The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1871-05-18

anu sci aSlae.
Mr.. siglsniund Iichtensteider was the next one
cated. lie had the appearance OF man who
would be quite qualified for the purpose. but ne
ton. lie said that he had formed no
opinion either for or against the prisoner.
HERALD reports lie nad formed an impression as
10 the guilt OF the prisoner winch he thought II
would require some evidence TO remove. Had no
conscientious scrupies reference 10 the punish
ment OF death. The impression ne had formed was
evidence before the Coroner II ne were sitting ca
the jury he would act on the evidence. lie had no
IMPRESSION on MS nina as 70 .he guil OF innocence
He had also no business relations or knowledge OF
the prisoner or his friends. He did not know Avery
d. Putnam, nor was he acquainted with any OF his
friends
Mr.. bartlett said that the defence did not wish to
convey any other Impression than that Mr. Lichten
steider was very honest man. but they desired 10
peremptorily challenge hun. MIR. Lichtcnstelder
upon Mr.. Bartlett for the mercTul deliycrance that
had been vouclsaied 10 him.
JURORS SET ASIDE
Prince W. Nicholson, Louis Inman, Nathaniel r.
Ackerman, William i'insenl, Lucius u. Cary. Isaac
Elias Hyans, Albert II. Deforcst, Hiram ii. Durkec,
had then minds made I'M and were set aside.
fur merchant Of sss Canal I street was subjected
10 short examination and proved so completely
The KIND of man everybody had been fishing for that
and placed IN the jurors CHAIR MI. Leo is gentlc-
man OF active nervous temperament, with head
Rip 1a Yam wnsss aer he awos Gu from is
long sleep. A he look his place by the side Of Mr..
With the qool-nailred, Emphatlc looK OF the
former gentleman. MR. Leo IS evidently gentle
heard OF the killing until his attention had
been called 70 Il When 10. 1e was sum,
avoided any conversation about IL in his family as
he mad been called upon to serve as Juror. DID
friends. Had no prejudice or bias for or against the
prisoner. II he served on the Jury he could serve
lmpartally. The triers, the counsel on both sides
\ and the Judge all unanimous that Leo
was an eminenty competent man. Mr. Leo was
Joseph N. shute, David Reyes John v. Dye, Fred
crick Martin, John L. Deem, Joseph Hall and Will
IL was now haf-past one O'Clock aud the court
took recess OF thirty minutes.
AT the reaSSemDling at two O'Clock the following
, were examined and placed among
! THE Rejected:
! Bell Charles W. Lent, James Taylor, julius often.
heimer and George Haupr formed opinions aud
Mr.. Abraham s. Grabfelar was examined and mp.
peared to have very decided, opinion that Foster
| Killed Mr.. Putnam, anu he was rejected.
Tie following gentlemen were also set aside on
preconceived opinions John Abendroth, Jonn N
Bradley, Hiram Poole, Christonher Cramer, William
II. Fowler. James v. Parker and William II. Riker.
MIR. JAMES NJ. M'KINLEY
was the cause Of considerable legal discussion and
! several spread-eagc speeches. from counsel on
both sides He was ultimately discharged on per-
Gnpt1 ,a cnaenge Ihls gentleman was one OF tae
seemed to have every requisite for juror. He said
that although he had read an account OF the case IN
/ jury and render an impartial verdict. II 1t were
! found that Foster had killed Putnam he should GER
talnly md him guilty OF some crime
Mir. Bartlett said TINT before the Court charged the
| triers he wished 10 address q few words to those
| gentlemen. AT some length ne replied TO the allc-
CATION made by Assistant District Attorney Fellows
that the defence was seeking to empanc a jury OF
idiots: On the contrary, the defence desired the
! most intelligent jury That could be summoned IN
deed they would very much ike II It could be DONE,
That the case should be decided before the Judges Of
the Court OF Appeals, for IL was certain that
then these judges would put away from them
oil impressions that they might have formed. Mr..
Bartlett then argued nj length as TO the disability OF
an Impression jnryman's mind and argued that
Mr. Mckinley was thus disqualified by his aumlssCn
/, that he had bias and on abiding Impression.
Assistant District Attorney Fellows replied at
length, and with great ability. ana showed that it
was Idle ask, IN an age like the present that
Jurynan should be destitute OF any Impressions In
Ex-Judge Stuart In response said that the Assist.
ant District Attorney had COMPOUNDED the inter-
nens to the Challenge lor piacpai cause 'I instead
oi challenge by favor. After arguing this with con-
ssderabe yehemence, the counsel referred TO the
Attorney, and sad that the impression on the
Camera was slight and. feeble, but when il was
placed IN contact With chemicals that impression
became indenbe and no chemistry could remove IT,
District Attorney Garvln called the attention OF
MS Honor TO case before the courts oil challenge
~ favor Of jnryman, WHO said That ne had rea q
the account In the papers and supposed the prisoner
was guilty OF the crime. The Recorder, who Is now
Governor Hoffman, charged that the trlers were 10
take common sense view OF the question: look INTO
admit the Juror. The Court OF Appeals supported
that direction. If there ever was q case In which |
impartial man was presented TO the jury IL is the
GENT aman who Is now before the triers.
Judge Cardozo, In charging the jury said:-Iherc
rs no RE OF law that can be given 10 yon that you
can say whether this or any other juror Is cOmpe-
tent or not II IS all referred 10 the common sense
OF the trers II had been said by Recorder HOFFMAN
that the riers should look into tho mind OF the can
dida,e for the jury and determine as far az they |
can, us condition, and to examine that as between
the prisoner and The people, and they have right
TO say that he Is competent or If otherwise TO fnd |
that he Is NOT The law allows the triers TO say
whether they think that the evidence that would be
brought before him wonld remove the impair
II there evidence before them that the juror
only the impression that every one geis and
prejudice beyond that, 1t would well reject
such one. Tn the contrary, If you are OF an
opinion that the impression Is fixed II will be better
for you to set the juror aside
Mr.. Mckinley was set aside on a pcremptory cha!-
lenge from the defence.
JURORS REJECTED.
Leonard X. Smith. William Emberson Levi Ellis,
Edward Mcnan, Edward ii. Falconcr ana John A.
Duggan Nassau strcen, William PaJne, Henry
Stirkey, Martin Chunen, Charles Horne, Charles
Falkner. William Henry STEPHENS Patrick MehOncy,
Smith, were all rcjccred on account Of preconceiycd
opinions.
IL was now five O'Clock, and ex-Iudgc Stuart
asked the Court whether the time had not come Tor
stood that there were only seventy ballots I'm the
box, and he should prefer waiting until those
called II counsel had TO objection
Ex-Judge Stuart pleaded Tor an adjourn ment, aud
the court adjourned until haf-past ten this
morning District Attorney Garvin wished all wit
nesses Tor the prosecution 10 be IN attendance ut
that hour.
There are still three vacant Chairs waiting 10 be
filed by Juiymen.
THE TENEMENT House MURDER.