The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-06-10
F FOURTH EDITION !.
The Trial of surratt To-day.

Continued from our THIRD Edition.
WASHINGTON, June 1O-Mr. Bradley said that this
motion had taken the defense by surprise, and he
asked that Mr. Douglass be brought in and examined
in open Court The defense were not advised from
the a davit, that the officers had taken any action,
In the late drawing of jurors, different from that
taken ever since the passage Of the law.
Mr. Douglass was sent for and brought into Court
Judge % her be connsa oT tse oe
II they OF jected to Mr.. Douglass being sworn and
Mr. Pierrepont said they would not object II II was
The custom to tXamlne witnesses in similar cases. All
be had practsed II was not the custom to take
Judge FISH er said there was no custom about IT, ne
never knew OF such case since he had been upon the
ton that no such case had occurred IN his experience
sworn and read over the affidavit gwen above, and
lie testified that he had been the Register of the
city Of Washington since 1861. and in office at the
last list Of nfors he had purs1ed the same practiee
that he always had pursued heretofore from the time
sent time. '''-' F''
lass testified that he did not know whether the names
placed In the box by the Clerk Of GEORGETOWN were
whose names he had put in we're tax payers ''''
Mr Merrick objected to these questions II was not
competent to go back and ask Mr.. Douglass to
what the other officers referred to had done. These
creon and was TO be presumed that the act of
The Court decided it proper for Mr.. Plerrepsnt
to ask the question.
pougass sad that he had fled away pSpeT aTF o1n
tanning the ofthe jurors and had searched for
IL but had not been able to find IT,
Mr.; Douglass then retired from the stand, and Mr..
Bradley asked that the Court take a recess.
This motion took the defense by surprise, and q
question lies at bottom Of the matter whether the
objection comes from the defendant himself He was
that the current of decisions the other way,
but there have been arguments to show that is In
the power ofhe Court to proceed and try case. aud
all the facts OF intormaty was yet willing TO go to
trial. He asked time therefore to look the law,
see they could not to trial with the jury
Mt Perrepont said he would interpose no objection
to recess, for he hRd no doubt that this motion
had taken the defense by surprise He argued, how
70 t 80 rioi m ~, T. " & anu gIeeu
be Illegal No stipulation can be so arranged as to
ther there were any decisions the other way. his
friend Mr. Bradley had intimated.
, MT Bradley said he did not say there were deei.
slons the other way. He had heard arguments to
prove that there were
Mr. Pierrepout again argued that conviction or
SS1GGi'al TSG by jury Illegally empanellod would be
Mr.. Darlington said he had no objection to inter-
to trial in so important case as this with any doubt
upon his mind. as to the legality of the jury that
Mr. Bradley wanted to know what would be done
with the cases of all the men who had been executed
upon the verdict of juries empaneiled in the same
manner as this one was.
Mr. Pierrepont said he was not responsible In past
cases, b II ne responsible now,
Mr.. Darlington denied that any one had ever been
hung bv jury empaneiled IN TINS informal way
dozen had been thus hung.
Mr. Darlington said II that So IL time then
MI Bradley said it was an interesting question for
the Court and he desired time to look up the law upon
The Court granted the application for rec 'ss until
to morrow morning at 10 O'Clock, and the Court then
adjourned until that hour.
The prisoner was then remanded to the custody OF
into the judiciary squsre for the purpose Of
getting good look at him.