New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-06-11
rur TWO DECISIONS.

ALBANY, June 10.-The following opinions IN tho
Stokes case were to-day handed down In the Court
of Appeals:
- JUDGE growers OPINION.
GRoyER J-Having carefully examined the n1 pleas
in Abatement interposed by the plaintiff IN error 10 tne
indictment, 10 which the DistrctAttorney domurred
upon which Judgment given sustaining tns oe"ar
rers and arrived the conclusion that there was hotn
inc contained in any Of these pleas emitting him TO
auashing the indictment OF TO any 0ther renei
wa shal not examine whether these proceed
es are before this Court properly for review upon the
certioraE issued and the return made thereto Inc same
remark ia applicable 10 the seventh plea upon which an
sue Of fact was Joined by the replication OF the District
Attorney which was tried before Mr. Justice CardoEo,
mon which he directed verdict for the people, The
testimony disclosed nothing tending to show the invalid
y OF the Indictment and the plaintiff in error was not
injured by the disposition Of the matter by tho Judge
whether the questions thus attempted 10 be raised are
renewable by this Court and IL what practice should
he adopted in bringing them before the Court mma
tera in the present The plaintiff in error clearly
had no right interpose these pleas second TIME or
others OF similar character, and was properly required
by the Court plead TO the indictment aud upon ns
standing the proper taken by the Court
p ordering the plea Of not guilty be entered for him,
and proceeding 10 trial OF the issue thus joined
The only questions necessary examine those OF
law arising upon the exceptions taken by the counsel
for the accused upon the trial for this ISSUE and per-
hans those upon the in fact assigned upon the
writ of error upon the judgment Those arising upon
the exceptions taken upon the trial will first be eOnsid
cred Exceptions were taken 10 the decisions OF the
Court upon the challenge by the prisoner Of several
iurors for principal cause 1t not claimed by the
counsel OF the accused that error was committed,
IL chapter Al yo page lSS OF Laws OF ls1 10 eonst
tutona IL will I've proper rt 10 determine this question,
"A In case that act held constitutional and valid h will
h. unnecessary 10 determine whether any error was
mad AZ fha0 ltn.
of the passage the act The position OF the counsel
for the accused is that tue right OF trial by jury
cured 10 persons accused OF felony by the Constitution
and that this the further right OF trial by
partial Jury. We shall the correctness OF the
latter position Any act OF the Legislature providing
for the Trial otherwise than by law Jury com
posed OF twelve would be unconstitutional and void
and any requiring authorizing such trial by Jury
partial and biased against either party would be vo-
aon OF OF the essential elements Of the Jury TO
fered TO in, and secured By, the Constitution.
QUESTIONS or JURY LAW.
The counsel insists that the set in question does
pei the accused 10 be tried by Jury partial and bAsed
against him; that the common law held that having
formed or expressed opinion conclasivcly proved .
want OF impartiay, and for this excluded the
juror upon CHALLENGE for principal cause uitAoas
ReN Rlahsh ReGsa