he was therefore unprepared with evidence which he now [?]s
he can produce and will produce and which is newly discovered
evidence material to the just decision of this issue, viz that a
certain Jim Webb, who was lately in the jail of this county
charged with the said larceny, shortly before to wit a few days
before the said larceny procured a certain instrument
corresponding with the description of that which was found as
aforesaid, and which the traverser expects to identify as the
same, from a certain Casper Moffit of Philadelphia, and that
shortly after the said larceny to wit a few days thereafter the
said Webb told the said Moffit that he had lost the said Colt,
and that he was afraid there would be an advertisement about it
and begged said Moffit to say nothing about it.
Carlisle Ratcliff
for traverser
District of Columbia )
County of Washington ) to wit
On this 2d day of May in the year 1849 before me a Justice of
the Peace in and for the District and County aforesaid personally
appeared Jacob Shuster and made oath that the facts stated in the
aforegoing reasons for a new trial are true to the best of his
knowledge and belief, and that he verily believes that he can
establish each and every of the said facts by competent and
credible testimony.
Sworn before Thomas C. Donn J.P.
----
8 May 1849
Motion for New Trial -- Affidavit
Cover Endorsement:
Shuster v U. States
Motion for new trial -- Affidavit
Filed 8 May 1849
District of Columbia
County of Washington to wit
On this 8th day of May 1849 personally appeared before the
subscriber a Justice of the Peace for the District and County
aforesaid, Anna Maria Wallace who being duly sworn according to
law deposes and says that on the 27th of April she was in the
passage heading to the door of Mr. Clives situated in the
basement of the City Hall, and whilst there Peter Hepburn, one of
the jurors who tried and convicted Thos. Hand alias Shuster, came
through and passed into the door of the said Clives.
That the said Hepburn was accompanied to said door by Thomas
Plimsell an officer of the Court who walked up and down said
passage some ten minutes, and then left said passage in company
of several jurors who had just got their dinner at the room of
the clerk near the room of the said Clives. That she did not see
the said Hepburn leave with them but thinks she would have seen
him had he done so.
Sworn to before me
Jas. Crandell JP
----
8 May 1849
Motion for New Trial -- Deposition
Cover Endorsement
238
U.States v Jacob Shuster
Motion for new trial
Deposition of Thomas Plumsill
Clerk please file this PBK
Filed 8 May 1849
District of Columbia
Washington County to wit
On this 8th day of May in the year of our Lord 1849,
personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace in and for
the said county Thomas Plumsill who being duly sworn upon the
Holy Evangels of Almighty God deposeth and saith that he was one
of the bailiffs that attended the jury who were empanelled upon
the second trial of the case of the U.States v Tom Hand, thus on
Friday the 27th of April he accompanied Peter Hepburn, one of the
Jurors, from the Jury Room to the room of Mr. Kliebes. situated
in the basement of the City Hall, that said juror went there for
the purpose of having a boil dressed which was upon his arm, that
he accompanied the said juror to the said room, and remained with
him all the time, that deponent was part of the time in the room
the said juror, and part of the time at the door of said room
which was held open all the time the said juror was in said room,
nor was the said juror out of the sight of the deponent, that
deponent heard no one speak to or attempt to influence the mind
of the said juror and third he does not believe any such attempt
was made, that after the said juror got his arm dressed, he the
deponent accompanied said juror back to the jury room.
Thomas Plimsell
Subscribed and sworn to before me on the day and year first above
written. S. Dunn JP
-----
10 May 1849
Declaration of Casper Moffit
Endorsement on Cover
Address: Daniel Radcliffe
Attorney at Law
Washington, D.C.
In haste
Filed 11 May 1849
City of Philadelphia ss
On the tenth day of May AD eighteen hundred and forty nine
before the subscriber one of the aldermen of the City of
Philadelphia personally came Caspar Moffitt who being duly sworn
deposes and says, that a short time before the Robbery of the
Patent Office, say four or five days, deponent met Jim Webb in
Philadelphia the same individual who since that period has been
charged with said offense, the said Webb had at that time in his
possession a weapon called a "Colt" or "Billy" -- Deponent asked
Webb to give him the said "Billy" or "Colt" -- Webb refused at
first, but finally exchanged with deponent for another, which
deponent could identify if he saw again. Two or three days after
deponent heard of the robbery of the Patent Office in November
last, he saw Webb again in Philadelphia. Webb then said to
deponent that he had lost the Colt which he got of deponent and
requested him (deponent) to say nothing about it as there might
be a fuss made, or words to that effect.
Casper Moffit
Sworn and subscribed before me the tenth day of May 1849.
Armon Davis, Alderman
No. 211 South 7 st
-----
23 April 1849
Defendant's Bill of Exceptions
Cover Endorsement:
Defendants Bill of Exceptions
On the trial of this issue the United States to maintain the
cause on their part [?] proved by Charles Hinkle that 15 or 18
months ago he received a letter signed Tom Hand alias Shuster,
and dated No. 9 Wallace St., Philadelphia, and that he replied
thereto, and addressed his letter to No. 9 Wallace St.,
Philadelphia, and that he received an answer thereto signed in
this same way, and wrote another letter himself to which he never
received any reply; and that he does not know the traverser and
never saw him till now, and hath further proved by Willis Blaney
that the traverser has resided for several years past and his
family now resides at No. 9 Wallace St., Philadelphia, and that
he knows of no other person of this name living there, and by
Smith that for a five years [?] traverser told him to address a
letter to him at that address, and by Willis Blaney that
defendants house and home is and has been for 4 or 5 years past
at No. 9 Wallace St., Philadelphia and know of no one else in
Wallace St, Philadelphia, of the name of Tom Hand or Shuster, but
the traverser, the U.S. then proceeded to ask the said witness
Hinkle whether in his opinion the certain writings (to prove the
same) were in the hand writing of the Traverser.
To which evidence the Traverser by his counsel objects, but
the court overrules the objections and suffers the witness to
testify to his opinion that the said writings are of the
traverser. Wherefore the traverser by his counsel excepts and
prays the court to sign and seal and [?] this his 2nd bill of
exceptions which is accordingly done this 23d day of April 1849.
T. Hartley Crawford (Seal)
-----
5 April 1849
Jury Verdict
Cover Endorsement:
238
United States
versus
J. Shuster alias Tom Hand
and plead not guilty
Larceny
-----
Witnesses
M.C. Smith
Jno. Varden
Thos. N. Kanourse
Nelson Stewart
True Bill
J. Gideon
Foreman
April 5, 1849
Recorded in Lib S No. 1 folio 31
In the City of Washington
Washington County in the District of Columbia
Better acquit than not make a verdict
District of Columbia
County of Washington to wit:
The Jurors of the United States, for the County aforesaid,
upon their oath, present that Jacob Shuster, otherwise called Tom
Hand, late of the County aforesaid, laborer, on the eighth day of
November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty eight, with force and arms, in the County aforesaid, one
gold snuff box of the value of one thousand dollars, one bottle
of attar of roses of the value of two thousand dollars, one sword
scabbard of the value of five hundred dollars, one pearl necklace
of the value of three thousand dollars, two pearls of the value
of one hundred dollars each, one medal of the value of fifty
dollars, and one medal of the value of twenty dollars of the
goods and chattels of the United States of America, then and
there being, feloniously did steal, take, and carry away, against
the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, and
against the peace and Government of the United States.
P.B. Key, Attorney for the United States
-----
3 April 1849
Jury Verdict
Cover Endorsement:
Jacob Schuster
alias
Tom Hand
Larceny
April 3d 1849
District of Columbia, Washington County, to wit:
The Jurors of the United States, for the County aforesaid,
do, upon their Oath, present
Jacob Schuster alias Tom Hand
For Stealing
One gold snuff box, studded with diamonds. of the value of one
thousand dollars, one bottle of attar of roses, of the value of
two thousand dollars, one gold scabbard, of the value of five
hundred dollars, one pearl necklace, of the value of three
thousand dollars, two pearls of the value of one hundred dollars
each, one German gold medal of the value of fifty dollars, one
South American gold medal of the value of twenty five dollars of
the goods and chattels of the United States, on, or about the 8th
day of Nov A.D. 1848 on evidence of Alex. M. C. Smith
J. Gideon, foreman
Witnesses:
John Varden
Alex M.C. Smith
Thos. H. Kenrouse
Nelson Stewart
-----
5 May 1849
Affidavit for a new trial
Cover Endorsement:
U.States v Shuster
Affidavit for a new trial
The Clerk will file this affidavit
Carlisle & Ratcliff
Filed 5 May 1849
District of Columbia
County of Washington to wit
On this 5th day of May 1849 before me the subscriber a
Justice of the Peace in and for the District and county
aforesaid, personally appeared Anna Maria Wallace who being duly
sworn according to law, deposes and says
That on Saturday the 28th of April last two of the jurors to
wit Nelson Robeson and Daniel W. Oyster, who tried and convicted
Thomas Shuster of Larceny separated themselves from their fellow
jurors after the said jury had returned to consider their verdict
and before any verdict was rendered in said case, an came to the
place where the deponent was being distant from the room where
they had been put to deliberate and got their dinner, without
being attended by an officer of the court.
This occurred on the Saturday preceding the night when the
said jury rendered their verdict.
And the deponent further states that several of the jurors
aforesaid had on previous occasions, pending their deliberations
got their meals, when she was staying as aforesaid, but never
attended by an officer of the court.
Jas. Crandell JP
-----
5 May 1849
Affidavit for a new trial
Cover Endorsement:
Shuster v United States
[?] for new trial
filed 8 May 1849
District of Columbia
County of Washington to wit
On this 8th day of May 1849 personally appeared before me the
subscriber a Justice of the Peace for the district and county
aforesaid Eliza Haas, who being sworn according to law deposes
and says that on the 28th of April last she was at the room of
Mr. Clark, situated in the basement of the City Hall, and that on
said day two gentlemen whom the deponent understood to be Mr.
Robinson and Mr. Oyster and that they were jurors on the case of
the United States in Shuster came in alone and sat down to take
them dinner. That whilst they were eating their dinner Anna
Maria Wallace who was living at Mr. Clark's, started out to call
Mr. Woodward, and was absent about five or ten minutes when she
returned alone, that soon after her return Mr. Woodward came in
and said something about the jurors being there without an
officer and also sat down and took his dinner. Sworn to before
me.
Jas Crandell JP
-----
8 May 1849
Affidavit of Catherine Ann Clark, Ann Maria Wallace
Cover Endorsement:
238
United States
v
Shuster alias Hand
Affidavit of
Catherine Ann Clark
Ann Maria Wallace
Filed 8 May 1849
Washington County
On this 7th day of May in the year 1849, personally appeared
before me a Justice of the Peace in and for the County aforesaid
Catherine Ann Clark, and Ann Maria Wallace, who being duly sworn
depose and say that on Saturday the 28th of April 1849. Mr.
Oyster and Mr. Robinson came to the room occupied by Gustavus
Clark, which said room is in the basement of the City Hall, to
get their dinner, that they came alone to the door, that the
Deponent A.M. Wallace was in the passage and saw no one
accompanying them, that they remained in the room 5 or 10 minutes
before Mr. Woodward entered, that during the whole time they were
present, no one spoke to them on any subject or talked to any
one, that they ate their dinner and went out with Mr. Woodward,
that A.M. Wallace went for Mr. Woodward to come to his dinner and
as soon as she got back Mr. Woodward came in, that when she went
up for Mr. Woodward and he didn't see him, that during the trial
of Shultz his wife staid with the deponent Mrs. Catherine Ann
Clark and after the trial whilst the jury were out the sister of
Shultz staid there.
Sworn to before me.
Wm. R. Woodvance JP (seal)
-----
8 May 1849
Affidavit of David N. Oyster, Nelson Robertson
Cover Endorsement:
238
United States
v
Shuster alias Hand
Affidavit of
David N. Oyster
Nelson Robertson
Filed 8 May 1849
Washington County, to wit
On the 7th day of May in the year of our Lord eighteen
hundred and forty nine personally appeared before me a Justice of
the Peace in and for the said county, David W. Oyster and Nelson
R. Robinson, and being duly sworn on the Holy Evangels of
Almighty God depose and say that they were upon the jury in the
second trials of the case of the U. States v. Tom Hand and that
when they returned to consider of their verdict they went from
the jury room to the room of Gustavus Clark, that they started to
said room to get their dinner (deponents both lived distant from
the jury room, and one of deponents lived in Georgetown, and the
other on 8th St between G and H), that when they left the jury
room they were accompanied by an officer, but do not recollect
whether he accompanied them all the way to the door, that when
they started from the jury room the officer followed but they do
not recollect that he followed them all the way to the door, he
may or may not, they think that this officer was E.G. Hardy, that
when they got to the room of the aforesaid Clark they spoke to no
one on any subject, as did any one speak to them, they had just
seated themselves and helped themselves when Mr. Woodward the
Deputy Marshall entered, they could not have been in said room
over 4 minutes before Mr. Woodward entered. Mr. Woodward
continued with them until they had dined, and then accompanied
them back to the jury room.
And they further state that nothing was said, done, or
offered to be done, to influence their minds either for or
against the prisoner, and that no such influence was felt by them
in the discharge of their duty. They had before dined there [?]
in company with the officer, and that nothing was said to
influence their minds or that did influence their minds. Sara
Shuster; [?] there, Ann Maria Wallace was there.
D.W. Oyster
N.R. Robertson
Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me.
Wm. R. Woodward JP (seal)
----
8 May 1849
Deposition of Peter Hepburn
Cover Endorsement:
U. States
v
Jacob Shuster
Motion for New trial
Deposition of Peter Hepburn
Clerk please file this PBK
Filed 8 May 1849
District of Columbia
County of Washington to wit
On the 8th day of May in the year of our Lord 1849 personally
appeared before me a Justice of the Peace in and for the said
County Peter Hepburn and being duly sworn deposeth and saith that
on Friday the 27th of April (he being one of the Jurors empaneled
upon the second trial of Tom Hand) he was suffering with a large
and painful boil upon his arm that he went in the company of and
under the charge of Thomas Plumsell, one of the bailiffs of the
jury, to get said boil dressed, it giving him at the time much
pain, that he proceeded with said Plumsell to the room of Mr.
Kliebes, which is situated in the basement of the City Hall, that
the wife of Mr. Kleibes is the sister of the deponent, and that
she dressed his arm, that during the time deponent was in said
room, he spoke to no one on any subject that related to the
trial, and no effort was made or attempted to be made to
influence his, the deponent's, mind; that during the time the
said officer Plumsell remained with him, sometimes in the room,
and sometimes standing at the door which was all the time wide
open, deponent states that said Plumsell was not out of sight the
whole time, and thus when and after his arm was dressed deponent
was accompanied by said Plumsell back to the Jury Room.
Peter Hepburn
Subscribed and sworn to before me the subscriber one of the
justices of the peace on the day and year first above mentioned.
S. Dunn JP
-----
8 May 1849
Affidavits of Edward G. Handy and Thomas Woodward
Cover Endorsement:
238
United States
v
Shuster alias Hand
Affidavits of
Edward G. Handy
Thomas Woodward
Filed 8 May 1849
Washington Co.
On this 7th day of May in the year 1849 personally appeared
before me a Justice of the Peace in and for the said County E.G.
Hardy and being duly sworn deposes and says that on Saturday the
28th of April 1849 he attended Mr. Oyster and Mr. Robinson two of
the jurors in the case of the U.States v Shuster from the jury
room towards the place where the aforesaid 2 jurors were going to
dine, to wit: to the rooms of one Gustavus Clarke in the basement
of the City Hall, that he conducted the jurors down the steps to
the space immediately before the door communicating with the
Court Room and told said jurors to wait until he called Mr.
Woodward, that he went into the Court Room and told him his
dinner was ready and that the 2 jurors were waiting; that Mr.
Woodward started forthwith and followed the jurors right down,
that he, this deponent, as he was returning from the court room,
met Ann Maria Wallace, who said she requested Mr. Woodward to
come to dinner, that deponent told her that Mr. Woodward was
coming, and that he saw Mr. Woodward come immediately and follow
the jurors, that the jurors had preceded down towards Clark's
room as he came out, that the deponent does not believe that more
than four or five minutes could have intervened between his
leaving the jurors on the space before the Court Room, and the
time which would have enabled Mr. Woodward to get to Clark's
room. Deponent believes they the [?]
E.G. Handy
Subscribed in the presence of and sworn to before
Wm. R. Woodward J.P. (seal)
---------
Washington Co.
On this 7th day of May 1849 personally appeared Thomas
Woodward and being duly sworn deposes and says that so much of
the deposition of E.G. Handy that relates to his being called to
dinner by E.G. Handy is true, and that he went down to Clark's
room immediately, that while there he heard the jurors speak to
no one, and heard no one speak to them, and that he accompanied
them back to the jury room.
Thomas P. Woodward
Subscribed in the presence of and sworn to before
Wm. R. Woodward JP
-----
5 May 1849
Affidavit of W.A. Mulloy
Cover Endorsement:
U.States v Shuster
Affidavit for new trial
The clerk will file this affidavit
Carlisle Ratcliff
Filed 5 May 1849
District of Columbia
Washington Co. to wit
On this 4th day of May 1849 before me the subscriber a
justice of the peace in and for the county aforesaid personally
appeared W.A. Mulloy, who being duly sworn deposes and says: That
on or about the third of May instant, he had a conversation with
E.G. Handy, a bailiff of the Criminal Court for said county court
who had charge of the jury in the case of the U.S. v. Shuster
lately tried, while the said jury were in deliberation upon the
said case, and before they had made of their verdict, and that in
the said conversation the said Hardy stated in substance, that
while he so had charge of said jury, he was in the passage near
their room door, reading the Police Gazette of New York which
deponent understood contained statements concerning the said
charge against the said Shuster, and that one of the jury asked
him for it, but that he said he did not think it right to let him
have the said paper, and refused at first, but afterwards another
person or persons connected with the court told him there was no
impropriety in doing so, and he let them have it.
Jas. Crandell JP
<< Return to Patent History Materials Index
