Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1873-11-22

NV OIL ClLlkCu anu NOAuH0A ~ ~ Af1 NHfa - /
call attention 10 such abuses.
Yours very truly, =. ,..-
oyFr6E q. s. MkRsHkL-)
DfsTRIcT OF DELAWARE,
November :, 1s7x
SANuRt. NJ. HARRISaroH, ESQ, ,-.-- 49,
DrkP SIR u have to acknowledge we
receipt OF yor ettss o. me h syln v W snd
Ssnrge " Massey, ESQ, 80 eopnsel for the
defendants in the suit OF the niteo ststes
sgsinaf Chs. X. y. Day and otherst Iste
pendine in the n..!ed states Circuit Souss
Tot this, District make % ~ late oetober
selection % the iurY at tho lA'e "s'o0s'
GAS As to 10 YOUR ffst chsfee thst l. ss Mafshsl,
| or some person deputized oy NE mas paeked
a Jury against the right OF the delendsntsi
! permit me 10 express my surprise that either
! You or Mr. Massey should make charge AZ
! once so false and 80 groundleas. Before
making it, l must presume, you inspected
| the panel Of jurors returned by me,of which
/ you complain.
The following are their names Abner P.
bailey Lewis ~. springer, John NJ. Scott,
/ Geo. ". Bright Charles X. Jones, Annesley
n. keithler, Alvan Allen, John V. ChTlsty,
| samuel Silver, Reuben p. Janvier, Jhsen
Davis, Joseph Clesver, Reuben Satterth-
| wait, Alfred GAwthrop, John Boughman,
samuel Hanna. OF New CASTLE county
and John p. olline, ELIJAH hearn, Ihomha
living, sheppard p. Martin, CALEB 5. Lee,
Iohu w. Day, William ID. Fisher, Thomas
/. Davis, William +. Reville, Isaac II. y.
Knowles, l.. A. Jenkins, Of Sussex county.
Most, il not all Of them, must be known,
either personally or by reputation, 70 you
, and Mi. Massey. No one OF them, TO my
knowledge, had any interest in the cause OF
the plaintiff, the United States, beyond
: their citizenship, and their welLknoWn
characters In their respective neighbor-
/ hoNds rs gentlemen OF the highest standing
! for Integrity, honesty, capacity and I'm,
4 partially, and as men who under tneil
' lessly, need no vlndication from inc against
e your wALtOn SANDERS.
Name kny one Of them whom anybody
would "a approached Improperly 70 a.
lost rho verdict; name one OF them who
e had any knowledge before he attended the
court that your case was pending name
= any one who was not an absolutely impair
o tlal Juror. Why then DO YOU eaTe say
q packed them 10 secure the United states q
n verdict? MIR. Harrington II this jury wa
9 corruptly packed why did you not MAKE
u your objections to Il 20 the Court at ths
d term when It's truth or talslFy coula %
If tried, and what new motive has since
- arisen that leads you to make Il now, whei
\. ii IL were true II could not avoid YOU
u clients Why do you attempt 70 blhekeI
the characters Of the jury and myseli oy
z charge which you dare not bring before IN
.e court? Why do you now asperse the chAl
actcr Of a panel, twelve Of whom you &C
:, cepted without challenge, and were sWorl
More especially am l surprised at you
,e use Of Mr. Massey'A name as Joining you Il
the complaint of your letter, (which he ha
10 not signed,) because at the court both MI
p Massey and MIR. Day, the principal defend
~ ant in.yOur suit, expressed TO me in WORD
rs their entlre satisfaction with the jury.
IT Your second charge, that /. as Marsha
al or some one delegated by me, had purposel
neglected and refused TO summon any Juror
49, frr Of Kant UhnFRlu ALL IN
y defendants reside and are well known 4
In leading citizens, IL, as l will hereinalts
~ show, partly false, and partly true, o.
1s whether false or true, y strikes me wy
70 amAzement that you should complain Of !
to IL YOU object TO impartial citizens lro
ne other portions Of the State as Jurors
YOUR case and complain of me because d
er not summons the neighbars and friends
ed YOUR clients, u Is because you think va
w would have received some especial adva
=. tage at the hands OF the latter, or 10 oth
ll- words your complaint is that dld not pas
y. the jury for your client Sueh ehnsse ga
de for no defence from me, and u is dimcult
IA. presume that you made 1t with your olien'
knowledge or approval
II is always my rule and endeavor
on draw not partial, but impartial Jurors
'ak both political parties, who have no intere
~. in any cause in the Court.
~ Again, / am not aware Of any imp
-. priety 10 Bummonipg the jury exclusive
INC from two counties, or even from one, or
O.. Won please. from even a single hundr,
to The law and rule OF the Court does q
Get specify that they shall be taken from q
~ part OF my bailiwick, and in the larger
~ tricte am informed, II is the practice
'bt' the L. s. Marshal to summon the lur
from the vicinity Of the Court House.
tor Asarule take juries from all parts
Ma the district and In this instance suppo'
, u'n had done So II IL not true that p
ian posely neglected to summon anyIurora IT.
az, Kent county, a portion Of the Jury vi
the summoned from Milford, four-httha
which town lies in Kent county, and q
posed the jurors thus summoned were n
Kent and so returned them to the eler
when found my mistake ! directed him
amend the return In that respect but 4
true, as-you charge that refused TO o
ny mon certain jurors from the county o. "A
Jar wherein all the defendants resided,
in until the complaint Of my refusal oontai
,op / IN YOUR letter had not supposed that
-. reduest shat refused either emanAted II
'n or wash any way connected witn
Dover, or its vicinity in Kent county tbe
the only one OF which / or you have
knowledgel made mention 70 MT. Mas
inst after the time OF itH receipt, express
DAD INV disApprobAtion that any one should
nroaeh me in such a way, or on such
NAL. iect and also spoke Of II 70 you In youl
i be nee since the court, and before the date
the our letter. The request was contained
tap a letter 20 nc from Mr.. Thomas ID. q. Sn
Dr. at OF Dover, OF which the following Is a
road copy - ~ G.. =, 10.
wing lover DELss sept lri
" be FRIEND JoHN WIN you do me the "a
bore Of summoning the gents, Of the next co
able october term, Joshua b. wharton, Geo
e on Baker, Andrew Smithers and Samuel
irec- Conigie. They are good Republicans
z its Dan Woodall can voueh for. Grant
unc. favor and will try and return the 90
tho Hoping TO hear from you SOON remain
erlin Yours, etc, rHos. d. q. SHIT
and, The above had every appearance to n
line an endeavor to secure the improper .
that monipg OF friends OF your clients op
O 81. Jury, and wrote at once TO MT. Smith
And. tusing 10 grant ms request, can only
being To this statement OF the facts that j
uifer. complaint OF my so doing seems to cal
hitch explanation, not so much from me as
with YOURSELF
4 run A. 10 your third charge that mad
es at turn to The Court that had summoned
tain Jurors from Kent county v
lenry truth they were from Sussex, have
near stated bnth the fact and It's explana
renee 1t is true, as stated 10 yonr fourth CD
d il that amended the return 80 As TO con
c evi. TO The fact without leave OF the Court
~ is il is utterly false that amended the
amt Tor the purpose Of destroying the evid
IS has Of A false return. The fact Of the ori
riend return was first called TO my attentic
Mt Day, the principal defendant, and :
pro. 1 ward by Mr.. NJ assey and II was, Of co
help known TO the Clerk Of the Court, Mr. 5
u into II is idle then to say / attempted 70 de
ealth. the evidence Of a.. Aud 1 failed e
Ike us leave OF the Court to make the amend
Wen really because l considered 1t then a
IA the now, ssch trihiug matter.
As TO the remaining charges, that
Lane tiou OF the aurora in this aud form
tore, stances were selected BY my deputies
uts ut muned by them upon writs allied
sw up them have TO say 20 limited extern