The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-06-18
COrrt of General Sessions
before the Recorder and Aldermen Ward and Dennan
TRIAL OF JAMES FERGUSON, FOR PEgJURY-CLosE
OF THE TESTIMONY.



TRIAL OF JAMES FERGUSON, FOR PEgJURY-CLosE
OF THE TESTIMONY.
JIM lt-hf. brCadwell, examined yesterday,
called his morning. and The s-examina renewed
q-ltw near was you 10 Ferguson when you said NO
no, none OF that ~ Al think said so at the moment
Of risrg. Witness went The floor, within two
yarde 81 Ferguson did not get hold any chair strike
Forsuson had nothing in his hand his tets clcnched
the door; bis object was to show that he in cool blood
70 ono bad accused him Of being in hot blood and he did
rot suspect himself had been tenant Of Mr. Brush and
hi partner had not paid al his rem.
Q-lIow many houses arc there in this city you have
gone out OF without paying your rent!
Nh Han objected 20 the question irrelevant
Mr.. Jordan argued that the trial Of
grra: importance. Here witness to swear per-
jury against another and without meaning this one)
such might himself he rotten to the core he
meant now TO chow that there not honest hair in
his head lie had lived from place defratding All The
landlords Of the whole portion Of their rent had
gone to the pious Harpers and obtained Bibles from
them. and mpc'ed on their clerks in their absence.
The question was ruled cut.
Witness contnued-Mr Ferguson had gone ont Of the
room had jus, placed BIZ foot the thrchod when
he squared of.
Elias q. Drake. ESQ. sworn-In October 1850 he was
foreman Of the Grand jury
viz Jordan objected to anything hat trauspred before
them.
Mr. Hall prey osed 20 show as an independent fact
tunder the authority o. our statute authorizing FORE
member Of a Grand Jury to testify on trial
for PERJURY that Mr. Ferguson had sworn the same
thing in substance at least before them and elsewhere
to prove corrurncss or wilfuI pervcroness He read
support Of his proposition.
Mr. Jordan replied They had no right to prove an.
other distinct PERJURY they ege not set forth in the
indictment
The Court admitted the testimony for the purpose Of
showing That the act corrupt and deliberate one
and not occasoncd Nv surprise nadvertency (Excep-
ton taken and notod)
Mr. Han then rendered the statement made by Mr.
Ferguson on which the Grand Jury had acted and which
was the foundation Of the trial in the Special Sessions
together with letter addressed 70 the witness rs FORE
man, calling atent 10 the written the same
sheet The paper The one produced on Monday and
arked by the Court, but not then put In evidence
Mr. Jordan renewed his obiection but tho document
admitted under the ruling and subject to same
exception and MIR Drake proved that il had been sworn
TO before the Grand jury statement on oath in the
shape Of verified complaint in civil action substan-
tally the as the complaint here was also nut in
subject 10 exception, and the prosecution rested
MIR. Jordan addressed the Court urging that there
70 20 TO the jury but they held otherwise
and directed him to proceed with his defence wheroupon
he opened the case arguing that there could be no con-
vicion for perjury In swearing Brush had assaulted the
defendant as by their own showing the compliments
had made out chat there an assault in law conf
mitted The only evidence they could in the nature Of
things produce that supplied by the xamipa-
ton Of the parties In the conspiracy and they would
show they had contradioted themselves in aidayits
which he would read and they would also chow little
more Mr. Broadwel whose evidence he thought
tho jury would not rely. lie called
hr William s. Dawson. Clerk II Second District Po-
ice Court Jefferson Market who proved that the alda-
Wits originally made by the complainant and Mr.. Broad
wei we're l,d 10 that Office but we're sent 10 Judge
Hcetc nd not returned Tic papers produced we're
tyt eoIlet mace y dciltcSn. ana oSamirsd Mr. ual