Evening star., 1867-06-12
LOCAL NEWS.
TRIAL sURRATT.

The trial OF John II. Surratt was resumed
this morning in the Criminal Court, before
Judge Fisher, when there was very large
attendance, and for the first time since the
commen cement OF the case two or three
women were in the crowd of spectators. At a
quarter before ten O'Clock Judge Fisher en-
tered the room and the Court was opened by
Mr.. Mulloy, the prisoner having been brought
same as Oh yesterday. and during the time
Judge Fisher was delivering the opinion he
seemed much Interested, and had his eye fixed
upon the Court.
Judge Fisher announced that he was pre-.
vented from being pr6 sent at nine O'Clock on
account of being much indisposed He stated
that he had considered the arg rgument ad vanced
by the counsel on each side TO quash the
panel, supported by the affidavit of MT
Douglass. offered by the prosecution. He then
delivered the following opinion:
Uni.ed States ps. John III. Surrdtt. Indictment
Murder.-MotIon of District Attorney to quash
the array, grounded upon the AFFIDAVIT OF
Sam uel Douglass, Register of Washington city
1T The act OF Congress, approved June 18Th,
1862, entitled "An act for the selection OF
jurors to serve in the several Courts of the
District Of Columbia" provides for the Sc
lection OF jurors in the following manner:
+ First, it makes it toe duty OF the Register of
the city Of Washington, on or before the 1st
day OF February, to prepare list Of such Of
the white male citizens tax payers residing g
within the city, whom he may deem best ualio
fed to ,erve as jurors, in which he may in
clude the names OF such qualified persons as
were On his list for the previous year, but who
did not serve as Jurors; the Clerk of the Levy
same time and in the like manner from such
persons qualified to serve as Jurors. who re-
side in that portion Of the District not Included
in either of the cities of Washington or George.
town, and the CLERK OF the city of Georgetown
is required to make at the same time and
manner, list of persons qualified to serve as
jurors. from citizens of similar qualifications
residing in Georgetown. And each of these
ohcers is required to preserve such list so
made in the archives Of his Office, and to trans
init the same to his successor.
The making of these Sc veral lists is to be the
work Of each officer in his separate Off eial ca.
pacity.
The lists for the three principal divisions of
the District being thus prepared, 1t is made
the duty OF these three officers to act together
and select in their joint capacity, from the
lists SO prepared as AFORESAID by the Register
of Washington city, the names Of four hun.
dred persons and from the Georgetown lists
the names of eighty persons and from the
lists prepared by the Levy Court the names Of
forty persons
preparing the lists Of qualified jurors, treats
of that duty as the duty of these Off GERS re.
spectively. Each one is, ia the express Ian.
gHage OF the act, ''to make list, and each is
permitted by the law to place upon his list the
names OF such qualified persons as were on
the list of the previous year, as sin the discre.
tion OF the officer making the same" may seem
proper. The lists are to be made by them ard
kept by them respectively, each one preparing
and having the charge and safe keeping OF his
ewn list ofthe persons for his respective dis
rrict.
About this there can be no Doubt, and, In
deed, there is no controversy in this case.
When we come to the second section ofthe act
which provides tor the number of names to be
selected from these several lists OF persons
qualified tn serve as jurors, persons of whose
Qualihcatlons each OF these Off GERS is 10 ,udpe
cinet. we find that the I,ersistnre on nor or pre-
uses The word respective or respectively bnt
proceeds to declare IN ipSisSiniS per6is s.Iaat
the officers aforesaid, call Of them, not one Or
the list of the registers of Washington city
the names of 800 persons; from that of the
CLERK OF Georgetown, SO persons; and from
that of the Clerk OF the Levy Court, 40 per
sons" While the work of preparing the three
lists Is the several labor Of the off GERS indie.
pendent Of one another. the work of selecting
tbe $40 names ls devolved upon .sthe officers
Aforesaid the whole three conformity. 1t NAV
not, perhaps, be necessary that they should all
three meet together and at the same time and
place agree upon the 400 names to be taken
from the Washington list. or the 50 from the
Georgetown list, or the 40 from the County
list; but certain il is that all "the officers
aforesaid. shall select the number of names
prescribed by the statute. If one of the clerks
only shall make the selection from the list
prepared by himself, or even if two of them
shall make the selection, this will not meet
the req uirement of the law. -..-
The principle has been too well established
by long current Of decisions to be now ques-
toned, that when the law, enjoining upon
three or more the duty of performing an act
without giving to a majority the power to act
in the premises, all must act, or the action Of
those who do act is q nulllty, and there is net
in the statute in question one single word or
syllable that looks In the least towards Sc
lection to be made from the three lists or any Of
them, except by the uni ed Judgment of the
three officers upon whom the duty is imposed
1t is just as certain, therefore, that the entire
three m lust act in making the selection of the
$50 names for jurors as that each of the clerks
and the Register is to prepare his own lists
severalIy ..|.r -
After these $40 names shall have been Sc
lected by "the officers aforesaid then the
fourth section OF the act of Congress further
provides that 1.-THE names selected from said
lists shall be written on separate and similar
pieces of paper. which shall be so folded or
rolled up that the names cannot be seen, and
placed in a box to be provided by the Regis.
ter and clerks aforesaid, which box shall be
sealed, and after being thoroughly shaken shall
be delivered to the CLERK Of this court. The
fifth section provides that when juries are
needed for any of the courts during the year the
Register ar city clerks. and the cierk Of This
court, shall meet at the City Hall, and such
Juries shall be drawn by the clerk Of this court,
who is to publicly break the seal OF the box
and proceed to draw the requisite number of
names. III as a -
Such are, briefly stated, theprovisions of the
act Of Congress upon which the motion in this
case TO quash the array is rested, as under
stand them, and as apprehend they must be
understood by everybody possessed OF ordi-
nary capacity and free from the bias of inter-
est or prejudice. There can be no other con-
sfr4ction put upon these provisions, which
win net do violence to. and indeed utterly
Pervert the language used by the legislature
TO copey their inten tion. In enacting these
provisions it was doubtless the inten-
tion OF Congress no LONGER to leave
In the hands OF lone man-the Marshal
or any other single man, the power
OF selecting Juries In whole or in part, except
in the exigencies Of certain eases for which
they provided in the same act, and which
cases are of rare occurrence This power
vested Oftentimes Ia Marshals and Sheriffs.
nobody doubts had heretofore been often
grossly abused and in many instances made
the instrument Of injustice and wrong, and
Congress thought it would better serve the
purpOses OF justice if it should substitute the
combined selectiye power to three or four off,
GERS; the Register Of Washington City. the
clerk OF Georgetown, the clerk OF the Levy
Court, and the clerk of the Supreme Court in
the place Of the much abused and arbitrary
solitary power OF the Marshal. This LAM
guaee In my Judgment expresses the intention
as clearly as any idea can be pictured by the
English language. Each Of these officers was
doubtless intended to act as q safeguard
against any abuse which the partiailtv, bias.
or corrupt disposition Of the other might DOS
slbly allure him TO commit. 81 m -a - ,.E
The afidavit OF Samuel Douglass, the Regis.
tor OF Washington city at the time Of the selec.
tcn. made In January or February last of tbe
names from which the present panel of Jurors
ie taken, shows: 1st That neither the clerk OF
GEORGETOWN or OF the Levy Ceurt saw one
sin gle name on his list, much less aided or co.