The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-12-05
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT.
The Case Of DIR. Rnnney-Whnf Constitutes
Jury.

The Case of DIR. Runney-What Constitutes n
Jury.
Before Judge Lane.
Metropolitan Board or Health rs. James w. Ran.
nev-This case. which has been adjourned from time
to time since the latter part Of June last came up
trial yesterday morning. The proceedings were
made much more interesting than they ordinarily
would be by the fact that the court room being re-
claimed hay loft, the odors from the stable below
found their way into the ROOM and into every article
In the room, with sickening strength. II would be
matter OF surprise II the Board OF Health should
indict the court house az q nuisance.
The counsel for both parties were on hand and the
argument was commenced. Before giving the point
raised may be interesting to state the grounds for
thetompaint. The Board OF Health IN the COM
pant goes to stateafrer the usual assertions as
10 the Board being body politic, legally existing.
created for special purpose, entitled make ordi
nances rules and regulations for the preservation OF
the health OF the residents OF the Metropolitan dis
trct--that the said James W. Ranney, a physician
OF this city, has violated certain provisions or the
health ordinances in not making and preserving
registry OF the deaths OF James Devlin Amer Joyce
Edward Joyce and Joshua Moore, who died while
under the care OF Dr. Ranney, at No. 47 West Seven
teenth street. In this city. The registry asked for
date. hour, place and street number at which the
death occurred. There were separate charges made
and damages claimed in each case. Charges and
further damages were made and claimed IN each
on the grounds that DR.. Ranney did, with intent
TO mislead and deceive, wrongfuily present false
and incorrect statement In each case. The total
amount OF damages claimed is $500, but the jursdic
ton OF the District Court limited the amount OF
damages 70 $3.50.
DR.. Ranney put in, in answer to the complaint,
that he possessed no knowledge or Information suf
icient to form belief as to the Board Of Health
being body polite legally existing and empowered
TO make certain rules and ordinances as alleged In
the complaint, and to all the other allegations, ex
cept as TO having attended the persons named, he
put In positive denial.
A jury had been summoned and the ordinary panel
OF six had been sworn in, when counsel for Or.
Ranney objected to proceeding with the trial before
panel OF only six jurors, claiming that the law de-
caring six Jurors full panel for the trial OF cases
before a district court was unconstitutional. The
constitution guaranteed the right OF trial by jury
and distinctly prescribed that jury should consist
OF twelve peers Of the person or persons on trial.
The attorney for the Board OF Health insisted on pro-
ceeding with the trial. arguing TO the effect that all
claims which had been tried before civil justices and
jures OF six persons would be OF no effect II the court
should rule that the trial by panel OF six jurors
was unconstitutional.
Justice Lane while holding that he had no power
to empanel more than six jurors for the trial OF Q
case, agreed with the opinion OF counsel for DR..
Ranney TO the erect that such panel unconsti.
tutiona The trial was thereupon discontinued The
Court reserved the papers, and will await the order
OF the Court OF Common Pleas.