The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-04-06

lhe following opinion was this morning de-
ivered by Judge Allison in the Paramount
Park Case" 1t is well worth reading
OPINION BY JUDGE ALLISON,
In the matter of the report of the jury to as.
sess damages by reason of the appropriation OF
property by the city of Philadelphia, to be
added to the Paramount Park.
The property for which damages are claimed.
was taken by the city by ordinance of June 2,
1864, and the report of the jury which began
their sessions January 2, 1866, was died December
IL, 1860. The jury awarded damages amount
ing in the aggregate TO nearly five hundred
thousand dollars; and to this award the city
fled exceptions on the 8th of February, 1866,
ASSIGNING as ground for exception, that each
finding upon the separate claims of persons
whose property was taken for public use was
excessive.
And on the 29th of March and 2lst OF April
following other exceptions we've hled in behalf
OF the city, assigning further objection to the
report-frst, that the petition was not filed
thirty days before the commencement of the
term at which the jury were drawn; and second,
misconduct on the part of the jury.
On the goth March, on motion of the City
Solicitor, an Examiner was appointed to take
testimony upon the matters raised by the excep-
tions, for the consideration OF the Court. The
Examiner closed lis labors on che 10th Of No
ytmber, and on the coming in of his report
the exceptions were set down for argument,
which was reached after some delay arising
from the vacancy which for considerable
The question was argued mainly upon the
correctness fthe amounts given to the claim
ants for damages. After full consideration of
the evidence, as 1t bore upon the amount of
damages awarded, the official representative of
the city felt that his objections to the amounts
seyerally awarded to the claimants could not,
under the evidence. be sustained, except as TO
the sums decided by the Jury as proper to be
paid to Charles Wheeler, Henry Fricka, Eli
Krupp, and William U. Flack-to Wheeler,
S93, i25; Frick, $SS, 1885, Krupp, $36, 1888 '33;
and to Flack, $3S, 3S,377'Os-amounting in the
aggregate to more than one-half OF the gross
sam awarded by the jury.
The attention OF the Court was, however,
directed by the City Solicitor to the exception,
alleging misconduct on the part of the jury
and TO the testimony taken in support of that
exception. We thus encounter considerations
of such grave importance that we have been
compelled 10 pause upon the question OF
damages upon which we had entered, and to
take up the question as to whether this report
could or ought to be sustained as to any part of
IT, even though there are portions to which no
suspicion of wrong could attach from ANYTHING
which appeared on the face of the report itself,
or from the evidence taken to impeach it..
II is OF Importance that the administration o {
Justice should be kept pure; that fraud and
wrong should find no seeming refuge even in
our Courts, and, indeed, anything but exposure
and marked reprobation at the hands of those
whose DUTY 1t is to administer the laws of the
land. 1t is of comparatively little account that
individual hardships may result from such a
course, reluctant as we are TO impose them, IL
II be necessary TO inhict such hardship in reach
ing the more important result. And in what
have the citizens of any community a greater
interest than the preservation of the purity OF
Courts and juries, and the maintenance of that
confidence without which judicial DEGREES can
not have the enlightened Judgment of the com
munity to sustain them.
TbeeVidence before Us exhibits in the cleares'