The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-14
s T Q K E s.
Another Day Of bubbles, Objcc-
tions and Challenges.
THE JURY COMPLETE.
The Grand Jury That Indicted Stokes
Themselves Put on Trial.

great decrease OF the rush OF people TO secure an
entrance into the court room OF The Oyer and
Terminer that the HERALD reports OF the previous
days proceedings and the explanation conveyed
therein had been read and understood that the
prisoner IN the question at issue was not upon
actual trial for the crime for which he stands in
dcted-the murder OF James Fisk, Jr., OF Erie fame
but that, In TACT, the grand inquest, which had
found that Indictment were themselves on trial. on
Q very different issue, involving the question or fact
to be submitted through testimony to-day whether or
not there was legal defect in their acting as sucD
grand inquest and whether or not Stokes was
legally indicted. The skirmlsnng OF counsel upon
the point had clearly interest for the thousands
who have hitherto crowded the court buildings and
,ts narl!sss e sasfs s.ssssa :, s.oxes as ne
passed., was supposed, to trial, and which must,
according to their reasoning and deductions, end
IN mis- conviction and sentence The usual police
precautions were, however, enforced and line OF
police prohibited all approach to the private en-.
trance through the Clerks office to the court room
and also to the public door leading direct thereto.
Only The privileged few were passed by the
police, and sometimes the dlatory and
anxious reporter Of the press was compelled 10
make a flank movement through the Supreme Court
Chambers TO get to his reserved seat IN the great
arena. little before hai-past ten
STOKES WAS GUARDED IN
and shown to MS seat. He looked around the room
and seemed somewhat relieved by the fact that he
had not as in the first instance, had to pass through
the threatening crowds OF the previous days, and
that the court room did not present The sea OF faces
staring ominously at him that had evidently cOwed
him heretofore. Take his demeanOr and appear
ance all In all aud they are that OF man depressed
with the consciousness Of being charged with the
commission oil fearful crime for which public SEN
timent viii demand Q full and complete atOnement
should jury Of Ills peers bring IN verdict against
him.
was formally opened precisely at half-past ten,
moment alter Judge CardoZO had taken his seat,
and numerous counsel OF the accused being ali
present
THE FIRST SWORN JURORS.
Quito early the two first jurors aud the triers,
Aessrs William b. Ogden and George u Huntington.
were IN their seats ana George w. Nicholson, Peter
fourth, nfth sixth aud seventh urOrs-were also
early In their places. The third Juror, Mr.. Chandler
Robbins, came In a little behind time.
THE CALLING AND EXAMINATION OF JURORS RE-
SUMEn
At quarter TO eleven O'Clock the proceedings
commenced by the calling OF Morris OSterweis.
Counsel for prisoner examined MN as to ms po-
siton ON the principal challenge. The main ques-
ton on the principal challenge IS In substance as
follows
under which the list OF the Grand Jurors and the
Grand Jury itself shall be selected. have you
formed any opinion as to the legality or illegality
Mr.. Osterweis was The second juror VINO had
formed such an opinion and was dismissed on the
principal challenge.
Mr.. Samuel E. Goodwin got through the principal
challenge, having no opinion on rather dlfDcut
question of law, but on the challenge 10 the favor,
wnlle denied any bias Tor against prisoner.
admitted that he had done business Tor Colonel Fisk
and had an impression as TO the nomlclde,
Prisoners counsel presented new set OF requests
TO charge. being IN substance that II any Juror
showed himself TO have such on IMPRESSION as TO
present plea mere technlcality or interposed Tor
delay, he was not indifferent
Judge CaldOZO renewed MS charge that the Juror
must he thoroughly and entirely impartial between
the prisoner and the people, ana not merely lndlf
ierent on this ISSUE He declined to charge four Of
counses requests, but charged the alth, winch was
to the effect that the question Tor the trers was not
what the PROPOSED juror thought he could DO TO
clear his mind OF any prejudice but what the tricrs
thought with their knowledge oil human nature on
the question OF his indinerency.
The trers rejected him.
MR.. JOHN c. HUsER EIGHTH JUROR, SWORN.
John q, Huser was clear Of opinion on the princi-
pal challenge On the challenge 10 the favor he
stated that he had had an impression on reading
the papers as to the matter, but something had
since occurred 10 ease 1t on.
COUNsEL-Yes and before we get through the I'M
preston Of others will be eased on considerably.
Huser sworn In as the eighth Juror at 1--WE minutes
pas; eleven.
principal challenge; he had an impression on his
mind as to the homicide, which would require some
evidence to remove. The trlers rejected hum.
This exhausted the regular panel
Mr. MCKEON said they had thought OF challenging
TO the array the extra panel OF 500, They would
be governed In that, somewhat, by the construction
placed by HIS Homer tile order calling the panel
whether 1t was panel merely Tor this Issue OF Tor
Judge CARDozo said 1t was merely for the trial Of
this Issue.
Mr.. NoKEoN-Then we shall not challenge.
The 800 names were then placed In the
box, and the hrst one that came out was Mr.. Cor
nellus Greeland, who had an impression on his
mind which would require evidence lor its re-
moval.
HIS answers led to a discussion OF much length
between prisoners counsel and District Attorney
Garvln as TO the form Of the Judges charge, Mr..
Garvin quoting from OConnell's case for high trea-
Claiming mat that rule was expressy CondemUed In
the case OF Freeman.
MT. MCkEoN, following. hoped that the Court
would not follow precedent harsh even for the
day and occasion Of It's delivery and utterly opposed
to the ameliOratlon OF modern law.
He was re,ected by the trlers.
MR.. NATHAN BROWN, NINTH JUROR
Nathan Brown. clothier oil NO 20 chatham street,
lug the papers, but nothing more, and II even
snght ilegalty was shown IN the formation OF the
Grand jury he would lind accordingly. lie was
accepted ninth juror at ten minutes OF twelve
Louis J. Frank had decided bias In the cas- G ana
Noses Kohscuild was Indifferent as TO the parties
but IL would make a difference in his verdict who
were the men on the Grand jury.
The triers rejected MIN.
oscar Mr.. SANFORD was disqualified on the princl.
pal challenge The third 50 situated.
Arnold kanen denied any Uias, but had an I'm.
preston derived from the newspapers, an opinion
sill remaining.
TIC was TeJecteu ny Tue uleTs.
Mr.. HENRY VAN HOLLAND TENTH JUROR
Henry Van Holland HAD no bias or prejudice and
ne found any llegalty In the Grand Jury he
would send 1t back 10 another Grand Jury. Laugh.
ter.)
Challenge withdrawn by the prisoner and re.
newed by the District Attorney. He was friend,
personal and political. OF MIR. John Mckeon, one OF
prisoners counsel. lie was not gong to put him.
self on record one VINO did not read and think,
but MS thoughts had not matured lnto an opinion.
lie was accepted aud became the tenth Juror at
ten minutes past twelve r. M.
MIR. SAMUEL GOLDSMITH THE ELEVENTH JUROR
samuel Goldsmith, the next Juror called, had
read the newspaper accounts, but they did not
make much impression him; ne was kinu OF
sorry-sorry for Mr. stokes and Mr.. Fisk. lie was
q wholesale butcher. lie had no prejudice against
technical deIepces. He was sworn IN as eleventh
Juror at u quarter past twelve.
A LEGAL BOUT.
Isldor Goldsmith was the fourth VINO mao an
ODIuo OIL as to the legality OF the Grand Jury, and
IIlIl ri LllIlnIXel Inuu A. Nc kelQ-