The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-04-07
Especially reported for the Daily Exchange. !
TRIAL OF DANIEL {. SlCKLES,
MURDER OFPHILIPBARTON KEY
THIRD DAYS PROCEEDINGS.

i'thN - LA rNSCEEU4NGS.
CRIMINAL COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF CO.
LUMBA-JUDGE THOS. H. CRAWFORD.
PRESIDING.
WASHINGTON ,,April 6, 1859.
| Inc Court was opened this morning at 1OI
O'Clock The prisoner was brought in soon after
wards and took his seat in the box The Court
| room was densely crowded usual, and an artist
! was pusliy employed in making sketch of the
scene Tor one OF the New York pictorial weeklies.
| Mr' 'ickies wears confident ART having been
made apparent, by the efforts thus far to select n
jury that great degree of sympathy exists for him
In this community. The eight Jurors already sworn
were called and severally answered to their names
The talesmen summoned last night were then a,-
amlned with the following result:
| Robert NJ. Coombs had formed onnions and H.;
mind was fully made up. He did not think anv
evidence could change it. He was set aside.
Charies W. Haveuner was set aside, having
| formed and expressed opinion
Geo. w. Hinton, VIM H. Arnold, Geo. NJ Good
all, Aoram Grinders, Thos. Parker, Thos E. Young
ana Jas; w Coombs were pronounced disqualified
for similar reasons.
Hiram Fl. King had never formed or ernrassod
any oplnion IN the case. Had no prejudice for or
against the prisoner. Challenged peremptorily by
| Mr.. Ratcliffe. ~
VIM. G. Deale had formed an opinion. IF nlacad
on the jury he would tryt to perform his du tv
Mr.. Phillips contended that he was a competent
| juror. ''eN'
The Court thought otherwise If a man was
afraid to trust himself it seemed that his ,,;nd
| must be prejudiced.
Mr.: Phillips responded that the most any man
could say was that he would try to do his duty.
Inc Court regarded his answer, that he would
| try to do his duty, evidence that his mind
was not in that unbiased and unprejudiced state
Which was essential to juror. Set aside
Jesse b. Wilson (grocer) had formed various
opinions without coming to anv decided conclusion
on the subject. He had prejudice for or AGAINST
the prisoner. He was sworn-making the 9th
juror. VIZ WI
Jno. A. Rupp believed himself prejudiced and
was set aside. N
Jno. Z. Leach was set aside, HAVING formed an
opinion. e" Oil
James Nokes had formed no opinion on the guilt
or Innocence of the prisoner, but had expressed a
great deal of sympathy for both parties Had No
prejudice or bias on either side. He was pronounc
ed competent juror, but was CHALLENGED by the
counsel for the defence Wv
John McDermott had read the testimony before
the Coroner's inquest, and had conyerscd freaIv
ABOUT the matter; had some vague impressions If
sworn as juror, would endeavor to DISCHARGE bis
duty impartially, but would prefer not to nndar.
take that responsibility; could not say whether his
mihd was olased or not, nor to what extent The
Court thought him a competent Juror and he was
sworn, making juror No. 10. ""'
Leonidas Coyle, J. Duval and Francis Mat.
ungly, were all pronounced disqualified
VIM. II. Stanford had never formed or exnressad
an OPINION, but being conscientously opposed to
capital punishment, was disqualified
Michael Green had bias in favor of the prisoner
so far as he had read the newspaper statements IF
placed the jury he could render verdict accord
ing to the law and the evidence
Mr. Brady argued that the bias which the iuror
had expressed for the prisoner, might be such as
any man would have-a partial knowIedoa of tbo
circumstances derived from mere rumor bnt ~
he said, in addition, that he would render vardct
In accordance with the law and the evidanca ba
showed that MS Dlas was not of such nature as to
warp MS Judgment or to prevent him from die
charging his duty as juror, in accordance with
his oath. N'e Win
Mr. ould replied that the answer of the uror was
@ 70 tne erect that he was prejudced and for this
reason he was not competent Juror: for II wos
fundamental principle that in entering the inrv
pUI mans mind should be perfectly free from
all pas or prejudice way or the other.
mr. uraham thought the answer was merely in
accordance with the principle upon which our
criminal code was based, that every man was to bn
considered innocent until he was proved to he
guilty. The presumption was always in trials for
e 1' Iaeoren VuGe, and in trials for liberty in ia
Vorem"oertdfts. The juror had only such symna-
tnY for the accused every man ought to have fnr
crime. e" vi
.b;" r narllsle would say one word in relation 20
TINS new suggestion, and it was necessary to take
INTO consideration the answer ofthe Juror He savs
as the case now stands, his opinion is in favor of
.ne prisoner.sureiy it would take great ingenuity
10 contound this statement with the impression that
II mere legal presumption of innocence would GRO
aye Inc juror had avowed an opinion, and under
qualified. N 0'e"'iS Zig
MIR. Brady would be satisfied with his Honor,s
construction of the jurors answer. He never knew
ol case where mere expressive sympathy was re-
garded as disqualification. He did not expect
jurors to be marble statues, devoid of feeling and
sympathy. The party was evidently upripbf and
intelligent, and he hoped the Court would Question
him and satisfy itself
Mr.. Carlisle understood the ruling of the Court
yesterday to be that when man had imnressions
or sympathies, he was not competent.
Inc court SAID that when juror said he could
give verdict according to the law and the evil
uence, IL quahhed his first statement, but in this
case the juror had gone further and expressed a
him ui'qu"iiheo
Mr. Magruder said the impression of the iuror
was only hypothetical one, based on what he had
read, and he desired to ask the question whether
that was not the case.
The Court said it had decided the question and
mad only listened to the gentlemen as a matter Of
courtesy. The juror set aside
MT. stanton made an exception to the ruling of
the Court. ' i1iins vi
render fair verdict "N''0
The Court said its rulinp in the fret o,so ao ~
plcable to this and he was set aside
Mr.: Stanton took exception
EilJah Edmonston had formed an opinion If h.
wason the jury he would acquit the prisoner Set
HI. Wiltberger had formed no opinion, and had
no Dlas nor prejudice. He had no scruples against
capital punishment; if the prisoner was guilty he
t would m hang him as high as Haman. Challenged
Alexander hammond had decided opinion in fa.
vor OF the prisoner. Set aside
theodore Mosher avowed his sympathy for the
prisoner. ''- ''ie
The Court said that was disqualification uo
had decided that question two or three tines
Messrs. stanton and Chiffon endeavored to show
disqualify. NH "0D'o no'
If the sympathy was for the prisoner personally
it was clearly disqualification.
Inc Court said it did not matter on what
SIDE the sympathies of the juror might be, he was
George F. Varnell having formed an opinion wa.
set aside. Of'"-'A vas
VIM. H. Marlow was also set aside.
Jno. =. Robinson had no prejudice. He was pro-
nounced competent. Peremptorily challenged by
the defence ~
James Davis was set aside, having formed an
opinion. ~
VIM Hughes had formed no opinion; could give
defence. ~
James skiring and John H. semme, having
bias set aside
Benz. ). Kinney, Alex. Forrest, and John Petit |
bone, had formed opinions and were set aside
Alexander Bully had decided prejudice for the
prisoner Set aside.
;, Thos G: Ford, Thos E. Baden, John P. Dennis,
Zadock Williams, James F. MacKintosh VIM, Ut
termehle were set aside for the expression of opin
ions. ~ Nf'1
VIM. NJ. Moore, Grocer having no fixed opin
ions and being able to render fair and impartial
verdict, was sworn, making the eleventh Juror
Hugh Levy, Thomas j. Magruder, Joseph L. Ven
able, Samuel Humphrey and James B. Greenwell,
had all formed opinions and were set aside.
Robert j. Cohen had formed and expressed no |
opinion; had no bias prejudice. Peremptorily |
by the defence.
James l.. Barbour and James s. Topham, were |
set aside having expressed opinions.
Thomas Clobeeler had such sympathy for the |
prisoner that his opinion could not be changed by
any evidence. y
VIM. B. Ball, VIM. II. Upperman and J. B. Pur-
cell, were severally set aside
Hiram Richey had sympathies for the prisoner.
but only such as he would have for anv man SINH
larly situated. Had no bias for or agaipst the
prisoner personally, but had. expressed an opinion
as to the result of the trial.
The defence thought that was immaterial, and
asked him if he could give verdict according to
the evidence, to which he answered afIirmatiyely.
on being cross-questoned by Mr. Oud he said he
had expressed an opinion as to what ought to be the
verdict of the jury.
j., The Court thought him disqualified, and the de-
fence excepted to the ruling.
, Stephen Cestar, John r. MITCHELL Harmon
Burns, John Miller, R. B. Clark, were all dis
qualified.
Franklin Tenney was disqualified, being opposed
to capital punishment.
j. P. Barthoow had decided opinion, and was
set aside. $1,000 ~
ID. ID, Cloud was stronU1v nra;ud;oa1 - f,x-o,