Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1837-12-07

CouRr OF sEssloss-Dec. sth-Imrortant Lerai Arm
MEMS motion for Nv TraLThe intermns5e case of
rangdon who has been convicted OF larceny for
Mesrs Talmadge and Griffin the prisoner pu, their
motion for trial The ground OF irree uariiy in he
proceedings 81 one Of The jury whilst absentrca Court
reured one OF them sent the officer who had them care
P sas ha s a. nv wanted to see him
Juror then sad 10 the cee Ask the District Attorney what
eeny y Mr. Phenx sensword back Tia, there As no dsr
ence' and upon this they grounded their motion new
Mr. Grlin opened the argument and cited bis authorities
the Jennng. versus wsrne where motion Vas made
for newtra on the ground that after jury had retired
took The jury ibis proved q d ~ m sa1
Which bad 6sea used the and bad been in The hands
the part Of such Juror was irregular and in violation let
retired, they communics,e with no one bu them
selves I'll they bring their verdict into Court he therefore
The cited page g. where alleged that
during the time the cause was trial ONE Of Jurors
Court In this also granted the
concerning the matters they have hand but among
nor 70 suffer any one TO speak 10 them about The
The nextciied read frem 60 the Of Tasge
his Of s .
givenn evidence The verdict here was set aside and
Another cited in which trial was granted
because the clerk OF the court made bundle of psper
their way into the jury The verdict ade
although the jurors that they looked those
The cited page IS Sargent versus Ro-
bes; the jury had been out three days. they then
the judge saying that they couldn't agree The Juoge wrote
in which he pointed how they might consider
OF the intricate points OF the manner
On this recount motion made to set aside the verdict
and Judge Parker granted ial the ground that
communication whatever should take place Jsdre
and srv except In open court IN the of the parties
and their counsel This would in lie
oath administered the officer who the charge OF them
And after the Court had sdiourned the Judge had
centro over the jury, right communicate With
down Law mold good in all
Tor the jury into court their questions and tbss
receive the law from the Court This speaking to he
OF Burrows Unws where the jury after they
tired sent in Court nto that they wanted Sedns Law Of
the Ns Prius them.
Mr. Griffith alse read fro. p,ge lol o. the same work,
versus Doue In trialor msrder Cowenpsge where
verdict aside because the OF
communication with jury after they retired from Court
absolute and without qualification
OF the rule would be worth nothing.
John A. Mre ESQ, associated with Mr. Phenis for the
prosecutions 10 reply
lie stated in the case Sargent versus Roberts, which
found In Pckerings Reports 81, the decision
sets and not applicable a, ali TO this State For there dis
which has been decided and confirmed BY the supreme
Court that used on the trial may be se lie made
n BY the jury.
Again s the case the People Douglas the Court
held that the separation 81 jury though cmPaneed to
capital offence and though they separate contrary the
directions Of the Court, will not Of itself he Sufficient
Of sb~ss either in the Of ardent spirits whilst
they separated then the verdict could We sside and
arising Of The rrsguary, and OF the ire
Ne tsen called the attention Jobnsons
case Jury bad retired they for the judge who
jary sied him Wheeler they could add any sIss charge