New-York tribune., 1872-12-06
THE COURTS.
MOTION TO QUAsH THE TWEED NDICT-
MENTS.

! TIE INFORMALITIEs AND IRREGULARITIES OF
! THE GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS DEFENDED
| BITTER PERSONALITIES IN PLACE OF
GRAVE RGUMENTs-PROBABLE DECISION
TO-DAY.
On Tuesday the Tweed trial was to have
begun but John Graham Of counsel FOR Tweed moved
TO ouash the indictment on the ground OF Illegal infu
ence OF the prosecution the Grand jury and informal
itv in the submission OF the evidence Afdavs were
submitted showing that Mr.. Peckham had i'm
properly been before the Grand Jury to advise
them; that, subsequently discovering this to be
Illegal, the indictments had been altered, and
the fictitious name Of John Brown substituted
for that OF Mr. PecBham; and a general argument fol-
lowed on the ITecuary and ilegality OF the proceed
incs An adjournment followed over Wednesday out OF
respect to Mr. Greeley, and yesterday was devoted to
hearing the reply OF the prosecution represented by
Wheeler II. Pcckham and Lyman Treman. The usual
number of counsel appeared on eath sde ahd the ay
began with an argument from Mr.. Peckham IN reply to
that OF Mr. Graham on Tuesday.
Mr. Pcckham, after expressing his rellet that the
motion had been at last made, said the affidavit pre-
sented two points the first that somebody authorized
by the had appeared before the Grand
Jury aud explained the indictment to them 10 mad
been said by the senior counsel Tor ne deIense lh ms
affidavit had supplied any defects on that point IN
statement Of the facts to them and desired conceal
ment OF them. There two brauches OF this obee-
ton First that TIE acts done by himself 'IF FecAhainl
were improper IN themselves
Mr. Justice Ingraham said tho acts were improper
in themselves. Tie question was whether any but the
DstrictAttorney had right TO do them.
Mr. Peckham accepted this suggestion as being a
ruling that his acts would have been proper the Dis
rict Attorney He did not ask the Court disregard
any welestabishcd rule, but he did call on
IL not 10 decide what never was rule or
Orney had the right appear before the Grand Jury.
This lot case OF an indictment found on the pres
euce OF any one but tho DistrctAorncy. To maintain
this pOnt they must maintain that the Grand Jury once
having had an improper person TO whose personnel no
well defined objection could be made, was forever after
incompetent 10 consider fairy case Ihey submitted
that, in the first place, there was no Improperly IN the
appearance himself before Grand jury aud In the
eDred nv fhe rv reseindng s action aud feconserng
the whole matter de Al common Law there was no
exclusion Ofany th6 Grand jury room 20 whose
presence the Grand Jury assented. He quoted from
United States AtOrneyGeneral BradfOrds opinion ad-
person agpeyed with his witnesses before the Grand
Jury. He cited Judge Wilson TO the same effect. In
England barsters retained TO appear before the
Grand Jury and in cases of treason Kings counsel APP
peared before IT, The prosecutor allowed, where
there personal prosecutor, 70 be present and eX-
anime and cross-eEamIne his witnesses, and
even 70 be present at their discussions.
There had been case in Indiana where two
men appointed by the prosecuting officer were present
during discussions ana votes Ot the Grand jury SIN
guary parallel IN somc respects 70 thi. case but going
beyond this case IN the fac hat tley had Deen present
during the vote. There It was held not Illegal nor
ground Tor plea abatement without some actual injury
to the accused or corrupt Influence The secrecy
OF the Grand Jury not Tor the benefit OF the accused
but Tor his apprehension.
Mr. Tremain then followed, closing the argument in
opposition to the motion. He said:
The theory upon which the motion Is based assumes
the form three propositions first, that the proceed
mgs before the Grand Jury were Illegal and Irregular
second that this Indictment tainted by that irregular
ty and is the fruit OF IT. third that this rregarlty Is OF
itself, upon the papers before the Court sufnclent
ground Tor the nterposon by the Court, and TO make
II the duty OF the Court TO grant motion to qlash TINS
Indictment These three propositions must be estab-
lished anirmauyey the part OF the defense. NoT,
the whole OF this rests upon this simple statement
of facts. which may be gathered from the yolnmnons
ney of this Court and OF all the courts OF
record this State reputable attorney at the re-
quest OF the AtorneyGeneral OF the state Us hghest
law officer with the concurrence and also joint request
OF DsIctAttOrney Of the County appeared before
the Grand Jury, where, not only without oDJectou Dut
by their expressed consent, lie proceeded 10 exaiue
the witnesses the part OF the Government, explain
ing the nature of the indictment. making the request
either Of the finding the Ignoring OF the lndletmeLt
the close OF hs examination, and then leaving tho
matter with the Grand Jury Of the county.
1t TINS slender ground that the prosecution has
been arragned, and all connected with IT, IN manner
unparalleled in my experience IN court OF Justice
Judge Ingranal-I did not understand that the coun
the defendant have made any personal observa
TONS II had understood wOuld nave stopped IL.
Mr. Tremain-I will show you some or them In the
simple discharge OF duty, moved that the defendant
should be arragned, You are tod that the counsel Tor
brain" We have been told that my learned
a. has be 9ssa and ought 90 be udsd We
have been told that we we're so eager 10 get AT this
tramped under foot the rights Of the Defendant ig
nored, improper motives OF personal ana p0htch nos
tiIty against the. defendant imputed take occasion
now 10 protest against IT, shall not follow, at least
now example, want the counsel and Court 10
understand recognize no superiors at ts par
and when the gentleman arralgns
Counsel for tue Government Tor simpy asking, hlter
Of delay ana days occupied in datory mollons To
simply arraign tue defendan cannot see the force OF
tue criticism upon the counsel for endeayorlng TO dis
charge a simple duty. - -
Mr. Tremain continued his arguments until recess,
citing point that the prosecution acted
legally procuring the indictment After recess he
argued sun further upon the right OF the Attorney
General TO appear In deputy before me ufad
Jury particular point of his address during the
latter part day relation 10 the power ~ tne
Attorney General being greater than tha1 OF the DE
tricJA Attorney. Mr.. Field will repy to-day.