The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1847-10-22


brought aga nst the makers endorses defence was
that was not applied to the purposes lo which it was
dict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed subsct
to the opinion OF the Court the questions of law rails
ed by deendants counsel. For pIainnf Mr. (;ssrss
CHORD; for defendant Mr. d. D. Field
Samuel Nicoi Us. Thomas REORGANIZATION for slan-
dsnt csss I cause Of action was that the defn
Mr. Muloch. -
COMMON PLEAs-Before Judge Daly-The Corpora
Ton rs Ddptd PhfHtPs.-This was qui tam action to
recover penalty Of $3.50 for interrDg child contrary
to city ordinance without certificate The action
was brought under the 9th section the city
which declares that the sexton any church. having
the care ofhe burial ground attached receives
e BODY OF any person without the certificate of the at
tending physician, or fno physician In attendance
taen the certificate of some member of the family of
the deceased who was in attendance during Ne last ILL
nees or fnquest held then the certificate of the coro
ner who held such inquest shall be liable to pay a fine
OF $3.50 In this case alleged that the child in
tered before the certificate obtained The father
OF the child was called the part of the prosecution
It was anterior to the date of the certificate which
produced by the defendant but he could remember
ton not being prepared with any other testimony upon
the point noDsut was granted it did not appear
put the might have been given previous to the
intsrmeut For plaintiff Mr. E Casserly For defendant
Mr.. Bryan.
Dueios, rs. syift.In our report which appeared in
the Herald Of Tuesday last, in the Of Ducloss
Swift the parties named should read Adelaide Ducloss
vs. Charles w. Swift and not Charles s. Swift
CoURr OF GENERAL SESSIONS, Oct. 2l.-Before Recor-
der Scott and Aldermen Feeks and Tappan -7Iiai of
Ca-oiine Lohman, alias Madame Restell-Ogden HoH.
lug counsel for the people, and David Graham IT, and
james I Brady Esqrs, for the defence
The sheriff having returned the names Of one hun
ed additional jurors the empannelng Of the Jury In
the case Of Madame Restel proceeded with at the
opeviog OF the court this morning
WI Banta called.-Had formed an opinion Set
aside. b. W. Durham, do do. T. NJ Lyon, do do. w.
Hugh Curry called Had not formed or expressed an
opinion rs to the defendants guilt or innocence The
challenged for favor, and the two iu-
sworn as triers
Ours. by MIR BRADY.-Have you any impression upon
your mind BILE to the accused3 have don't
consider her good woman.
Q-Assumng what you read in relation to the prison
in this TO be true, would you that assumption
concede her guilty Of the offence charged?
EN- rss read ; the statements u the papers re-
but on looking at it again might MOI, because have
known SO many cases where the first statements
different from what subsequently, turns out to be the
truth
Q. by Mr.. HOFFMAN -supposng then that you had
statements would you now disregard those statements
and be COVE ned by the evidence alone in the case
Al cannot say but that should
q. by the CouRr-trom what you have heard and
read do you feel that you could decide impartay in
aside by consent.
John Dow culled-Had formed opinion Set aside
samuel Williams: o.lIsd.-Had formed an opinion to
certain degree. After considerable argument the iu.
competency left triers who fouud the cha
lepge not true and he was sworn as the 4th juror.
Lewis T. JackrOn cAl00.-Ha0 formed opinion nd
set aside; Robert Johnson do do T. C. Latham do do:
D. Shepherd do do; j. +. Meyer, do do; Lewis P Dex-
ter, do do
John B. Anderson called: have no. EXPRESSED or
formed any opinion as to the guilt innocence Of
the accused In this cage am grocer reside at the
read any statements that could induce me to form an
opinion as to the general character Of the defendant
Mr. A. was then sworn as q Juror.
Robert Davis cailsd-Iiad formed opinion and
get aside; J. Hamilton, do do; James Quinn, do do
William Blacket-l have formed opinion in
Inc ease nave one butcOUd decide in
cordance with the evidences adduced. Challenge
over SVepfued BY by the Court The usual question
although you now state that you had formed an opn
ion could you disresard that opinion impression an
render your verdict In accordance with the evidence
a0ne! to which he replied that he could The trers
Wa BsRss ea.d ana ns was set aside
se9 ASIDE T. u. " iams do do; g. B. Hamilton, do do
JAMES SroUr called and examined -Have vou az
pressed or formed an opinion in this case
Al have formed a sort of an opinion about 1t.
Q-When You form that opinion
Q-what led you to form an opinion,
Al can hardly say but thought she was guilty
Q-Whst is the accused put on trial for
Bigamy Laughter in which tie members of the
court could not refrain from joining
1910 you know in what kind of business II "a nj
legged she mas been engaged
-Bgamy Renewed laughter
Q-What do you understand by the term bigany !?
Al hardly know and don't think / know enough
about 1t 10 ray what 1t Is.
Q-What are your prejudices founded upon ? A.
The reports among the ladies.
MIR. 8 was permitted to slide
II P Lee called i Ihave read and heard statemart.
relative to the charges preferred against the
have formed an opinion in the oase have no prejudc4s
against the accused at ALL and the opinion formed IL
not from any thing have relation to t. in the
papers. have never seen the accused before and nv
opinion Is not so strongly fixed in my mind but that evil
dencs OF her Innocence would remove it. read the de-
tails Of former case, in which she found guilty
do reoosct converting with any one about II at all
Challenged peremptorily.
;; Ferdinand Cortleyou, John B. Anderson and John
dino
in the case, were sworn as Jurors
Charles Towrley called.-Had formed an opinion
Set aside. s Smith, do do; Cornelius Wsster6.d do
do; Nathaniel Sawyer, do do; Henry Moore do do: G
H Hay do do; John w. Burnton, do do; A. P. smith,
do do; Abraham Maze do do; Asa Raymond do do;
WIN fitz Norris DO do; Thomas Bristol, do do, Mi
chael c. Deberoise, do do.
tive to the guilt of the accused in former case from
reading the reports OF the trial Challenged for favor
r. Page oAled-Challeuged for favor aud rejected.
yo5'pn soaier csiled-Had formed an opinion set
aside John L. Hitman do do Lewis W Prime, do
do Joseph Weed, do. do Richard Mckay, do do
WIN Brown, do do Frederick Raft do do.
Elijah Downs called-Challsnged for favor and re-
jeced
sampson Rocco called have hoard someth ing about
tue Gas. once have had some conversation with my
In tn case have formed feeling Of pref udics against
the accused some time ago; have not changed nv
opinion; have no personal prejudice against the &C.
cused do not know her tits against the business
which it is alleged that she follows am preudioed
count believe she pursues the business alluded to
bat am sworn juror the question her guilt or in
nocepce will rest upon the evidence adduced; have
general prejudice against her business; have preu.
dice against burglars well other offenders; and
should require much evidence in the case Of the ac.
cused to warranta conviction, would In any other
and no more Challenged for favor and rejected by the
triers
Robert Steal, Lenias Tinker AID John Buxton were |
also called and set aside account of having formed
epnions as to the defendants guilty in the case.
After spending two entire days in obtaining jury |
six jurors only have as yet been sworn viz-Ricbard
Vcoabies, Russell Benedict: Robert Young Ferdinand s.
Cortieyou John B. Anderson. and John MADDEN. At4 |
O'clock the court after making another for en- sd
ditiona number of jurors to be summoned adjourned
until to- morrow, (ths morning)
CoURr CALENDAR, Oct. 2l.-Circuit Court-Before
justice Moorehouse, (no change and Justice Edwards
(no chapge) -
C9mmon Pleas, Part before Judge Daly-Nos I5 |
10 80 49, Al a. 3d. 65, g. CO. "a 10 s. So ST. Part
2-Beiore Judge Ingraham-Nos IS, g. g. 20, IA 1878
80, s4 SO, 80, %, "a, 96, 9s, l0D, IS.