New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-25
TIE NEW Jury LAW,
IT'S PHAcrIcL OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES STATEMENT BY
MR.. TREMAIN.


MR.. TREMAIN.
The result Of late important criminal trials
has called attention 10 the practical operation Of the
new Jury law The securing OF very intel
gent iuries in the Stokes and Tweed was most
generally commented upon and usually alluded TO as
a most une xpected well as gratifying result In the
course OF conversation other topics with Mr.. Ire
man elsewhere reported, allusOn was made to this mat
ter and the following singular and interesting statement
was made by HIN touching the secret history Of the
Stokes aud Tweed trials. The reporter had called to
Mr. Trcmains memory the fact that after the former
trials some criticisms were published as coming from
him in relation the In which the iures had
been made up, and which he had criticised the action
Of the Commissioner OF Jurors He was then asked
what was his present impression in relation to the mode
in which the lists OF jurors have been made up for those
cases recently tried. Mr. Tremain answered:
It'll true was so forclbly impressed with the great
contrast exhibited between the characters OF the two
lures, the which tired Stokes being composed OF
men highest int gence, character ana p0stl0D
while the one which tried Tweed was 40
VIGOROUSLY of different character with a few
honorable EXCEPTIONS that did express myself at the
time strong terms of anmadverslOn In relation To the
whole system by winch these Jurors had been drawn
wrong existed somewhere, came 10 the trial or Stokes
with full determination that that matter
should be probod TO tho bottom by a most
rigid and thorough examination Acting upon what
we belle ged reliable Information, uterposed on
Stokes trial challenge TO the ehtife array Daseu
upon alleged Irregularities and legalities on the part
the demurrer 10 that challenge had been argued and
the ston bad been submitted 10 the Court who took
nntt the nrvt morning to decide IT, It happened that
accidentally cams ia contact with Mr Taylor In the
COURTROOM had neytr haa The pleasure Of his &C
ouantance before, and som5 sharp words passed
between us. He complained o. the injustice when
had been done to him In my FORMER IL CRU y,
cisms. 1 am happy to say that the result .,
my interview with him more thCsopGu
ac1ualnance and familiarity with the machinery Of hs
office He chee fully invited me to examine the books
and papers and placed full possession Of all facts
relating to bs administration. The result OF my inyes
CATION was the full convection that our challenge had
been based upon q mistaken conception OF facts and
that there ground IN truth for the challenge
acting upon this conviction, upon the opening VI tue
Court the following morning. after the Judge had
announced his decision sustaining our chaHense, /
did, with the concurrence OF my associates,
promptly withdraw the challenge announcing that
il was unfounded In fact Judge Davis who had
also Ia the time had frank conversation with the
Commissioner took OCCASION III expressing MS satisfao
ton at action In Withdrawing the challenge, To
yindcate and explain the proceedings OF the Commits
sOu Nothing could be abhorrent 10 sense OF
justice than do anything tnat would unneces-
sary inre the feelings or any public officer. am en-
rely satisfied that tho present panel OF jurors com
pleted by Mr aylors direction has been fairly, legally,
and impartially made.