The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-12-15
= tlAc A SUAlkA July 1klOUcAB Leg s&l
Arg ument on the Challenging OF Juror.
COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS.

before Dis honor heGOrQef IuOu
Dec. IA This being the day set down for the trial
James Sanders ard Others indicted for riot in the Ninth
ward on the Fourth q July last the court room wa,
crowded to its utmost capacity with the defendants thsil
fs nds and Witnesses in the After the court had
opened the District Attorney, N Blunt and moved
Tor the trial of James Sanders and Others for riot
gentl-nan. behalf Of Mr. Rustsed, then came
forward and read several sidavits stating that the
counsel for Sanders (slr Buseed) At present lying
in bed sick and under those circumstances he could not
attend to the cafe which srder ordinary circums
he would have been ready to try that day and in
cusen praying that the case Of Sanders might be post
poned.
Mr. Blunt suppose mis,ortunes will come and this
is one Of them have endeavored all could to prevent
IL per sble two uias and shall state, ia reference
to this case, that the complaint made against thoss
parties The 4th Of July last reached the office Of the
District Attorney the rnag afer the grand Jury for
the August term had beer DISCHARGED The magistrate
Lad been month il vestgatng those charges. and nn-
y an Indictment sas found the papers could
down for the second Monday in Osoher Mr. Busteed 1T
that time counsel fer all of the cet ndAuts On the
wtht raw from III the defendants except Mr.. San iers
who fortunately at that time broke his leg the
fore couli not att+ni determined at that time to for
feit the bail Of the defendants, but they hang re-
tnrEei 10 the clerk could do Mr.. McKeon then
took charge OF the cfe but not knowing mach about
the affair having only entered upon bic duties,
seBted to put the of until this present term II is
proposed with view Of having It'll 10 ger period
OF time to have tso trials instead Of Now, owing
to the sicAIetB of Of their counsel the court will be
under the necessity of having two tr;sls. will here
state to the court in connection with this pre-
vent any usrtp esent6ti0ns 1 stand here not from
any person al motives but In capacity public pros
ecutor. have been falsely misreprsented By some
cowaIdy miicreants, who ignorant that they
no knowledge OF the duties Of business District At
torpey, or too obtufe to understand them There.
for., your Hoaor, l move for the trial CT the de-
fendants
The Court then granted the motion of Mr. BcBesds re-
pt.enta,ive on The psrt of J. Sanders
Mr.. PcKeon counsel for the rrist NERVE have ora
person here named Chars Burns not ind cited bat hed
10 bail and ag.i , we hays another named James Barns
indicted but arrested Now which these persops il
II he j strict AttoI ney means 10 prosecute.
District rneyIpc have seen found ganst
both Of these men, although ors Of ,hem James Barns
be. not teen arrested. Is Charles Burns here?
Ar. NcKs6n-No, sir; he has not come yet, bat will
appear for him.
Dist let AtsorneyTbep sir his rscoguizanses b.
foIei ed ane bench war ant Issued for his arrest
Mr. Thornton, hi, bail then eppeare and in search
OF the defendant, accom- panied by oiHcss.
Tae Clerk Then began To read of the o, the
reHt OF he defendants and only Fix OF them ppearinx
The wtrict Attorney moved e forfeiture Of the bail
In every where The defendant did not ap GEAR and
that bench wlusnts be Issued for their arrest
The bail Of the remainder OF the defendants then went
in search Of the absentees and the Clerk proceeded
TO empap mel jury.
Samuel Carson the 8rst Juror called and was chal.
peed by the counsel for the defendants for the
that he had expressed his opinion in the case.
is'iiot Atoi nsy lilo are you going to prove thAR
District Attorney onest to his swe ,rpg the Juror on
that point, ard now ones fr all waot to the
mon as carried into elect Ia relation to he challenging
Of Jurors. For the earliest time down to the present.
the practice has been to object to jurors for various rea
ons, which bss 10 great extent served 10 confuse the
principle laid down by the common law OF England, which
pro,ides that 40 nrotno than any other rsu or
wne,sshonld be a,ksd any question that would tend 70
degrade bime elf ard that lrnation or ion OF
Al OPTION prejurgirg nan pieces Of moral deg
dacp Tbs truth of the matter H. that heYirg forped
or expresfed an option Ia Father challenge ia favor
thar against refer your honor To the of the Peo
pie Va William Booins; again to the OF the People
Hplse; Ard aga;p to tire case of the People against
FREEMAN. In the latter cass the Supreme Court after
thorough examination, dee cd thu very pint that
now srgui in my favor The subject OF challenging
ur rs he's heen well reviewed by JOY ia adde0ds TO
his work &c rfusidu7n The question occurred
10 th. rourt f Oyer and TermUer, in Nev jersey, be-
fore Chief Justice Hornbower in ths trial Of spencer
in6 ted for the bis wife. reed not say thai
Chief Justice HoTnbower stood, among ue, If the
most enlightened lumpsIies tbs bench Ia all ca ses
he distinctly affirmed the common law doctrine, that II
u Dot yeht IFoper that Juror shoull Ne kei tao
question hat would dsgrsf@ him. ] vi to place tbs
question - this light the. the true prncipls Of ohal
IensIs jurors may, Ia this court for ever 30 established