Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1857-02-20

.
Tho Clerk addressed the juror and prison,
r." Prisoner, lo1k upon the juror.
Juror. look upon the pri'oncr.'
Goddard propose in behalf OF the gov
eminent to put the following questions
Arc YOU related 10 the prisoner, or have
You given or formed any opinion, or are You
sensible Of any bias, prejudice, or parilcu-
lar interest in the case 10 DO tried ? wide
Il ) Chap L., Sec 81
These questions we've put singly to the
juror 10 al Of them tn juror answered
I" No"
sIDoNp QUESTION.
Can Won conscicntiously find man gull.
ty Of an offence which is punishable with
death. provided the evidence satisfies YOU
that be- j. guilty? or ; chap IL, sec. So
The Juror replied in the affirmative.
rmEp QUESTION.
Goddard move your honor that the ju-
TOR be- irquircd of as Z, whether he holds
either ut The 1ficCs, or j. engaged 10 either
Of the professions or occupation. named in
the lajth chapter Ut the revised statutes, a.
cSemptlng from service, ~ juror, and for.
bidding their names from being placed on
the list
The above question was rut 90 The juror,
and be- replied IN tho negative.
Mr.. Clifford pruoccIcd q examine ihc
juror.
Juror have heard Of this case, | read
an account of the murder in thc lewiston
Falls Journal cannot remember what i'm
preston it made on mc have heard both
favorable and unGyur,hlr opinions cxTrrs,-
cl ! am constant reader Ui toe Journal /,
when heard of the case ! resolved IN form
~ opinion, knowing that my name was IN
the Jury box. asked Mr. Goddard, on
saturday, what questions were "a b. put %
me un Monday crossed the bridge with
hum, and came up % the court room with
him, where hc rad o. mo to action ot the
account Ui the cmpuglhuE of toe jury lu The
Webster case.
CHf1ti-Thai rrcssn's question, %. far
n. know. that has not hc-n sotilrl TO- this
state limay h. that Il his,-ccriamly not
within my knowledge PERHAPS, however,
my remarks will hr more appropriate after
tie oath il administered Tho juror was
here sworn 90 make true answers Then
how shall toe question Ut interest be- tired
| am not avarc ot any authoritative d,ci-
ZION uTon thr question However, the Trac-
tirc Of the cImm.n law In England aui New
York D, this iur toe fr,t Jury the court up-
points trirrs, who hear the evidence aud
pronounce upon 10. us o. whether the juror
was or was not indifferent A0sr there are
more than two Jurors cmIaunrIlel, some two
81 A.. la. sI a..
mated a. tricrs, 90 whom the evidence was
adlrrsrd, aud they pronounced upon the
imIlrtialiiy ui thc juror. Now, without
Proposing o. enter iutUauy Discussion, claim
ing that 10 Is MT the province ui the court
% ~ The question, am perfectly willing
@ submit thr question o. tUr court.
Applrtuu-lt ha. hrru the uniform Tmc-
ticr Ut the Court On decide thrs question.
our statute provides the same ruln nr civil
and criminal cls's, chap. l52, a'r. -i-"Ihc
same chlllansf jurors shall br allowed 10
criminal as 90 civil rlusr. o. 'lc Attorney
General, NJ other prosecutor, and ~ the dr-
frniant. That is, the question 0i iuiil.
irrruc, should De- determined by the court.
| am avarr that was not formerly lhr rule
under ihc common law.
Jui-c X Tho practice in tlis state, and
under our statute las been % submit; the
question Ut indifference M the juror, o. thy
determination Of the Court Such, 10 s l"-
lic,ci, has hcru the uniform practice 100
Massachusetts.
ClG1Il-lIay' You rad the Published 70.
ports OF ihc examination before ,hc justice
"a the Journal
An. / think have read part Of what
i. reported boo thc Lewiston Fall Journal oi
Oct. Is, 1886.
C.-Wht impression jill tie reading
CRATE iu your mind
My fret impression W.. that IL WIS
lest Tor mg o. think boz little OF thc as' U.s.
my ulmo wls iu the Jury box.
U-hyo You beard he sub rri frequently
talked about
Al have heard hu. ht,l, OF tho merits.
Q-liA,c You not heard persons express
opinion, 900 regard t1It'
Al think have. cau'tt.il rs whom.
p-ra,0uhls or uulwuhio'
A-SJmg,im,s one way, sometimes an
other
Q-Wlcn was II that YOU heard and uu-
favorable opinion
Al cannot tell.
MA subscriber O. the Lewiston Fall,
Journal Have hytn q reader i.ruma ,lmc.
Have not talked tho matter over with nay
family, except ;Iat 10 hls he0u preached NJ
the table. haze drJr.d item % uy moth
in. about 10. BEARDED 40 home during tie
sessions Of the court. don't know that !
have heard opinions except from some one
behind my back. have never .rcn pamph-
let editions IT the evidence. have never
sccn dagueucoiyrc Likeness OF the accused.
cndgayUrul a. form no opinion iTum tie
r1adin. OF the Poland tragedy and horrible
murder. | have cDnycrscd with the govern
ment officer, Mr.. Goddard, in reference 10
the questions that would be- put 90 me a. a
Juror. He told me nothing more than !
have heard to-day, ia the report OF the trial
of j. ". Webster This was on saturday
last. Nothing was said in regard to the
merits Of the case.
CliiIurd-I desire 10 make . remark or
two upon tins question, and il will probably
save time in regard % other questions that
may aris' In cmTanneline this Jury. THIS
u a challenge Tor taror and not for PrHdph
oduSr. This is one Of tie class oI challenges
where, at common law, the issue was lnyari-
ably submitted 10 trlcrs. The only rcspon-
,ibiity which the court had, was IN deter
mining the character or quality VI the evil
dence that should be adducrd To the tricrs.
The causes Of challenging, are, - use the
language Of tho best writers upon the Grim
NAL law, rs we'll as the best considered Ju-
dicial decisions, various and nnumcable
Tho question Of fitness after the evidence
adducci, whether it came for the Juror OF
third persons, was submitted 90 the discrc'
ton Of the tricrs, and the question wh'eh
they were called upon 20 decide Is TIC exact
oue,tiDn indicated hy our statute, whether