New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-12-19
the FENLiNS.
THE swEETsDURG NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. oF THOMAS
MADDEN.

THE SWEETSDURG TRIALS-ARRAGNMENTo P THOMAS
MADDEN.
N TELEsEAPH
SwEErsBuRG, Dec. l5.-The Court opened at lU4.
Thos Madden placed the bar to be- tried ON an ndc
mcnt charging him with having fconiou joined certon par
ties who entered Lower Canada with intent 10 levy war against
Her Majesty Madden about e ycms Of age Of
erful build dark complczoncd and has very distinctive Irish
During the proceedings he kept his eyes constantly
fixed on the ground. .
certificate put u lt Mur u O the Witnesses ~ TINS
case was too nj 10 attend lie informed that Marvin had
requested that IN instructed 20 10 Frclgh.burgh
and asccFtnin IN what state be now
The Court granted the application.
Mr. De,lin-Wl you have TO wait or this witness
Mr. Dc,ih said TINT when he lc Court last "Wednesday he
under the impression that no proceedings would be taken
against the prisoners whom be defended until this morning It
was with surprise tlcrorc be- Ind leuwc that few hours
ncr indictments had been presented TO the Grand jury ana
bills found by them against some Of these prisoners a
that they had been sc,ely called upon TO plead which t9ey
did lie requested tlai those pleas might be ~hdhwn Wa,
be might file the same pleas as to Jurisdiction Nc winch h"d
The Judge remarked hat Ar Dcyn had distinctly ntimaed
thai Mr. ilnomn would represent lin m his aDsen'e. a.
Mr. Dcyin said De had left after the Court rose that
he bad opportunity 81 consulting with AIR Ollaoran Arf
some further il was agreed that tue special pleas
AMI same ndpen IN this as IN tle otter tsa SHOT, ~ en-
tered having bH made GU Thursday before tic plea Of not
NJ Dc,1 then Proceeded on behafof prisoner Madden
10 challenge the array of the Grand jury .,,
The Judge inquired whether the challenge was lrnepH
10
ing to the practice which had proved i was TOO ae 9e D
had been found ard plead TO challenge the array OF e pIaAu
Jury because Of any defect in it, orraniMllQB 60 -
Mr. DcYln said that he cla scd array because OF lie
y n be mode q" -Iumonug the jury and because lhe pro-
voh y ht statute regulating the umnonng Of the jurors had
not been complied with As being too late 70 make inc
challenge be thought he informed his Honor That ne eomo
siion the Grand Jury entirely Illegal ana Iol inc me
suggestion OF such ieaiy would be sufficient 70 induce ns
Court allow The withdrawal Of the plea not gr III oucr
that the legality OF the body might he tested g.,
The Judge said thar Mr. Deyn might 50 on 10 SHOW wherein
the constitution OF the Grand jury was Illegal ana u any
trcme made ont he would then have 70 cOlner
whether he d the discretionary psver OF Showing m pea 70
be Withdrawn Tho practice low ever was hl nur 'he pea
fled IL too late 70 challenge the array OF tue "iahu
Jury .
Mr. Dcvln then went show al some ng the grounds
upon which he challenged the array quoting clause by clause
the protisOns tho Statutes with reference to he preparation
tie Grand jury list and said that they had not Deen com
piled with ~, ~
Mr. Ramsay said he had right motion OF MS ehalieags
10 plead 10 demurrer or 10 move for its rejection ITO mover
FOR It's rejection lie held that the prosecution was not ouHu
the challenges inasnuch the prisoner Ahl heaN!
plead and waived oil objections 10 the Grand Jnfy panel
Mr. De In male further remarks assigning reasons
WHY he made this apai5aOn Tie l.s was that LetS Yves
no, ON the paid OF either the grand petty ay sge IN
li-h speaking Catholic
ThsJudgc in deciding TIE question raised said y was pot
TO bin matter fcct that those technical points had iern
made The subject II such 'nase Gscussq Itf esS we