The Opelousas journal. [volume] (Opelousas, La.) 1868-1878, 1870-06-25
COURT DECISION.
State OF Louisiana vs.. Ernest NJ. Ferayr
THOMPSON SHERIFF DE FACTo.
Organization of Petit Juries.

A1o"SJ o.
Court:
The accused in this case was indicted for
murder, was tried and found equity, with
out capital punishment" and having been
sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor
for the term of his natural life, has appeal
ed. The objections to certain testimony,
admitted by the Judge quo have been
abandoned; and a plea in bar founded III
an alleged repeal of the statute ~relatiTe to
murder will not, we presume, be insisted on
since the recent decision of this Court / n
the case of State VS.. Brewer, % Ann, p
The remaining points made by the appel
liant arise from q challenge to- the array OF
Jurors, and from objections to the manner
OF drawing taaesmen.
I. On the first day of the term, the de-
PENDANT moved to quash the venire of jurors
on the ground that It was not drawn accord
ing 10 law-not having been drawn, select
ed, or summoned by James G Hayes, Sher
if Of the Parish of ST. Landry, but byJames
NJ. Thompson, Tor his deputies,) styling
himself Sheriff Of st. Landry.
The Record teens with evidence that al
the time the jury in question was selected
and summoned by James NJ. Thompson, ne
was the Sheriff de facto of the Parish of st
Landry. He was in possession OF the Office
He was recognized by the Judge a quo. He
was the minister of the Court in which the
Jurors were summoned to. appear, and te
which the bill Of Indictment was reported
Pc was thus acting under color of title
under. a commissions FROM the Governor o
the State; and it cannot be successfully
commended that bis legal rightsto the sdict
can be eollaterally enquired into or attacked
upon q motion to quash a venire of jurors
The rule in this regard is elementary ane
hardly requires a citation of authority II
its support. Il is a rule established in the
interest of peace, quiet, and good order, ane
we are unable to perceive any reason why
the prisoner should not be held amenabl'
to it. Turner VS. Hill, 81 Ann, 545S, ant
cases, there cited
II. The appellant objected to the organi
cation Of the petit jury by whom he wa
tried, on the ground that at the time it wa
e~mpanneled, certain persons who had beer
summoned did not answer to their names
and the Judge q quo ordered q suffieien
number OF talesmen from the bystanders tt
complete the jury, Tt appears by the bill
of exceptions that the objection was over
ruled, for the reason that a list Of juror
had been properly served ON the prisoner
three days before the trial, according t.
law; that 6 or T OF the above jurors ha'
not been found IN the Parish, by the Sher
i'll, after diligent search, and that the re
mainder of these who did not answer !
their names had been excused for good an
valid reasons !; that the prisoner was no
entitled to have a special venire summoned
but that a sufficient number were to be Sc
lected. from the bystanders, and that tn
prisoner had no ground of complaint, as b
had accepted ten jurors before the regnla
panel was exhausted"
We do not think the Court erred in thi
ruling. Tt is sometimes necessary for tn
speedy and proper administration of justlc
that ~taleszaan Should be resorted to ; an
the reasons which appear by the BILL Of ez
eeptions to have been given by the Judg
a quo, seem to entirely sustain his actio
in the premises.
It is contended by the counsel of the AZ
pellant that the statute of March Sd, 1861
relative to the drawing of jurors in the Pal
is1 Of st. Landry is still in force, and ongt
to have controlled this case and that,
it's provisions were not complied with, th
Jury was 1rlaWfuk We find ourselves III
able to assent to this view. The statute !
question was a local one, adapted to a stat
Of society and a qualification of citizenshi
which no longer exist ; and the mode
procedure in case of the panel being e1
hausted. was founded upon the same cend
ton of things. The statute was evidentl
repealed by the law Of 1861 relative to j
ries in all the Parishes ofasTse State, sal
the Parish of Orleans, by the 9th section
which the use Of talesmen is specially recoI
nRed and their compensation establishes
Laws of 1868, ps 14S
Judgment affirmed