The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-01-11
Motion to Amend the Panel in the Tweed
Civil Suits Denied.
ANOTHER CHALLENGE TO THE ARRAY.
Transfer OF Pledged Securities
Without Notice.
Compensation for Appraising
the City Property.

Judge Westbrook rendered his decision In the Su-
preme Court Circuit, yesterday the motion to cor
rect the panel of OF jurors in the case Of
William NJ Tweed, the facts of which have already
been fully set forth. The court room was crowded and
the counsel on either side were promptly on hand.
Judge Wcstbrook said:--A decision having been rem.
dered upon the challenge to the array OF tho struck
jury this made by the counsel Of the defendant
Tweed, which holds that such challenge must be
tanned upon the ground mainly that the list OF jurors
summoned by the Sheriff contains only tweDty-three
who have been selected and approved by the elisors
and one who not selected approved,
motion is now made to correct the list OF
names by erasng iherefrom the name of George W.
Southwick, the juror not selected, and putting in its
stead the name OF John Q. souhwick, the individual
who was chosen The Judge held that George W.
Southwick upon tho original list the defendant by
the granting OF the motion would be deprived OF his
opportunity to strike the name from IT, which involves
TO HIM substantial right as he might have great
objection to John C. Southwick and none TO George W.
Southwick. As to the claim by plaintiffs counsel that
the choice exercised as to John Southwick, as
he knew who he was, he having been orally described
as the partner OF Jackson > Schultz, Judge Wesbrook
reviewed tie evidence gwen. and held II 10 be unsatls
factory, defendants counsel positively testi-
fed that they did not understand it,
and actual conversation with the counsel TO
that effect was not sbo~n to have taken place "A
careful reading OF the statutes, however, said Judge
Wesbrook, Twill show that resort can be had to
evidence to prove what persons are selected.
There must of course be the mental operation OF the
elisors in solution and the indication the parties Of
the result Of such mental operation, and the mode OF
such Indication Is the written names.n He read the
several subdivisions of the statute the selection
and striking out of ''names," and the summoIng by
the sheriff of "the persons whose names are con-
tanned in the lists, &C. and continued:-"r my mind
the language of the statute is conclusive the evidence
of the choice CT the esors is the written name and
the thought is expressed in every section. 1t is
really, the only practical mode OF doing Hold that
the written name may be explained away, and
lar instance, from the character Of the
ehsors, entertain doubt as TO the absolute truth
OF their statement but the precedent If made will be
most dangerous one for the future" After review
ing the casoe cited, Judge Westbrook, in conclusion
sad-"in denying this application OF the counsel Of
the plaintiffs possible mputation Is made their
skill learning and care. They in nowisc rcspon
sible Tor the They had right TO that
the esOrs had selected every name from the general
jury list they ordered TO do and they certainly
could not know that the elisors moant In the ofone
individual some other person than the who in
dicated by the name which they themselves wrote
Immediately after the conclusion OF Judge West
Substance Messrs Garter and PecEbam tbe mresecnt
ing counsel served upon Messrs Field, Edelsein and
Dyer affidavit with IN order to show cause why the
proceedings should not be stayed and the csors
ordered to strike new jury.
Mr.. Peckham called on the $1,000 900 suit against
Tweed and the Clerk proceeded TO call the struck jury,
all of whom answered TO their names excepting John
J. Cisco, who sent in doctors certificate
Mr.. Dudley Field then submitted a challenge to the
array containing these points,
First-That the said list was not selected from The
complete list OF jurors liable to serve, but from partial
lists (Ths point was oyerru!ed as IN the first casc
.Second-That the clisors the 23d OF December
selected tho OF julius w. Catlin, which does
not appear the partial lists selected from
nor the complete jury list Of the Commissioner Of
Jurors
TAird-That another juror selected John II. Cas-
we'll is not the list Of jurors liable to serve,
but is on the list OF jurors exempted from jury
duty.
FoarLa-That the same csors selected in both suits,
that nineteen of the struck or nj the first draw
ing, eight them by the defence wgre put again by
the elisors at the second drawing.
FIfh-That one OF the jurors is not resident nor
liable IN this county, and is liable TO do jury duty
the county OF Queens
All of which acts and omissions are to the injury of
the defendant
The counsel for tho people after recess interposcd
traverse to the challenge and after filing both his chat
lenge and traverse with the clerks the defendants
counsel offered his proofs
Charles f. Bouerdon, of Field & Deyo's Office Of the
Commissioner of Jurors Office, testified in answer TO
this suit there were seven lists produced by tho County
Clerk, 10 which Mr. Field objected as partial lists:
witness does not know that there complete list
supplied; the esors brought out list OF ory-e eight
names and handed them to Mr.. Field, who handed
them to Mr. Deyo who read it out TO the senographer
who took down the copy now produced by wi ness
Mr. Peckham objected TO this list not being one
which bound him as true copy. IL was one Mr.. Deyo
took for hts convenience.
Another list was handed in by the defence and wit
ness testified that il was the orig nal o. the eisors
Mr.. G. X. Alderman, Deputy Commissioner of Jurors
was examined by Mr.. Field at length and sub
1antiay repeated his testimony TO the method Of
making up the lists OF jurors liable TO serve.
At half past three O'Clock the Court adjourned in
order TO allow counsel TO make motion at Chambers
according to the order TO strike jury but that
Court having also adjourned the proceedings were post
poned until this morning