The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-11-13
OFFICIAL CORRUPTION.
lvcat un,,nntsc Narrative-Thc People
ngainst sydney II. Stuart, City Judge.
COURT OF OYER AND TERMINER.
Before Judge Roosevelt.

Before Judge Roosevelt
MONDAY Nov l2-Ihe case of people against
sydney H. Stuart City Jucge having been fxed for trial
to-day, the courtroom filled with anxious and in
terested spectators The prosecution to Nc
Frsucis B. Cutting-Mr Hall the district Attorney not
wishing to conduct H. i, obsbe he shoed have
to appear witness sgans the accused. Mr.. STUART
was defended by MessTs. James 7. Brady James Il.
Whiting and E. W. Stoughton lie sat behind his counsel
during the progress of the
The indictment against Ne stuart charges, in sub
stance that the accused Febrna 1885, ia cond raon
Of brbe OF $500, nterlered wic he niustration
Justice in the oil indictment sg,nst VIM. Cos
grove, and prevailed upon the mtric Attorney, by the
representations which he made him ia the matter, TO
enter nolle proseJ,i.
The Clerk proceeded call the petty jury panel The
first name called that of
Robert Beatty examined by Mr., Cutting-Was recently
candidate for the Office of County Clerk has formed
idea of the guilt or innocence Mr. Stuart; his name is
Robert Beatty, r, and his taner's Robert Beatty the
served at witness place of business not at
his iather's.
Mr. Cutting submitted to the Court whether this
the juror returned by the Commits ,ioner.
To Mr.. Bradyiiis iather's occupation aud his osn Is
that of ookbinder; his place of business is in
Spruce street, and his ll.hecs in Gill;
To the Court-My fathers age ia seventy; his
sidence and place of business different from mine.
Mr CuttlnR 10 tnt ivy l1rtctoryJ Wnert ne
found both given Rober. Beatty. He thought
it quite important, however, that in this there
should no for ssry criticisms to those
who should compose the jury ani as this per.
son had for public Office Robert Beatty Jr., aud
received under that designation he thought the
presumption that the intended for this
mans father.
Judge Roosevelt thought the presumption rather
that Mr.. Beattys ather disqualified by age from
&f.o
this gentleman his place Of business that he the
person intended by tb. Commissioner OF Jurors
Mr.. Beatty thereupon sworn as juror.
John b. Wateran not objected to, and sworn as
VIM +. Van wagenen challenged for principal cause
and favor. Messrs. Beatty and Wateran 3
Mr.. Van W. had read somewhat Of this could not
say he had not formed opinion the guilt in.
nocence OF Mr.. Stuart, but had expressed none.
To MIR. Cutting--fias settled opinion in regard 30
this matter less than usual ia such cases; that
would prevent him giving an impartta verdict.
Challenge for principal cause overruled, and exception
taken; examined on the ehai enge for favor. Has
served Grand jury does MT think that
the fact Of bill of Indictment wing been found by
Grand Jury would weigh item in the evidence at all
the time he read the account of the csse put felt
more free in in his s 70 1 Try any % he be- aia ID to Try his
does not know the accused personally.
Challenged perempoTily
Charles g. Wright, examined on the challenge for prin
cipal causeHas read and heard aoout this case has
formed and expressed impressions ABOUT the guilt
nocence OF the deceased but they crude inn
pressions.
To Mr. Catting-Have siedge the facts the
case has formed settled to the guit or in
of the accused thinks he cout find verdict in
the case the evidence alone unbiased by former
opinion.
To Mr.. Brady--Distinguishes iDpressops and
opinions; has had iuipre notning occurred
remove IL; ii remains about the
Mr. Cutting-is any impression or opinion that 20
have formed pressed such to disable from
listening to the evidence and mak,ng up your min
the guilt innocence of the upon the esidencs
aopef
Objected TO- and question arg led
Judge Roosevelt did not understand the rule hal
iepges principal TO extend further
fact of juror having formed expressed opaion.
The mere reception OF an impression from reading
newspaper il disqualification juror II 1t did IL
would be Impossible, 10 an intelligent community like
this, ever to get jury.
A. could find verdict altogether upon the evidence
that may be given
Challenge for principal overruled. scption
taken witness examined the challenge f,r favor.
Has served ON the Grand jury knows the rule which
governs that body the fact Of Indictment being found
against man does not to certa nty leave the impress
sion his mind that il in which petty jury
woud-without evidence overthrow the prima face
caseconyct; knows the accused for years but has
personal acquaintance with him
Challenge Withdrawn, and Mr.. Wright juror.
Edward j. Godfrey examined the challenge for prin.
cpa causeave read Of this case; have deci idly
formed any opinion about III have spoken of it several
times ia company but do know that have any lm
preston about IL seemed uesce at the time
In the opinion expressed by our iite company have
not paid any attention for the three four
weeks; there is any impression at all my mind that
IL the one that stands uppermos do not know Stuart at
To Mr. Cutting--Have nothing about the in
the case, the evidence gwen have formed settled
opinion ~ to the guilt INNOCENCE Of the accused:
presume could find verdict ayoraby the evidence
alone.
To Mr. Whitney, merely acquesced IN the opinion Of
the party with which eOnversing respecting the
case; remember what that opinion was IL stands
upperp os in my mind aud it would probably require
some explanation TO remove it,
Challenge for principal overued and exception
taken; challenged for favor and the principles OF law
bearing the point argued ct length by Messr CItting
Judge Roosevelt left the matter in the hands of the
triers; they had the evid nee before them: II tney
thought that he had impressions subject of the guilt
innocence Of the accused which would affect hi
dict they would end the challenge true otherwis they
would find 1t not true.
The triers agreed OF them finding the challenge
true and the other not true This amounts 70 the chs
tenge not being sustained and the juror was challenged
George +. Peterson challenged for principal cause had
not formed or expressed opinion iu respect to this
Challenge overruied, and Mr. Peterson sworn az a
James Boyd challenged for principal cause-tad read
about this case but had formed expressed opin-
ion about II had not heard any person say anything 20
what they thought about It has person knowledge
OF Judge Stuart knows nothing about the and has
no Impression about it either way
Challenge overruled, aud juror challenged peremp-
Elijah H. Riker challenged for principal cause; has ex.
pressed opinion to the guilt innocence Of Mr.
To Mr.. Cuttins-Has read statements in the newspa-
rsBaruiDg against Mr. stuart, does
recollect reading anything else has heard It talked
over; forme1 his opinion from what he had read AMI
heard; cannot say that he heard anything about
the facts the statements which he had heard yht ia
fnence his mind thinks however he could render
partial verdict.
Judge Roosevelt thought IL better 20 let this Juror
stand aside but did not TO make thls precedent
the contrary II he found IL impossible 70 get jury
be would consider that the Of mans having
impression which would not influence his verdict is
cient 10 disqualfy him.
Edward Green, challenged for principal oause.-Resdes
kno AZ he h.4 f,rme
any opinion TO the guilt innocence of Judge Stuart
he had read the statement and surprised at II from
bis knowledge Of the Judge has known him for years
but not intimately.
Challenge overruled, and Mr.. Green sworn juror
George kingman challenged for principal causc-Re-
sides In Montgomery street has read account
the complaint against Judge Stuart heard noiog psrt
uar about IL might have made heard statements but
nothing 10 leave impression particularly has no bias
his mind one other. docs not knnx Mr