New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-05-06
THE STRONG DIVORCE CASE.
Proceedings Yesterday - Argument o
Counsel.

70 quhsu inc lOuLu py IuO JUL
against Peter r. Strong Full reports Of this case have
from time to time appeared in The TRIBUNE henry
A. Cram, esq, appeared for the defense and Johh a.
Graham esq, at the request of the DistretA'ofne!
for the prosecution Tie arguments were heard yes'Sr
day The motion was made by Nh. Cram on an anna
vii Of the defendant setting forth the iacs Vi tuo '
Mr. Graham. in the Of his argument salu: L.
1 desire before commence 10 express my giatIlea
ton for the hheratv and frankness OF the DstrctAt
tOrney in presenting technical ODJeciioh W 's "p
plcation and the invariaDe courtesy nave reot4.cu
at his hands aud at the hands OF his associates ~ Is
sonrce of ,.raf satisfaction TO me- and feel great
pleasure I'm mentioning II. desire riso 10 say nal
while condemn the conduct OF the DlSIrlct-Aliorno
in this matter believe that he thinks the pracuo
which is pursued in this Is correct Az"
proper and calculated to further the enas %
Justice NV motion is motion INST tnat We ma! ~;
an immediate TRIAL II that may not p heI ' 20. 81.
indictment be Quashed on the ground mauc IL. Wv
affidavit which represented generally as case % re
markabe and unusual oppression. 9esl'e 10 S' l
attention Of the Court 10 very familiar RUE pt Inv
40 many Others forgotten. the BIZ OF Rights OF lne
State OF New-York. The Bill Of Rights Of TINS Slate
proydes Ito every citizen tie right 10 SPEEDY anu
public trial by an impartial lury me saWo 80,
Is contained in the Constitution OF the United Siae
TWAS never meant TO be an idle iorln ont WINE IL
NAV have been forgotten in the ordinary emerEehole
Of criminal courts and while court may permit,
and il is right in permitting, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
10 arrange the order of his BUSINESS inns power.
merely gives to him for time, power that the court
possesses and whenever TIE court sees tat ',e eAeI
else of that power by the District Attorney u lnng
ing and destroying that right OF the cilzens 10 al
speedy trial" submit that then II becomes Inc uut!
and the power of the court 10 that thai fundamental
right of the citizen Is preserved so that without al!
special facts in this case, the defendant Is eneu 10
speedy trial in his Indictment This Is night that mas
ALWAYS existed in England and here, and Is as ola as
Magma Cbarta say luIther, that the special facts OF
this case show case Of oppression ana an ABUSE oi
authority by the public oiheer; they snow tha' 'hc
process and power Of this court have been
perverted into instruments OF private ma
hgnity. The public prosecutor, whose dul! ~ is 70
stand ind erent between the people and the accused
abuses his oco when he serves The private purposes OF
party in a private suit 1t is my pleasure to remen
Der expressions that have fallen from the ups OF inc
learned Judge whom now aC0Iess ana MN Win
whom he was associated depreeatng the gross lmpro
priey OF the instruments OF public justice criminal Jus
tice being used subserye the ends OF parties IN p
yate civil suits. Nothing is more DANGEROUS nothing
is more improper and it is an abuse Of the ohce OF
public prosecutor; it is abuse OF the office of the
grand jury when such thing is allowed. What was
the original foundation Of the grand Jnry' why ola
il exist What its objectf 1t was
" protect the accused; 1t was an additional
protection and shield thrown over him
The object was not to help private parties to protect
them and enable them to further their private ends in
private SUITS but Grand Juries were originally barn.
ers against frivolous State persecutions-tbat is what
they described TO have been That great purpose
for which they originally introduced has passed
away There might have been time recently when 1t
was claimed in this country. But low that peace has
come upon US and the ordinary times Of peace in this
country or in England they are no longer needed
They scarcely Of any use at all They are hostile
70 the spirit of our institutions. TO the notion OF our
people OF secret tribunal Their day is over and they
are doomed exist longer whenever they come to
be used for the purpose of promoting private mahgnliy
and the advance of charges OF private sultos
instead of subscribing the only purpose that remains for
them in protecting the citizen against proceedings.
Counsel then quoted authorities support of bis
vrment from the Commissioners of Criminal Court and
the opinion Of judge there quoted denounee here as
agreat injury to my client and departure from what
should be proper practice. First The opening of the
Grand Jury aud giving possession 10 the adversary Of
the thoughts Of the Dstrct-Attorney and OF its ma
chnery and taking the private adversary and his
sci into the Grand Jury. Second HE departure from
that ordinary rule bringing the complaint before mag
istrate which if it had been done in this case, would
have been end of the prosecution This is suit for
which there has beeD and there does not exist at
this moment any sufficient evidence 10 convict my eli
ent AS Mrs. Potter, with whom he is Jointly indicted
she has speak to- but refer TO it increas
ing the outrage in this because she is poor
frendess woman. she stands alone here. AS against
her the absence Of evidence is still more papabe there
is no distinct crime proven such as that for which che
ats nds indicted. Tie principal witness in this case
proyes nothing 1t appears clearly and distinctly that
after having permitted these two great ourages upon
nv client giving his office to private adversary
emitting the preliminary complaint and then laboring
the Grand Jury to find verdict without evidence
there was not sufficient evidence against Strong. Per
NIT to say few words about the right vi partial
indictment when obtained insufficient evidence. II
seems TO have been question about which there was
some doubt perhaps want Of authority. Counsel then
quoted from English authorities He then referred 10
Dodd's case He held that If the Grand Jury found
Indictment which was based upon wrong the Court
should undo the wrong. and said decision exactly in
point would be found in the People ACT Restor, lst D.
bots D. pos. Were We In the nineteenth century
to be told that this iDconyeDient prece-
dent TO establish, because criminals would
be always seeking find out that the Grand jury had
pursued irregular proceedings. No case 70 the con
frary could be found, unless II was in decision OF
Judge Nelson in the supreme court IN save case,
the last and great violation Of right and which, when
heard it stated and read il in my own affidavit could
not believe that stood here alive in the nineteenth
in Mates. L thought
stood in some far distant court in the middle ages
where they used torture to abstract testimony. A
without preliminary complaint has the doors Of the
Grand Jury opened, and is invited 20 walk
in and BRING in sis private private NANCE and
indictment. The gravest offense that can be COM
mitted against man has been committed by
this prosecutor 1t is not proper for me TO refer to the
details Of this crime. After acts OF criminal intercourse
acknowledged epeatedly, and when about TO become
mother he forward TO charge her husband with
the murder Of that offspring They say to MIs Potter
and you shall be pardoned for the oense for which you
are Jointly indicted and for the greater and more horr
bic crime murder" He denied the power Of the Dis
triet Attorney without the sanction Of the Court 10 do
this
clnded BY saving that If His Honor against him in
this case he would hope TO obtain trial tomorrow.
John A. Graham, ESQ., then made his argument for
the prosecution. He congratulated his learned oppo
nent that his remarks addressed 70 Judge whose
nntecedents opposed 10 the encroachments Of tie
Grand Jury upon the rights of citizens But ordinarily
impeachneut is preferred against that body. Not
here SO far from any impeachment IN this case, we
find the able counsel stating upon the face of his OVID
affidavit that so friendly was the Foreman OF that
bodv 10 him that he violated his oath in communicating
TO him the evidence upon which the indictment was
found.
After the formula Of oath was read by counsel, he
proceeded 10 defend the District Attorney from the
charges brought against him by counsel for the de.
tense Then he defended the counsel arra.gned as be
sanctity of the Jury ROOM and passed eulogium on
their Characters The very caution with winch inns