New-York tribune., 1874-04-24
LOCAL MISCELLANY.
THE TWEED CASE.
TIE BILL OF NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. ON MOTION


TIE BILL OF neutrality-suspicious. ON A MOTION
ELL. TO COMPEL JUDGE DAVIS TO SIGN IT.
The question of disposing of the bill OF ex-
ceptons in the Tweed came up again yesterday for
argument before the General Term OF the Supreme
Court composed OF Judges Brady, DanIos. and West
brook the problem with Mr.. Twceds lawyers being
now TO compel Jndge Davis who presided at the last
trial. TO sign the bill OF exceptions. Messrs Phelps and
Peekham, representing the prosecution appeared in
court on the order 10 show cause why peremptory
mandamus should not he ssuod compelling JudRe Davis
10 include certain matters, mainly az to the mpaneng
oi the Jury in the book which he had refused TO
do on the ground that they had occurred during the
ria MT Graham, Nj. Root, and the Messrs. Bartlett
appeared to father the application aud support It, Mr..
Phelps raised the preliminary question OF the luris-
diction OF the General Term IN the matter,
but the Court decided to hear the case on Its
merits Mr.. Root then read the papers for the moving
parties, and Mr.. Graham argued the motion The first
ground OF the application related to the exclusion OF
JURORS was that Owen c. owens challenged for princi-
pal cause by the Defense which the Court decided not
true, and then challenge to the favor was oyerruled
The defense then withdrew the challenge, and having
been renewed by the prosecution, the challenge for
principal cause overrued but the Juror was ex-
ciuded on q challenge to the favor. A. Judge Davis
settled the bill OF exceptions, the only challenge appear
ing 10 have been interposed that By the prosecution
to the favor
In the case OF James W. Hay the principal challenge
was overruled az interposed by each SIDE but Judge
Davis excluded the juror challenge To the favor by
the prosecution defense excepted Judge Davis
struck the whole out OF the bill OF exceptions Mr. Gra-
ham claimed that 1t ought to be shown to the higher
courts how the court OF trial can rule juror competent
when the defense object to him. and incompetent when
the prosecution signify dislike to him the facts and
the course of the Court 90 other jurors hardly war
ranng such decision.
ne 9TH o1asao ~ tuha Mr. Grah i'm
substance charges bad faith IN Judge DAVIS that 1t
was Understood that wherever Judge Davis did not
charge substantially the requests TO charge submit
ted Dy him, the defense should have an exception MI
Graham charges that this understanding was violated
by Judge DAVIS refusing after the jury mad retired 10
admit such excepnous and that his refusal 10 admit IN
the bill OF exceptions Just did without regard
TO when IL occurred substantially deprVes the review
Mr. Peckham in his reply. read arcertcate made by
Judge Davis to the facts OF the ra and which states
that certain exceptions claimed by the defense
been made not made at all. Mr.. Peckham also
read his own affidavit cOrrOOoraye OF these facts ME-
Graham promptly objected to the certificate. claiming
that II should have been Affidavit, but Judge Brady
said that the certificate Of the Judge the same elect
as his AFFIDAVIT During the argument Mr. Graham said
that he and his associates Judge Davis
In regard to the bill OF exceptions the latter made an
offensive expression, whereupon he Mr Graham) took
Graham added that II would have been useless ana
fareca after the remarks made by Davis for the coun-
sel TO the risk O receiving insults by gong 10
Judge Davis again with the enRrossed bll since ne SUP
sautiay tod them he would not do anything unless he
Mr. Graham was interrupted by judges Brady and
WestbrOOk VINO told him they would not permit crit-
csm OF Judge Daviss manner. IL was the fefusal 10
sgn-nOt the manner OF refusng-that was in question
Mr. Graham said that the lDse appeared 10 be lnsD
uatng something about his tGrahaDs pnrposely gong
10 Judge DAVIS To excite him and raise quarrel lie
said he had always been respecu tO Judge DaNrJ ana
never intended to be otherwise.
The Court shat off this kind OF argument, and Mt
Peckham replied considerable length, insisting that
far the exceptions TO the charge were concerned
Mr. Justice Davis mad really what did occur in the
bill of exceptions which he had directed to be prepared
But he took technical ground that this writ could not
issue except where a Judge had actually signed ana
sealed bill OIL exceptions or mad refused TO
sign such bill.
Mr. Phelps followed, arguing that this was not the
tribunal to decide this matter since they were asked 10
decide hand the fact ana on tue other the mean
ing OF the fact on both OF which the court below Lad
the only reil knowledge.
The Court reserved decision.