The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-12-12

shall thereupon try the law and the facts" The
difficulty with the Court, said Mr.. Pitts seemed to
be that it could find no one ready or willing to pre-
pare the indictments; in that they proposed tC
traverse the presentments and go to trial before
the Court, who would have difficulty in appoint
ing counsel as then he could compel an attorney
to try them, as they were properly before the
COurt.--Judge Bond remarked that the difficulty
here arose, that if the Grand Jury desired to alter
or amend the presentments, as implied by
previous remarks of Mr.. Pitts, they hat
no States Attorney to advise them or t.
whom they might look for couusel.--Mr. Pitts
said the presentments had been already filed by the
Grand Jury, and if they traversed upon them The
matter was properly before the Court, and al
though they might find other presentments, they
would have to be disposed of, when brought in tha
way before the Court.---Judge Bond remarked
that the Grand Jury may want to amend the pre-
sentiments, and they were certainly privileged tC
have legal adviser, as there no States
Attorney. The Court hoped that by Saturday tC
which time it thought best to adjourn, there would
be an attorney to prosecute the part of the State
MIR. Pitts then handed the presentments to the
clerk, and directed him to enter the plea of "not
guilty upon the presentments, saying "we will
traverse the presentments, and that course bring;
the m before your Honor, who has now only tC
appoint an attorney to prosecute the case-8e-
fore any action was taken, Mr.. VIM. Crane, one of
the Grand Jurors, asked leave to say few words
before the Court He remarked that the Grand
Jurors were mott all lawyers, and although the pre-
sentiments may have been somewhat informally
drawn, yet the majority were honestly of the con
vIctlou that the presentments should be made.
They had no legal advice in drawing the papers
and on that account they might appear somew hal
vague. He would further remark that the Grand
Jurors had some claim upon the Court and
the State in any action which they deemed
proper as body to pursue. They had right
to the protection of the Court against any
aspersions of their motives made by the States
officer on Saturday last. As one of the Grand
Jurors, he would suggest that if the Court could
not find any gentleman to act their legal adviser
in the matter now under discussion, the Grand
Jury be allowed to select somc gentleman them.
selves, for their legal advser.-Mr. Pitts here
arose and said that the remarks referred to by Mr.
Crane were not made by the States offcer.-Mr.
Whitney here disclaimed any and all intention OF
calling in question the action of the Grand jury
or in any wise impugning their motives. MI.
flnkney had spoken upon his own responsibility,
and not as States officer. He (Pitts) himself,
had spoken entirely for Mr. Whitney.-Judge
Bond here remarked that the Act of Assembly
gave the power to the Court to appoint an attor-
ney, in an emergency such as this, and the Court
now did not feel disposed to give up its constitu-
tional right as conferred upon it. The Court ex-
pected that by Saturday it would receive the ac-
ceptance OF the appointment from a gentleman
with whose action both the public and the
party accused would be satisfied. 1t was a
matter OF the graVest Importance, and it
was necessary that it should be pro-
perly, diligently and legally inquired into--
Mr.. keighler, foreman of the Grand Jury, here
arose and said that the Court had heard statement
from the majority side of the body; be now want
ed to make statement the other sde.-
The minority had desired in this matter
to call upon the Court for legal advice but
the proposition had been declined by the majority
and the presentments drawn without proper
legal consultation. He thought the Court was the
proper source whence any advice should come. and
advocated such consultation. Eaton said he
knew nothing about the refusal of the body to re-
ceive advice from the Court He, as one of the
majority, did not object to such course. He acted
with the majority because he thought that the pub
lie desired full investigation into the charges
which had been made against the
accused, and because he thought that by present.
ment the party would have right to full investi
cation, by which the public might be satisfied and
the accused might be satisfied If the papers were
drawn wildly or vaguely, it perhaps owing to
the fact that the foreman desired to be absent and
therefore proper opportunity had not been given for
the body to deliberate as it should have DONE
Mr.. Miller, Secretary of the Jury, here arose and
said, that at the time the body were celebrating
upon the matter of the presentments, he had pro
posed to invite the Court before the jury and ask
counsel of it, but that the majority would moi
accede to his proposition; they had replied that the
Judge should be admitted before them as witness
put not as legal advIser.--As soon Mr.. Miller
had made his statement, several jurors arose to thei
feet and commenced speaking to the Court and to
Mr. Miller. Mr.. Crane said he knew nothing OF
such proposition as sstated.-Others wanted 10
speak but the Court demanded silence, and re-
marked that the proceedings were out of order anC
that the jurors were discussing publicly their delib
erations which they sworn to keep secret
The Court hoped to have the services of States
Attorney by Saturday, and would adjourn until
that time--AdjOurned until Saturday.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CoURT-JUDGE GILES
Charles Benhalm bark May Queen. Libe
for wages. Decree for libellant for SSS.97 ant
costs.-Court adjourned until this morning.
SUPERIOR COURT-JUDGB MARTIN
Patrick O'Connell as. the Baltimore and Ohic
Railroad Company. Action to recover for iniurie
received, plaintiff being employee-before re
ported. Not concluded. Addison and Bigger fo
plaintiff; Latrobe for defendant.-John j. Wood
bridge as. VIM. Woodward, garnishee. Non pros
Same vs. Jacob Trust, garnishee. Non pr os
--Snue as. Edward L. Parker, garnishee Nol
Pros.-Same Us. Gustavus ober, garnishee. No,
pros.-Assignment to-day 443 to 469 inclusive
CITY CIRCUIT COURT-JUDGE KREBs
Cyrus Gault Us. VIM. j. Humes. Opinion of tht
Courtiled, declaring the existence of a co-part-
nership between the parties, and directing decree
for an account of the profits. Duffy for plaintiff
Stockbridge for defendant
Nothing done in the COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.