The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-10-04
THE BROADWAY TRAGEDY.
The Trial OF Macdonald for the Murier Of
Virginia Stewart Postponed to Dcccm-
COURT OF OYER AND rERxINER
Rafora Hon IuIga RNoaavelt


Der. A
COURT OF OYER AND rERxINER.
Before Hon. Judge Roosevelt
Ocr 3-The Grand Jurors called, but only six
having answered to their names, the District Attorney
moved for additional PANEL rcturnablc onthe third
Monday Of this month. Ordered
In the Of Robert Macdonald, charged ,ciA The
der of Vsrynia Scar-The District Attorney that
in this he had been with the
ton Of tho prisoners counsel 10 apply the Court for
commission to California He had sent for the prisoner
The petit jury panel then called aud heard
from those who unable 10 serve.
In short time afterwards Macdonald brought into
Court handcufsd, by Sheriff John Kelly and Of his
deputies The prisoner is TALL powerful looking and we'll
made man. apparently thirty FIVE years Of age about
feet IL, wearing moustache and hair upon his Chin he
pale though resoute, and looked Court
room with quivering and resessness OF the eye. He
was dressed in black with tho exception of white waist
coat.
Mr.. James T. Brady with whom associated Mr.. f.
II. Grandin Of New Jersey said that in the case OF
Macdonald they had served notice Of a motion for
various commissions for several places In the Union;
the notice was given the Gath OF September for
to day, it being the earliest day which the appii
cation could be made The affidavit Of Macdonald dscoses
that the indictment against him found In the Court
Sessions and moved by the District Attorney u the Court
II Oyer and Terminer that several persons named in the
affidavit material witnesses for him, he is informed
by his COUNSEL James 7. Brady and Clarence Seward
in California; the most OF them in Mobile, Ala that
deponent is resident OF Mobile, Ala, since 1885, and that
those witnesses cognizan Of the facts stated and by
which he hopes 10 prove his innocence.
The District Attorney had no doubt that the application
IL In good faith this being the first day could have
been made; if he had had opportunity he would have
consented to II IN advance, In order 70 avoid delay II
matter within the discretion OF the Court to Tx the
terms upon which the commission should issue. He de-
sired to have the time mtcd and he believed that stay
Of proceedings to the first Monday in December would
the wishes Of the other side lie also thought that
the prosecution should have power appoint counsel
crossexamne the witnesses orally aud 10 produce wit
nesses at these several commissions throughout the
Mr. Brady understood that the District Attorney
timatad To the jurors who had answered TO their
that their attendance would not be required till the third
Monday IN October, and that the Court should not actu
ally proceed business till that time In regard to tho de-
sire Of the District Attorney 10 know what expected to
be proved by those witness that would be disclosed long
prior 10 that time for the nterrogatons wod be pre-
pared with all diligence and despatch and copy served
upon him. The rule To commissions perfectly set
tied, that where party the first opportunity
after issue is joined for commission to issue, he is not
compelled to disclose what he expects 10 prove ny the
Witnesses unless the adverse party throw doabt
on tho question Of bona idss in making the app'i-
cation. In such the Court might desire the
ing party TO state what he intended to prove;
otherwise party was allowed TO enjoy his privilege Of
reseyyDg any statement OF his defence till the
when it became absolutely necessary in the ordinary
course Of judicial proceedings IN this case they had
moved at the earliest time That was conceded They
had moved good fah. That, too, conceded. They
had named large number OF witnesses 1t perfect
~ obvious, from the situation OF Macdonald and the his
whom he had depended would be out ol the ju
rsdiction OF the court, except so far as commission
might be issued He was resident Of Mnbilo-an entire
stranger IN the city. There person here
who had ever known his character or anything Of
his personal career. II IT were desired to show
what his personal character had beon that could
only be shown through the persons who had known him
in the places where he resided visited In regard TO
his visit the city New York proof save limit
ed degree could be expected obtained III this city
But lie and tell his learned opponent the
history OF the prisoner (Which he should have no oojcc
In sO yutatu \ and all
witnesses expected to testify to, he would occupy
two three hours Some Of the would prove
perhaps, only little fact. Some OF them for
instance, would be called to prove Geographic
messages which might bear directly the in
the case, and the moral intent OF the deceased
Being here stranger, he might claim at least
Hospitality. He was entitled TO fair trial, and counsel
believed he would get fair trial and be acquitted.
As to authorizing counsel appear and the
Desses orally he had never known such provision to be
made in any order II would be attended with very
great Inconvenience and delay, because while he did not
deny that there were many professional men who
eminenty qualified to examine witnesses there still
believed that consisted only asking questions without
object point IT. therefore, this unlimited right
gven II might defeat the object which they all had in
nesses on the part Of the prosecution he apreendad
there was right power in the Court make any
such provision. He did not know any law that
toned IT, II there any he should like the District
Attorney to produce il.
The District Attorney remarked that the statute
express the subject
Judge Roosevelt; suggested that the way proceed
was Ter counsel 10 draft such order he proposed
Mr.. Brady-I have drawn one.
Judge Roosevcl-And submit ii to the other side, aud
they can submit amendments morrow morning 1t
Chambers.
That course agreed upon, and the order will be
fixed al Chambers IN few days.