The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-08-27
MOULTON VS.. DEECHER.
Motion to Change the Venue from Kings
County to Obtain an Impartial
Jury-A Swarm of Affidavts
FRANKLIN COUNTY's PROSPECTS.

church, defendant In the suit brought by Francis
Mouton 10 recover damages Tor alleged malicious
prosecution served upon Ar. Roger A. Pryor. counsc
for plaintiff, notice OF application to tho Supreme
Court for a change Of from Kings county, New
York, on tie ground that iew any, persons IN that
county refrained from reading the reports oil pre-
vious trials upon which this 10 based ami rom
forming and expressing opinions thereon, therefore
will be impossible 10 obtain impartial jury in that
county The application will be argued on the hrsi
Monday September, at the special OF the su.
preme Court Franklin county suggested a suit
able place to procure int gent jury; Essex county
would like have the test made within its limits
ST. Lawrence county would object to the trouble
and Clinton county its jurymen irreproacha-
Bile. Among the principal papers IN tho present appi-
cation are First, the
NOTICE OF MOTION.
Supreme CourtFrancis d. Mculton against Henry Ward
with served and all the peadus and proceedings in this
% be- h.a "a 1p Court 90 The city of
Ign on the first Monday OF i'eeember, 1870 as 10 A.
place of trial in this action from the
OF knss to tue comfy o. or 10 susn 1er county
herein be transferred and also Tor such other
further order relief to tue Court may seem just
sHEARMAN 4 STERLING, Defendants Attorneys
To ROGER A. Pryor, Plaintiffs Attorney.
Nkw YORK. August 70, 1876.
Then follows the
AFFIDAVIT MR.. BEEcHER.
Henry Ward Beechsr, being duly sworn, says:-
e c IT. 81 ooa ~
York, but AIN Temporarily residing at tue Twin Mountain
House. Coos county. New Hampshire
in action brought ny Theodore Iton in August
lo7 which tried in the City Court oil Brooklyn in the
81 The present action is brought to recover damages
tain Indictment found against paintn Dy the Grand
Jury OF the Coart Of sessions tor the County Of kings in
probable cause This Indictment MS am informed aud be.
two ioe upon me- ono OF which contained exactly t6.
same accusation against mo which WAS made by tho com
mentioned My answer herein denies most Of the alice
tons the plant, including particularly the ailes
that the nAd Indictment was procured alciousy ana with
out probable cause
that the trial this action will involve the determination
OF al the material questions wnsn Were at Issue in ha
that the plaintiff herein will Tor the purpose Of supporting
The said &C ion BY Mr. Tlron ana am also informed and
beiieve that plaintiff herein ntcnls produce other
evidence in addition to that wnich produced by Mr.
upon my behalf substantially evidence viii be
produced te trial Of this which was syen upon
amount of other evidence e. the same general
issues and require the takins about large
volume Of testimony in the aforesaid action brought by
S. The trial the action brought by Mr. Ton as aforo-
OF January 1879, and concluding the LIST day of July,
1879 on which last day the p.y was without
for eight days ana snnans ~ the time OF their
nine in verdict for me and three in favor OF YER
hs in tb. action and in the a,or
OF Mr. Ton have been the subject of continual
Err a bs IN IN b aaS
have been published in detail ali the
trial OF Mr. ltons action which recessed to be verbatim
published daily during the S the
believe, that scarcely any person in the tiles OF New
egsy auaiihsa Tor jury duty has aosaned rom resdi"
and discussing the merits Of the involved
i'm lhla and Ia 4 In
be either OF said cities counties part Of
formed and expressed opinions less decided
upon the merits OF the said issues
Mr. Triton. u panel of $50 jurors was summoned which
obtained and had agreed accept Jurors
who had form aud expressed opinions adverse to me- but
be gued by the evidence would probably been i'm
a ia sn cut y s fsd q.
paneed TO! the trial OF the had at that time formed
while not more than two had formed an opinion in
During the entire Of the said trial intense
public excitement prevailed throughout Kings county,
OF the trial seeking places IN % Court House, the larger
% OF IN the on
great that 1t or.ke ont into applause and
the the jury ami they had retired
,Se o. he
excitement continued t. tine very end 81 the case
long trial attended with much excitemen was to In
asnss tho minds Of the .hss esm%sny Of knss county
and expressed opinions prior to he trial certainly did so
proionged agitation intense public interest il is i'm
possible 10 smpane any thoroa hy npar. jury in Kings
should 60 admit TO the jury intelligent persons
who had formed opinion the only possible result would
TO- The sources Of I,sspssns the issues In
pubcaons in newspapers and the fullest publications and
newspapers Of New York anu Bro,ksn which circulate
freely throughout the southern part Of the state In
tanning impartial jury which In the Kings
part oil the State am Iurther Informed and believe that
the which arc most widely circulated in The
TO tho discussion OF the at issue in this cause than
nrs ,ns ss oanon HAVING AMI s
cited 1t will be possible obtain in the said northern part
Ordinarily empansi,sd in The county Of Kings '"'
AZ" mea ma Sesss mat ,ne p n, "a IN s s
declared that their respective actions brought
plrpose Of procuring verdict jury upon the personal
am s s saass Ss d h
this ae.ion has svo%ed hi. WILLINGNESS to accept
that his object TO the discrimination OF the
of f,e involved The Questions o. tact herein
covers immense field, and the amount OF labor
enormously dsproportoned to the pccuniary amount
stake and far beyond the value OF my entire property
action brought Wy Mr. Hilton amounted than
action may cost an equal amount / respectfully submt
IL extremely unjust TO me that should be compelled
which make improbable that verdict be OBJ
tanned
H. have fully and fairly stated the In this action
Thomas g. Shearman. my counsel therein who resides
lT6 Coumbir Heights in the city of Brooklyn.
good and substantial defence to the whole
upon the merits thereof advised by
my counsel alter such statement as verify believe
HENRY WARD BEEcHER.
Subscribed and to before this l7th day Of An
gust, ls7oWM r. iioBBs, Justice of the Peac for the
county OF Coos. State OF New Hampshire.
Tho affidavit OF the defendant is supported by one
made by William Pee attorney and counsellor at law
stating that he has been oryeigh years resident OF
Kings county and for twenty-five years in active prac
ticc the applied to- that he has been
ncc,ed with Plymouth Church is not connected in
business in pccuniary interest Of any kind with
either OF the parties to this action; but believes that II
will be possible to cmpanel twelve jurors Kings
county for the trial of this who have formed
or expressed opinions the merits OF the controversy
herein and who have not decided bias either IN favor
oil the plaintiff or OF the defendant.
Mr William Edsa, merchant, OF 1876 Leircr,s place,
ada oa,d of IN