The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-28

ally had always regarded Mayor Hall member of the
The rers then decided that the challenge true, and
the Was s% sana NO. had
YEAR, ago been engaged n ma ri tools
The gentleman aside by consen. Of both ndes.
street. nag Ssss c cy
twenty years had read the general charges IN the papers
The witness was then challenged as to favor
Witness had expressed opinion to the guilt Of any
person. most assnredy he had expressed opinion to
e sf mayor a Oh the city, ana had included In that num-
By consent OF both sides the witness was set aside
John BOYD swornwas candle maker had long resided
in the cy knew the general charges against the Mavor and
The Court~You may stand aside.
Joseph W. Simpson sworn-Was dealer IN faces and
% but mad not formed or an opinion about ae
opinion during the last election but having
paper reports; read the hERAID; had heard Of
Sd no bns a the I'D nS
an active Interest IN politics. had not attended the reform
anu had that opinion STILL formed opinion about
he e he had a. 70 no their s
no bias AGAINST the Mayor on account OF his order about
The was accepted by the srs and was sworn as
so sa s.rG ad Du. rejected
Of having very decided opinions NJ to the guilt or
sn s Ss a7o
and had expressed opinions with regard to them go.
David Eaeser acpary ana AND Liberty s se
read and Knew Of the had
TO Mr to the special charge against Mayor
"A OF the Audit In omiLting to audit q
certain claim he had no distinct Impression. a..
To Mr.. shaer got impressions from what read IN the
papers and would require counter statements to remove
Edmapa b. Beasby dealer in spcesHad an existing
impression Q! the CUNT or Of the ACCUSED eH
him IRON returning verdict In accordance win the tes'
the challenged the admission but
overrued In 10 further questions he stated
impression such that it would require evidence to
remove IT. On The application OF counsel ON that admission
henry A. Van Meas Had read the charges in the news
MsALS I'D not SUPPOSE that the Mayor
ns e had any 90 @
Committee Of seventy; had no knowledge OF any o. tne
ever had taken action in the political reform movement
TO Mr. Clinton return verdict according to the ev
dence whou, references TO any previous bias OF influence
Frederick burnham expressman. had read the charges
opinions which Would require evidence to remove Rejected
Alexander henderson, dealer IN straw sSoas mao reaa ane
Toni Clinton Had formed opinion with regard 70 the
or ting against the city preferred by
A. j. Iarvey; had formed no opinion Whatever on that
10 Mr. shaferhad formed opinions upon the general
cause sustained BY tie Court AND the juror rejected.
After very proraced discussion between counsel as to
the Court sustained the challenge and the juror
Daniel Wright rejected challenge for principal
cause he having formed ana a opnVn wn f n
opinion as to the sult or nnocenee o, the accused,
Charles Lewis Resided s5 Yves, Twenty second
Joboer in domestic cloth have done business
in the city about ear and half MS attention nae oeea
discussed them and formed opinion
A. JAIME on business as tobacco
IN Maiden lane had resided here ve years his
had abou. them. PVT had not expressed or
an o gDen as an epno ne e
feet that It was dinicult to form an opinion;
eoria the reading Of the ar ,
to as IN a To @ Of pa
ties Mayor Nan not one Of had never
Inc witness was then challenged as to favor
Mayors conduct they not he thought,
NO sens O or r h
m st the Committee Seventy but was not
with 1t knew some OF its members joined reform associa
could not say If at the meetings at which he
present resolutions were passed; remembered
fvfoSTS street the speech was humorous one might
were directed at others than Mayor
knowledge particular allegation had been made against
the Mayor the association directed s efforts against the
TO the prosecaonIihe association was munae,pa re-
O. Notwithstanding your being in favor Of reform, could
have bias AGAINST Mayor Hall which would prevent my
| deciding ON the evidence
ss % n S of the r wns 10 had en %
| length and the principal thing against him was that
sa. h'a 'aanseu was IL faSor Of voting
not i he were q de S S
lie did not think the counsel of the defence meant to
that could 60 the jury who was not In favor
OF municipal abuses they would have to 90 that length
tins Witness would be impossible to
# rule adopted for the entire male population OF
the city either in favor OF reform or against It. had
not proved that the witness politically OPP
posed to the Mayor and he were that would not be dis
qualification
of and anti reform should not be raised on this trial.
We all in favor OF reform: The defence had no know
thought he had bias against the Mayor although
he honestly thought he could render an Impartial verdict All
together poltcay had prejudice against their
antagonists and this witness must be superior to other men
| he influence. Suppose OF the
member OF the Ring, and had been abused by
every newspaper published In the city, and member
him, would they think unjust and unfair TO accept
hm No matter how high that man might be socially, he
which uneypainabe; but prejudice arising from
political Fellowship expainabe and. indeed unavoid
able. Would be unfair to have jury made up or
twelve members Of Committee of Seventy Then why
The gentleman mistaken as to his not having
any bias 80 49,, TN, a., 1884,. :,
liberated, Sullivan explained that the extended term OF
the Court expire the following day. The Court could
extend its term without any outside AID, however.
Mayor and said :-A have to Ia, tina,
the District Attorney and Your Honor may
agree 10 is perfectly agreeable the defendant will not
now make objection to irreguarlty
Judge Day that order would be made TO
| row by the Court to extend the term -
The the challenge true, and Mr. Jayne
was set aside
The Court then adjourned until this morning al
| eleven O'Clock.