The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-01-12
Notion for a New Struck Jury in the One
Million Tweed Suit.
Argument on the Challenge
to the Array.
WHAT A WOMAN CLARVOYANT SHOULD KNOW.
Usury in This State Not Usury
in Rhode Island.

The counsel in the Tweed appeared In the Su-
preme Court yesterday morning. before Judge Barrett
on the order 10 show why the same esors ap-
pointed by the Court TO draw the struck jury which
was on Monday quashed, should not proceed at once
to strike another jury. When the motion was called
counsel for the people commenced to read afiidavts
and other papers in support OF his application.
Mr. Dudley Field arose and objected to tho reading
OF any papers which had not been served upon him.
After some conversation between counsel and the
Court Judge Barrett finally said he hat right to read
tho papers included in the pleadings
Mr.. Field said in that case no entitled to an ad-
ournmen to enable him to reply the andavits pre-
sented by counsel and made application to have the
matter set until this morning
Judge Barrett granted the application
The counsel then proceeded to tho Supreme Court,
Circuit, where before Judge Westbrook, the examina
tion on the challenge nterposed by the defendants
counsel the array OF struck jurors In the ST. 600
suit was resumed The court was crowded and tho
proceedings seemed to create considerable interest
Mr.. William Douglass, one OF the Jurors summoned
on the struck jury was examined and testified that his
county he voted and paid taxes there and had served
on jures there; has never served on jury or voted
here on DISCRIMINATION he stated that he com
monty spent his winters IN New York, and lis
mers at his homo near Flushing at various watering
places In Europe.
Mr. julius Catn another of the jurors objected to as
not properly named the list being in court was
called to the stand, and testified that his father julius
Catin lives In Hartford, and he himself resides at No
n West Twenty street, does business at No 4lS
Broadway, as julius Catin, Jr his name got into the
directory incorrectly as Julius II. Catlin.
The objection to this gentleman Is that his name was
given Julius w. Catlin" by tho elsors.
Mr. Field then proceeded to argue that his challenge
was good In the 1rst place the lists of the Commits
sonor Of Jurors, one, for instance of 296, are mere
evasion OF the law, the complete list oeing Z3Ooo
Second, the act of the olisors very serious error
cannot stand Those gentcmen account Of the
confidence felt by both partos-a confidence
NtCh cftn vtcfa fpa1 alfGn IN
The second case. What did they doY Tho do
fence, on the FIRST suit struck Of tweny,four
tho second jury II must have been done without re-
lection, and no ono could suppose for moment ju-
dical sanction OF such prooeedins-cramming down
the threats OF the defence tho very thing thoy had
thrown up. 1t was contrivanoe to deprive the par
ties Of their right Of selection They might Just as
we'll have put back the whole twenty-iour and de-
prived the defence altogether OF their right Of soloc
tlonforce them TO take the very Jurors they had OBJ
jected TO. Again how was IL that the esors selected
two gentlemen from the same mercantile firm? In
ply to the Court, Mr. Field said he could not suppose
any bias In tho elisors II the act that
planned OF, amounting to what the law calls ''misbe
havor." Again, the law says the twentyfour jurors
name of Mr. Caswol, who had been put on tho exempt
ness s concerned.
AT this stage MI Bshcock ono of the esors. was
called and examined by FIR. Field He admitted that
at the second striking they put on nineteen of tho
struck Off the first The olisors considered
them good aud wished to give them another chance
His associate, Judge Peabody told him they had per-
rect 10 select man on the jury isis without
regard to what they did before Witness admitted that
they placed two members OF Phelps, Dodge & Co. on
the panel though be had overheard Mr. Field, Jr., say
to hts father, eve don't want any OF that arm,n or
words to that effect
Mr. Carter replied for the prosecution. He said no
objection had been urged to Jurors rs individuals and
the only question was Did the elsors act according to
laws They had the trust reposed In them and
their act not renewable a challenge,
as no bias infraction Of the law imputed
TO them. AS TO putting on the second Jnry ramos
struck or the nrst somebody had 10 be struck of,
and the striking Indication that they were
Objectionable the defence. II counsel had any obec
tion TO these names the second list, they should
have said So and not lie In wait chances object
aterwsrd. II they had any objection to members Of
the firm OF Phelps Dodge Co.. they should have
openly it, and not IN aside from one counsel q
his associate which was overheard
Mr.. Field replied, saying IT plain the elisorl
committed misbehavor in the eye OF the law just
II they selected from list OF the Union League Club
or any club hostile to defendant
After some further argument by Mr.. Carter. Judge
westbroOk announced that he would render his deci
sion the points at issue this morning.