The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-06-18

might have told him TO prevent his tSkidmores) pre-
twenty witnesses to subpoena and they were all
present in with exception What right then.
had the prisoner been denied II the case could De pat
where the evidence Of good faith on the part OF the
counsel selected by the prsonerf Why, the English
language adequate to characterize such trans
action as theirs Mr. Morris thought he was justified IN
stating that he believed that tine adavits the other
side made merely enable counsel or parties TO
make up fee Why, 1t would have been better that
his Honor, on the first day the prisoner had been
brought into court had made an order that the county
pay counsel much for their services. He was
justified In making these remarks from the facts that
had been disclosed in this and that averred here
application was not made in good faith that the sole
and only purpose Is to delay this case when the prisoner
was here with the counsel assigned WHO mad faiinfuy
prepared the case, and with every witness subpanaed
that he requested 10 be subpnnaed with one exception
Mr. Townsend replied TO tho District Attorneys re-
marks briefly ertng that they bad acted IN good faith
There things which English language could not
sufficiently characterize Of which was the course OF
the District Attorney in his remarks the only question
was simply this-"Dd Mr.. Townsend receive any
money! and II 1t were any qualification 10 HIM he would
tell HIM that Mr. Townsend did Some further Discus
sion ensued, during which Mr. jerks said that unless
this application had been mado good faith he had
DESIRE to obtain fee be- would say that he had defended
every capital case in the county during the past five
years, and had not received cent therefor Neither
THE APPLICATION DENIED.
Judge Barnard, after consulting with the side JUS
tices-The court holds this application not sufficient.
The prisoner Will have to go to trial.
Mr.. jerks asked postponement until today, which
was den ca. snort time, however was allowed coun-
Mr.. jerks read another affidavit made by Skdmore,
stating that two witnesses were absent by whom they
intended TO provo facts Ia connection with the argun
Mr.. Morris said he would admit all those facts. Some
further argument ensued, the Court refused to
postpone the case.
TaE ENTIRE PANEL OF JURORS CHALLENGED.
Messrs. Pearsa and Hughes then made statement OF
their connection with the case on witndrawing The
Ea npto avoA hair uuifh
clerk, then proceeded to call jury, when Mr.. jerks
challenged the entire panel Of two hundred and fifty
s es ks G sGs ss ysss 1ss IN fss
& % oa As g fs the @
soner BY bis counsel ,nsrposes challenge the
that the SAND panel es que:he because he said
GsS s ss he sdss IN
Second Thns large nSSr Of said are aeas anq
in Of the officers desgnasa By law e be present
were not drawn in presence q said officers Fifth That 10
panel requirements Of the statute respect
aA0 hSyf M SssS g. jerks Counsel
n Re and Kag; ". or i H.
" - = : - 80 WILLIAM +. sKiDMoRE.
Mr. Morris demurred as follows:-
Samuel D. Norris the District Attorney prosecues
for the people having challenge read says
that far the third fourth aad dth Of
far as the rst ground Of challenge therein he
$. y. NORRIS
Mr. Jenks called Mr. Nelson Shaurman Commissioner
Of Jurors, and on the issue examined him foows:-
Nelson Shaurman, Commissioner OF Jurors, sworn-I
hold in my hand list of the jurors called in the present
panel; those names were drawn on the 18th day of
June; when the box was first opened Justice Voorhees,
and Hoyt and myself present; such drawing
tinued for nearly two hours and was present during
WhOlo me-. no m IN at Wor m
the following day; tho names ali drawn, seriatm,
continuously from the box; alongside
Justices aud myself meet 70 draw tho names,
show tnem the box. to see that the seal
ia cxhausted Voorhees, drew tho ballots, calling the
name and number, which stay" In the check book,
&c clerk takes II from Justice Voorhees, and checks
IL, and then bands 1t again to Justice Voorhees, who
arranges them In order table, Justice Of the su
preme Court judge Of the City Court county Judge
recollection that Justices Hoyt aud voorhees, were not
absent at all during the time.
Justice Hoyt was called from the bench, and testified
that he was present during the drawing, and did not
rus DnzuRRw WELL rAKD-zxrAsEILrsG A JURY.
nard finally declared tho demurrer well taken His rul
ings throughout were excepted to, exceptions being
provided that jurors should be drawn fourteen days pre-
vous to the meeting OF the court In presence OF justice
Of the Supreme Court the Judge of the City Court tue
Judge OF the County Court, &c. Assistant District
Attorney Troy referred to the case Of tho People
vs. Kenney, tried in Kings county and carried the
Court OF Appeals where settled that the Court
had right 10 order panel Of jurors after the beginning
of a term Er
Judge Barnard desired the clerk to proceed to the EN-.
parchment Of jury. The following parties called
up and questioned BY counsel on either sides
VIM. T. Macy has conscientious scrupes ia reference
to capital punishment; rejected A. G. Angel has an
Impression In his mind which the evidence could
moves rejected Israel Barker has formed an opinion
10 tho gsit of the prisoner; rejected
II. Dubois has read OF the case has formed and
expressed opinion in regard to the guilt
OF The prisoner; rejected Thomas Koachy has
versed about the facts OF the bus has fixed
opinion TO the guilt innocence OF the prisoner has
present IMPRESSION but could render fair verdict the
cvidence would take evidence to remove the mpresson
rejected Al. T. Warren has no conscientious scrupes,
but has formed opinion and has Il at present; 70
jected. Claus Laus did not sufficiently understand the
English language; excused. VIM. johnson has not read
or heard anything Of the case before the present
time; has formed no opinion since he has been here;
challenged peremptoriy by defauce j. T. Dill has
formed or expressed opinion Is able to render fair
verdict; accepted and sworn In James CORVALLIS
formed opinion; rejected John Tyler could render
. fair verdict accepted and sworn in. Charles Hughes
had consc entous scrupes rejected. j. w. Moseley
has no conscientious scrupes or oplnion impression
on his mind as 10 the case accepted and In j.
Z. Larwel has an opinion; rejected s Abrams has no
impresston challenged peremptoriy by defence g. l.
North has an opinion; rejected. l. Spring has an i'm.
preston which would require evidence TO remove; re-
jec,od Several other parties called up, and finally
fourth Juror was obtained In the person OF Mr. Corr
nelius Ferguson.
Tue cour. then adjourned at hsIfpast five O'Clock.
until To day at ten A. NJ having been In continuousses
SION nearly seven hours. The utmost excitement pre-
vailed in the courtroom during the day and the crowd
was great that there little space left behind
skidmore stopped 20 light cigar. and afterwards
walked very coolly away in the charge of the officers
followed BY q large crowd Of curious people