New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-06-29
CIVIL COURTS.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CoURT-BefOre Judge
BLATCHFORD.

limited STATES DISTRICT coURT-BefOre Judge
BLATCHFORD.
,,,, p,Nous CHAMPAGNE CAsES-THE JUDGh
cuAPGF-NovEL ACTION or THE JURf-TnEf AXE
INsTRTCTED TO BRING IN A SEALED VERDlCI
80, mo case. Of Champagne Wine marked rs NJ e. Co.." Aer
This case was resumed pursuant to Adjournment;
Judge Blatchford i'll charging tho Jury ausetinned in
importance OF the case On Aldl' anu 'N0N W.
substance, as fOuOWs' s A.. -. ,.inoents mad svs-
That the Government assumed that olahatS tos Tor
.omstically dervalued their wines In their III
the purpose of defTaudng the GoVernhen. III Con
ants on the other hand, eOntended tnC w s Il was
formed to the requirements of the statute az lar Wing nc
practcable for them do. in view OF there pGIE %
market price for their wines IN France them
and fair profit added me Question IN 'f The
arises there market yalIS iOt HI market price
In that country at which, according 10 the eIalue,
wines could have been nyoced nnnts that thew in
Voiced these wines at some other VaIue WHICH my i
rived at by adding profit to the cost or '0 he
&c roind unless this value is equal IN amount 10 INC
ssoertained amount of the market Value III
their the manner they clam tney % acr1rate
ones or rather not sufficiently high IL they arc DIS s
ss tho subsequently ascertained market prices
then The Government have not made OUT a
case and the wines cannot be condemheu. me
market price is the price that the customer
st nav Ia get his goods H. the Government claims
claimants asked certain prices Tor then "lhos anu III
not take less then those prices market prices III VIII
NOT do In sv that as to the wines in controversy, tney
had market price because sent here 70 DC ~ "a
a. re, then fine prices those wines obtained the
popular indication OF the market price Inc Wy %
Mr Marshall for the Government would Indicate that u
"a diacn 10 crIninate between the various so called
grades of wine simply by tasting OF thelh wlthOt
fho color or label leaving the inference that there is SID
Stantiny very little II any difference III the real quy
or value OF the various brands OF Wlne atl
testifios TO buying from Groves who sold claimants
wines IN IopGon and after seeing price currents OF
claimants wines, at much hsneI Pilees ,i,' me.
were brought in bond, dRty unpaid, and they were
bought the lowest wholesale prices yet 'ne @
Blanche bought by Marshall was As francs per case,
while the same-named brand in the invoices IN con-
troyersy put dswn at 80 francs ana % eenles;
Then there Is letter from claimants stthg thh1 19
make but three grades Of wine, all Of superior Q,
and giving prices at from 10 to is francs per case
ment claims that the claimants have thus fixed thel
selves the market prices of their wines III EItC i
fixed them at much higher prices imam s'"'eA III '"0 "
For the claimants six brokers Of Rheims testify that
there is no market value for this wine IN Rheims ~ Is
for you to say whether in giving TINS testimony, tS
witnesses fully apprehended the meaning Oh ma. IN
value IN its strict SENSE whether they ala not mean '
manufacturers did not purchase eeE others VINE"
IL the Government have established pr0OaDe eauSe,
to determine this question If you find that there T.
market price for these wines in France ana tht cin
ants have invoiced them below that price, then there
mains you determine whether they did 50 Win g
knowledge. with intent TO defraud the ~
1T will be necessary for yOu TO lind IN the araNe On
all these points in order 10 give verdict Tor inc
ment II you find in tho NEGATIVE on any one ~ '
points your verdict Will be for the claimants Inc luy
then retired and after being out tn - O'Clock p A MIe
sent for by the Court Upon Their appearance ttS nv
asked If there was any prospect of agreement me
foreman rose and said that they stood eleven 10 one anu
that the dissenting Juror had declared tat MS oihOh
could not be changed by any further dellberatlOn
The Court expressed the opinion That III case OF IS
magnitude the jury ought not To be discharged NVu
thorough effort 70 agree. :, ..,
The dissenting Juror and desired to be excused
from further service, saying that nothing could atef ms
view of the evidence and his Judgment would not be al
tered If he stayed there 40 days ,,,, . O..
Some of the other jurers expressed their Willingness 10
make further effort 10 agree upon verdict the lore
man. however expressing his opinion that the eleven
certainly would alter their views to conform to those
OF the one. ..,. 49,.
One of the uymen asked the Court If 1t was reason
able for one to hold out against eleven Wlthout
giving any reason for his views Tor rs the juror expressed
IT. "without giving any cause for the cause why.
The Court asked the jury II they desired any ithei
instructions upon the law TO which the foreman replied
In the negative, $50 d.. -, .
Another Juror then said that he willing to sit TIL
O'clock did feel like sitting any later AS ms SAD
bath would then he is lsraetel ana IN al
dtOn that he completely atgued and there ala not
seem aEy probability OF their agreeing at all
The Court finally decided that the jury had better make
another effort TO agree they having been out only three
hours which was long time, considering the length
of time the case had been on trial
The Jury then retired again. the Court counsel con
eentng directing the Marshal 10 furnish them with dn-
ner At o'clock the jury having in the mean time eaten
their dinner yet unable TO agree ann WORD was
sent to them by the Court instrucng them that they
agreed in the time to bring In sealed Verdct at
the opening of the Court this morning.
The Court then adjourned To this morning at ii O'CLOCK
G. Courtney, United States District Attorney
VIM NJ. Evarts Ethan Allen Deputy United states Dis
trictAttOrney and GrosvenOr p. LOwery, for the Gov
ernment Webster Craig for the claimants.