New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1849-09-14
A.tor-nlars Riot.-sEcOSp DAY
COURT or SkSIRAL ssSsiONs-B.for. JUcs- Dali Alder
Y kstLr AZ

Tx CAsE oF JUDsON AND OTHERS INDICTED
TOR RorAt the opening Of the Court yesterday
swrnDs except Norus, McL.sgDha ana creep wao.y re-
cogDIAeces ~eo forfeited yesierosy for nOnseDdsnce
ns Cen then Proceeded 10 call tire pane Of 4rOfs
ar.t one ueirg I'll Benz an,n 4 bafloa
Toe QI--uon- asked acre follows
~ Nv saith J'r "s pr""a~s s~aGsHsins az % principal
= Do you foow the seeu,edi 4 Oaly since I have
ss,n IN Court
Have you read the accounts Of The riots 10 the
Doyoa believe what you have resdi 4. believes
z bal 90 you believe what the newspapers stated p
bvnsNr thein 70 be a. correct ne~spapors general
Y DO YOU believe ne~ though A. / believe new,pa-
Peas TO Dc as generally incorrect a. correct
BY Ihs Dissnct A1tsrssy-Q COuo JOu lay aside the
ipiormston which you have read ana heard ard Ind
true verdict according TO The evdeuc. 4 Ihlls could
M onith lnen argued 10 the uyers, Aessfs Cram and
GOulo, mat Ia. gentleman not proper Juror, be-
cause nc believed 10 tbs hrst place had COM
mliec Now tnst qussuon Certainly one If an ana
hal ceston Wa D. yst decided sL0 lnal certainty his
would bs infsencsi f he had lo. frleLd Or rss.
ton durbg he occurrences VI llo not Tor against
prisoner, 4 lie believed what he lao read Tae usaier
inen Dsng ei 10 u- ~ ere hey pronounced The challenge
Of Mr Barlow 10 be csTkUE.
M Barlow eas snen pefenpioniy challenged by Mr
james N omith ns beng De nfs. VI lls i've pefemplo
The name called IVES Hiram O. Boomer 40
Cfee1"el-ss MI Biooiner was challenged a. " pm
Tue question, materially the same as those Of Mr
bsrO" Challenge for cause Withdrawn and ordered for
Z. Do you know Mr. Juoson a Sotunt the present
un0uIrut.
Z bid you read aud believe the newspaper accounts Of
Inc noti od' aud not particularly doubted wal Wa
stacd
Z. Ddths newspapers charge Mr. Jad.on with being
Qsaia1, ~ h coDi wns do you understand BY not
n Wei, suppO.e u 10 be- tumulluOUs sssemDisge Of
people thiO~Ihg bucsDsts ana Stones
hif snith tuen remarked Il suppose that Il sufficient
Mr Crane one Of the trers asked Information Of the
Cour relation ~ the law laid down By me Supreme
h, ne I.,f Attorney Could you lay aside your opin
ion. sd Ind verdict according 70 evidenced H. fes,
Ai,r confederation. The announced the challenge
untrue. Ar BOOnvr was pefempiorny challenged.
Nj Busted, behalf Oi The defeu'e, asked The opinion
sfue COuIt relation " statute allowing that any per
so1 Deng usd Tor murder VI ieOn.e. Incurng
yeas incarceration may be al owed Eve pr emyiOy cha
lon. o. Sow runDg OF he COurs dsmauQed whether
IN tni- clmsnt tic leu prisoners allowed chs
leasV. eo VI I've must w lhs qlantum for Ins whole
M. Whiting behalf Of the prosecution opposed The
rug Couu al thls stssc Of proceeding, The
olrsos cue not be Ia order m The hrsI frs had been
consumed or exhausted
1as Cont oos ground u Mr. Whiting and refused
order al hs present tne which ruling Mr. Busted
Mf Beslsmis ID Brush wa. the next Juror called He
wss cAslsnged /. to favor Dy Mr. Basssed.
Q-Dd yOo rese Tue Newspaper accounts Of the Aston
Place uOisi Il dld.
o DID 5os re.d what was stated In reference TO Mr
Juasof, or what you read whs Il unisvorabis % hm p
x-What read was favorable 10 him
Q-DO you believe What stated In reference 10 Mr.
Ju1sOs beiug present. OF bs being engaged Ia The O g.
II bsAe'eu he was tere, but not particularly Deiiey-
80 satin. oa oehsf Of Jud,on then withdrew hs chsl-
lsnse, ssa .sssd Tue Juror mi ht be sworn IN.
Dir Ba.l-ea behalf OF George Douglass, ordered
ysierDyoy cL.Asegs and Nj. Crush wa accordingly
IA Jo..ps Browner ~ssthe the person called from
lie csaienged on behalf Of Mr. Judsou a. to pnn-
cipsl causes
s. Mr., Smith
q Do you know Mr. Judsoni \ do not personally
y from wbst you have heard, or what you have read
have you formed sny opinion as 10 bic gait or Innocence
chsisus. for principal cause Withdrawn aud the ch.!-
iere VI f.'Or Instituted upon the ound of biss against
Ale much argument The challenges were withdrawn,
an M. sro~nsr, OTIS oreenwett'i was sworn ~ A.
the hf-t Juror, ara cOnsv qlenIiy the foreman
Tue EeKt juror va. COruelius De WIT lie was ch9l-
y DID you uesf OF Tue Astor-pIacs riotsf A ]
H.. IN. challenge for cause was Withdrawn and for
o H.ve yoi any friends who were sufferers from the
riot.l 4 No, ~ friends OF scquaintsnces.
Here The challenge was Withdrawn and Dir. Dewitt,
nouuf-dealer Vi AmOssL sworn IN tue second Juror
h,s Two juror. "ens oolaued the necessity Tor 'ne''
def,d tLslr ers 10 Messs Browner aud Dewitt
The name of Wnmol Williams WAS next called by the
Mr Winans SAID he a merchant dealing IN Dasal
so. % AscdOug has formed no opinion from NE
sompsny aud uad friends injured al the late not
Tue ch.i.nge on behalf Of Jod.oa ~as ~hdrswn, put
Nj NIusn. ~ss pefshtOfHy ohaiisnkou "n oo"sH "
the accused, Douglas
Tae next sf Christopher Delaoo lie was cha,
cs.ueAxsd AS favor
from What you have read IN the newspapers do you
b-nsss oecuffes On Inc iV'n u nay 'S''' n i"''
Q IA. the fact Of prues beisg indicted any influence
on your nindf 4 nave been Oh Grand Jures 90 often
r. never anew psrson 70 be ndict,c without evidence
appearing to wsusut a convicuon-if suo.snuslcd
. Do yos IhinE you could act impAruaiy as Juror
0 iBy Mr. Smith Have you 70 med any opinion ad.
ye.r 10 Mr Juds n 4 Noih ug further than dsike
have him from reading his own p.per but maj would
not influence him fsom scung az a juror, n, -, a.,
Ia. nsfs consulted lOsether, snd alter much det
h.,,on decided .e challenge to lrus and Mr. Deano
was 10 cous, quence refused as a Jur.f
Lewis DOdd, beng The next called was challenged
NJ DodG stated II at he had poor opinion ofhe moral
eh.rseter Of JudsJn and consequently wac peudced
ss.nsl hin on that account lie hSd Ie.a We ue~sPs
p~rs formed NO 81 inon OF the transaction "heh
would hun frun being an impartial Juror IN refer
eure 10 tnts accusation.
Inc tner. found III. challenge not true.
kIf Dodd ~.s peremptonly challenged by MI Smhh on
NJ DAVID Page lsuordeser, reading al tho corner OF
N,H snd hO0oken-s,, was The next ,,.,.
he the ground on the nisht OF the MOI
Had thst tucson there but had formed no oph
ion ~hsthsr Ne was eoncsised IA we ptoSeeo,"s S
sT, ,ss
Tue sa.enge was withdraw and nr. Page sworn As
M Si..r Bogsrt, Is CharlessL wa the next name
called asd he stated he pIeiudiced ana dd mol hl"A
he Al npsusl juror. lie was then dismissed as III
Nj Fr,dsncs " Welshmsn. book Keeper, living In
E.,t ~ nty-seveuih-sL was the ns1t person lie W"
shaAenged ss 10 favor
. puNuu kuO~ hi Judsonl 4 MOL ptfsonall
Have YOU pre- Judice against Inn from what you
have heard havv hrm opinion but have certain
IN A. uuiavorable 10 Mr.. Judson never gave
81 much ,hOuah ,,, - ,, -,
sse your impression, and tad verdict according 10 the
evidence ss sn Impartial juror / mus 00u''
Tns tf,sfs found the challenge mol True -
N smith pstemptory challenged him There beang
FIVE persons y.rempteTy aleu.ed Ihr argument upou
wueter ID. statute SLOWS i've challenges io each prison
a. " nvs fvf " hole lon persons, " - tAhen up
M MhilHs Isd that The amount 81 ave "ss inc mum
be- nuot.d the hole number, and not hNe esch ue
tA..r n sOw forty ave psfemptoy chaichte'
hs tol- number and sAch siugy would be Aho"eo
beheht OF he ubcr, ana Nal YOU prove ucSo
lssr 10 he statute farce OF Ja.uce-thsi me pane
waud certainly sr1h.usedghst no more than 81 NAMES
eyuid be sued. AID tho would then beifusiracd
Tue arsuEcut not coucuc d, the defense msAint
no reply, wHen the Count soJOurnsd III tomorrow Al II
c'e.vSk. -, -.
Al The conclusion. james Mathews one OF the prison
eis surrendered by his ball aud committed 10 prison
~ prrvent escape ,,,
lie attendance a. large and attentive throughout
the tsaiou.ue. OF business transacted yesterday ne
wss .hs sosy The excitement sun cOnnuu-s a. sne
sane pleb, tue feet Of getting aJury IN his e'uHS
ss-uls he . matter Of = HUE doubt
Court Calendsr....THis DAf
Cosxo. PLxA,-Nos IFS IS LOO, a., Is, o. ~, w. 81
Law Courts.