The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-04-06
I79Pect'07y reported Tor Me Ddily Ecchange.
TRIAL OF DANIEL E. SICKLES,
FOR THE
MURDER OF PBARTON KEY
SECOND DAYS PROCEEDINGS
CRIMINAL COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF CO.
LUMBIA-JUDGE THOS. II. CRAWFORD,
PRESIDING.

PRESIDING.
WASHINGTON, April S, 1852
The Courtroom was crowded as fully as on yes
terday, and the most intense desire was manifested
the part of spectators to see and hear all the pro-
ceedings. For the most part quiet was preserved
and good order maintained, in consequence of the
efficient arrangements of Marshal Seden and his
polite deputy, Mr.. Phillips. To the courtesy of
these gentlemen your correspondent is indebted for
more eligible position than he could otherwise
have obtained. The room, however, is a small one,
and the accommodations for the press necessarily
restricted. large number of policemen are on
duty, guarding the avenues to the Court House. and
various parts of the building.
At lOA o'clock A. NJ, Judge Crawford a vene-
rable OLD gentleman in gold spectaces and with a
keen eye came into Court, and the session mmedi-
ately commenced. The five jurymen selected YES
terday were severally called and answered to their
names.
At the same moment the prisoner was BROUGHT in
and placed in the box, which, by the orders of
Judge Crawford, had been placed Immediately in
the rear of the table at which his counsel Sit so as
TO enable them to have free and uninterrupted ac-
cess to hlm. Mr.. Sickles showed no alteration in
appearance since yesterday, and conversed fire.
quently during the morning with Mr. Stanton and
Others of his counsel. Mr.. Stanton occupied seat
by ms box during the entire morning. Mr.. Sickles
watches the proceedings closely, and exhibits great
hrmness and selfpossession.
The Marshal having handed in the list of the
talesmen summoned by order of the Court, their
names were placed in hat and drawn by lot as in
the case of the regular panels at the request of the
prosecuting Attorneys.
The first name called was that of Geo. j. John
son, who having formed decided opinions, was pro-
nounced disqualified.
The questions propounded to the talesmen were
somewhat varied from those of Yesterday The
Judge IN the first place asked whether the party had
formed or expressed an opinion in relation to the
case! Ii it was answered alirmatvely as il was in
almost every case the defence then propounded que
rles in the following order: Is your opinion derived
from common rumor or from conversation with wit
nesses to the transaction? I'd Does your opinion re-
late to the act of killing the circumstances at
tending it? 3d. Could you render fair and i'm
partial verdict upon the evidence submitted?-
The counsel for the prosecution upon the cross-ex-
animation usually asked the simple question whether
such an impression had been formed as would pre-
vent the party giving verdict in accordance with
the lao and the testimony? These questions were
generally asked of each witness with little varia-
ton.
VIM. B. Jackson had formed an opinion from
what he had heard and read, and had several times
expressed them. He did not believe.he could rem
der an impartial verdict and was accordingly set
aside
John Garrett was next called. He thought that
Mr. Sickes was perfectly justified in killing Mr.
Key and had expressed this opinion. Set aside
Charles Edmondson had formed and expressed an
OPINION. Set aside.
Thomas L. Potter had formed and expressed opin-
ions based upon newspaper reports. Set aside.
George b. Barnard was declared disqualified be-
ing under 25 years of age.
Robert c. Brooks had formed and expressed opin-
ions formed from rumor and conversation with wit
nesses. Disqualified.
Andrew p. Hoover having formed decided opin-
ion set aside.
James o. Barrett, z. D. Gilman, George Rhodes,
Jr., Benjamin F. Middleton, VIM. H. Narrower las
w SearS.
Clarke, Richard w. Carter, VIM. R. Riley, William
IL. Tenney, Joseph B. Moore and Joseph W. Nayin,
were all set aside on similar grounds.
James Kelly had formed and expressed opinions,
but believed he could render an impartial verdict
upon the evidence submitted Having the other
necessary qualifications he was duly sworn, making
the sixth juror obtained in the case.
Elias e. White, James A. Riley Theodore F.
Boucher, Thos j. Gait and Wm. Baldin had form
ed and expressed opinions, and were pronounced
disqualified.
Thos Orme had formed an opinion from what he
had read and heard but did NIT think it would dis
qualify him from giving verdict according to the
evidence. He might, however, have bias and would
feel free if left off. Set aside.
Samuel Durrel had fixed opinion. Was GER
tain he could not render an impartial verdict. Set
aside.
Robert NJ. Sutton had fixed opinion which could
not be changed. Set aside.
c. G. Whittlesey, VIM. Darling R. II. Donnell
were disqualified for similar reasons
Capt. Dorry had formed an opinion from rumor
1t was too fixed to enable him to give an impartial
verdict.
Robert A. Hoe had formed an opinion from ru-
NOR; had not conversed with witnesses: had so
strong an impression that he would like to be ex-
cused, from serving on the jury.
Mr. Stanton said he supposed almost every man
would like to be excused. He desired to know
whether the opinion was so strongly fixed that he
could not render fair and impartial verdict upon
the evidence.
Mr.. Carlisle protested against the question-itha had
been answered once,
Mr.. Stanton said he declined to Weld the floor.
until he had finished his remarks to the Court
Any man Of intelligence who reads the newspapers
(and no man of intelligence failed to do so,) could
not help forming some opinion a case of such
toriety as this, but the question was-whether if
put on the Jury, could he render impartial YER
dict?
Mr.. Carlisle said the juror had distinctly stated
that he had an impression, which would disqualify
him.
Mr.. Phillips said the juror had intimated that he
could render an impartial verdict, but would rath-
er not 81! in the That was not full answer
He had not understood the juror to say he could
not render fair verdict. lie would PROFOUND the
question distinctly.
The Court said the juror had said he did not wish
to sit in the case because he had an Impression
That, he thought, was sufficient.
Z. B. Tucker hadformed fixed and unchangabe
opinion in regard to the justification of the act.
Set aside.
J. T. Jenkins had decided opinion Set aside.
John 7. Gibbon sympathized with the prisoner
too strongly to render an impartial verdict. Set
aside.
Edward Lenny had formed an opinion from the
statements published. He had formed too decided
an opinion in regard to the justification Of the act
to enable him to sit on the jury. Disqualified.
A. +. Ofutt had formed an opinion from CONVEX
sing with witnesses. Set aside
Anthony Hyde pleaded his privilege as a member
OF the bar, and asked to be excused.
The Court thought that entitled him to be ex-
cused.
Mr.. Carlisle was very modest as to any sugges-
tions to the Court upon matter of professional
privilege.
Mr.. Brady, of the defence, said he claimed an
equal share of modesty for their side.
Mr.. Carlisle was willing to accord the possession
of the quality to all his professional brethren.
The Court said Mr.. Hyde was excused, but it had
known persons to come into court about once a
year to try case, in order to preserve their pro-
fessional privilege
Mr.. Phillips then repeated the question in a
more definite form, and Mr.. Hyde replied that he
did not think he could act impartially.
The Court,-"A very sensible answer after what
you first said.'
He was set aside.
John H, Wilson had conversed with an eye wit
ness and had decided opinion. Disqualified.
Esau Pickerill had formed an opinion from read
ing the papers and from rumor. His sympathies
were so strongly for the prisoner that he did not
think he could act impartially. Set aside.
B. F. Guy, Gilbert NJ. Wight James Goddard
Charles B. Church, John F. Bingham and VIM. II.
Craig, had all formed and expressed opinions and
would be unwilling to trust themselves on the
jury.
George NJ. Southron had formed an opinion;
had never conversed with witnesses. His sympa-
thies in favor of the prisoner and he could not
therefore render a fair verdict.
Thomas W. Berry had formed an opinion and
did not think he could act impartially.
Thomas Milburn, James B. Dodson, Nathan G.
Mcknew and II. NJ. Ofutt had all formed decided
opinions, and we're set aside.
John W. Dyee said he had formed a decided
opinion.
Mr.. Brady asked if his opinion was of such
character that if he heard the evidence and the in
structions of the Court, he could not render fair
verdict?
Mr.. Dyee said he could not. Set aside
Mr. r. koons had formed opinion and was set
aside.
Peter N. Bacon had formed conditional opin-
ion from reading the papers,
The Court asked what was the condition.
Mr. Bacon explained that if such and such things
stated in the papers true, then his opinion was
and so He had no impression or bias for or
against the prisoner. He thought he could give a
verdict upon the law and the evidence He had
talked with Mr.. Gobright about the case.
The Court thought him competent Juror
Challenged peremptory by Mr.. Radcliffe.
VIM. ii. Morrison had decided opinion and was
set aside.
Benjamin r. Mayfeld had formed an opinion and
justified the action of Mr.. Sickles His mind was
made up. Set aside
John Ii. Smoot was called but did not respond.
Jonas B. Ellis, John Moore, A. L. Newton and
Andrew Minitry had all formed opinions about the
circumstances of the killing and did not think they
could give impartial verdicts