The New York herald., 1872-12-12

inquiry wssn sa u,ed @ sea nom
proceed 70 the matters which this motion Is made,
mss. a SS net e on Secrecy
s su e sy
Is confined branches OF their duty, in regard
y s IS no %
Is contained in that part Of their which requires
s e s e
L nr y s Hss
q the s
ms. II: should also Ss sddsd sSs proceedings
q e S,s,a::Sns % anans bin TSsse ali sSs
ss that
Jury. Each one knows what took place while he was
there and there Is l.w prevent HIS disclosing such
sssnns Witnesses sntiIsly sIs .aSieot @
p5cSf IN relation thereto The main question connected
nSsa Ss c The Pns
Re iii s % me m
e 1es a. an5es % DAY on
ss ihsstitutsd there such oee district At.or
seg eg 70 i he e. % wodd the and pre-
Ssns1 @
be 70 e by nd e,
SS 1hfn m @ se sl the ECU Of the
business Of he been conducted BY VI District Ht
S5s;s for MAT
rsier IN se present y NOT
eiiS. nor
that took place in the examination Of the
%Ss saS Sse =
lor who Is not public ocer authorzed to conduct the
fore them and advse them Indictment presented
Whsn yers s esab .s
s hsa s,nss
sPssiay ss:s 'ass
s hs hf bs aae
Albany and the Court Of Sessions whether the District
and conduct the witnesses The supreme
attend the Grand Jury for the Of examining nov Wit
nesse nor tor any other purpose except advise them
sa I %h s Ss hin in opinion 5
Of OF s ns tha s right
@ S @ % s
that II should be his duty jury when
sa Of Il as Or ye
nas the District should be allowed
giving information relative to any matter cos
rhs% Se Se des t.
Yhe latter section the District Attorney or
e e s
giving Of their upon any matter before them. This
decision and the provisions Of the
clearly TIE Question whether any other than the
When the decision was made In C0wan IL was irregular
for any person. even the District Attorney to attend
during the sitting OF the Grand Jury, either for examn
ing witnesses or for any other purpose except to advise
them on any question they might put to him. This
In S7 The alterations In the laws, which passed
IN M changed the law 80 far as to provide certain
Grand Jury In all other respects the law remained
altered No other construction can be given statute
passed as this was to remedy partially decision of the
Court than to conne its operation to the words
the District Attorney leaving the prohibition to all other
persons remaining in tul force Under the decision of
the Supreme Court. the Attorney General has
Grand Jury No provision of law changed the effect Of
that decision to the Attorney General and it
as then held to be improper for the Attorney General
before the Grand Jury do not refer to the decisions in
other States on this point because feel bound by the
rule adopted In Cowan, and the subsequent modifca
ton OF that decision by statute For the here
count There are some general rules applicable to the
motion to quash indictment which may referred
as applicable to this motion.
Is discretionary to grant such motion or not but II
should csS not pe GRANTED WHARTON L. SIS and
are good and motion is made to quash the old ndict
ment viii not be granted as 70 some counts Bishop
So where the Indictment Is serious offence affect.
ing the public at large, it will not be quashed except
promoted thereby Nest OF the objections male to the
Indictment before stated immateria The appli-
cation of these rules the others will render IL proper
deny the motion as to these. have fully examined all
find nothing that will justify the Court in quashing this
motion. 1t must, therefore, be denied.