Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1878-01-11

WEATHER PR0BABIIWES.-W var DSpGIc
nent, Office oftbe Chief Signal Officer, Wash,
sgton. . G. Jan H. ls s ocs9sr Nth nth
west, back to southwest Winds rising barometer
partly cloudy and clearing weather.
THE SHINN CAsE.-The Corporation Court
room was the scene this morning OF most 10.
tense interest. it being generally known that
the trial of George R. Shinn, ex.Presdent OF
the Common Council, for forgery. had been
fixed for that time. At 10 o'clock, the hour
spectators thronged the court room, hiIing
all the available space within and outside OF
the bar Several eminent counsel from else
where we're present as spectators, attracted DY
The imnortance of the case and the high stand
ing of the accused.
THE defendant occupied seat 10 the bar by
h.s counseI. Edmund Burke and Charles Il.
Stuart, and they were in consultation until
Judge Il. M Lowe inquired it counsel were
ready to proceed with the case; and counsel
on both sides having signlGed their readiness,
the defendant was arralgned 10 due form upon
the indictment.
Mr. Edmund Burke, counsel for defendant
then moved to uuash tho indictment and began
his argument He reviewed the insti,uion
and organization Of grand juries at common
law, and claimed that they were Instituted Tor
the protection of the citizen against frivolous
Slate prosecutions, and, laterly, they were
necessity as bar to the malice OF the private
prosecutor No citizen could be put upon trial
for felony without 40 Indictment first had by
oompetent grand Jury. This principle il TO-
herent and fundamental, and uuderlies the
social organism. What was the spectacle pre-
sented in this court? A citizen oil the Uolted
States and of the State had, by virtue OF the
extra ordinary powers OF the Executive. ba'u
brought ,t."om great dlstanc, at much expense
to the State, a. great loss anu 'uc !nvsne"o' ~
mon iaiI. cut off from his rights as 4 freeman
to minple in society with his fellows. and all
this had been done upon a piece OF worthless
naner misnamcd an Indictment. Io suoh great
lengths had this prosecution gone. 10y snch
great sacrifices must Justice be satish' u Dut
IN fact and 10 truth this defendant hai been
made MARTYR, Impertections which bad been
nassed bv 10 others 10 him had been uhdul9
magni6ed. until they had reached til" Stupend-
Gus proportions Of crimes nevcr q 'n'r'ip':'ea
bv the law, and which II never dts'Su"d TO
punish. Such was the state ot the case, ana
now the defendant stood upon his u'scnarSe..
A motion to quash the i9d'rfneht Is based
upon defects in the proceedings arparrut upon
the face of the record, aod the record IN this
ing with the rights Of the delcudsnt. Tie
law. the act Of Feb. 81. 1874. provided that
the grand Jury 10 the Corpora,oo Court, *
cent at the special terms. should consist o! ten
duly qualified grand Jurors, which nuu:b.r the
court might. by direction 70 It's clerk, I!lnl: 10
number not less than six. The Legislature cs
tablished the number to be summoned at ten,
and then vested judicial discretion IA the
court of reducing that uumber so that there be
not less than six. This is lcgi ,lA'iv: doleca
ton of power-a judicial discretion t. be cxer'
cised in strict law iDasmuch as 1t couccrns ne
liberty of the citiz 70. No other person OF 9Th
Ger could assume the exercise OF this power or
Interfere with the high prcrogat!cc OF the
court. In this case, by AN cutry 10 he rec,rd'
the court had fixed the number at seven, but
in fact, only six had been sworn and empan-
nelled 1t was folly to argue that this was
legal grand jury-it VS. nothing more or less
than o party of respectable gentlemen, who
had concluded to say 10 the court that MIR.
Shinn was guilty OF this offence.
MIR. Burke read the entry upon the rccId OF
the October term, 1876 as follows:
1.-THE Court doth 0x the number Of Grand
Jurors at this term at seven whereupon, +
Hooe, foreman, NJ. II. Jsnney, john Muir,
James T. Crump, George l.. Simpson and Kobt.
T. Edele1l were sworn u Grand Jury Of Inquest
for the body of the city of Alexandria. and hay-
ing received their charge withdrew to their
room, and after time returned into Court and
presented an indictmentagainst Gorge Is. Shinn
for forging promissory note ard for utterlng
aud attempting 10 employ it as true; true bull
Judge Lowe inquired il counsel for dctcn
dant had any authorities TO submit up"n The
point.
MIR, Burke, answering, said that the case
was 30 apparent that it vas not conceived reces'
ssry to produce authorities, but there Was Que
at hand which, though not directly ruling the
point, vet applied 81 strongly 10 principle that
it might be safely cited lie referred to Mes
mer's case, &c Grattan. which originated 10
the city OF Winchester. 10 which the Court OF
Appeals held that 10 the absence of the entry
upon the record the Court would presume that
the direction had been given by the Court 10
the clerk to fix the number Of jurors who ap
peared upon the record to have been swcro as
Jurors. This was presumption Of the law in
favor of the correctness OF judicial proceedings,
and suoh was maxim of the law, hut in the
present case no such presumption could arise tt
overthrow the record or to Involve judicial Ia
sifcation of it's language. Ii the exigenccs Ct
this case should require its supervision By the
Court of Appeals, the venerable jurlss wi {
compose that Court would never stultify them
selves by induleing presumption TINT wou'e
do violence TO the allegations Of The solemn
record of the Court.
Mr.. J. Nj. johnson. Commonwealth Al
torney, said:
The objection now made to tho proc esding
under tho motion to quash aroso btforo he hat
any connection with tho case; but. however, i
was more apparent than real, and two reason
would be given for overruling the motion Th
law reads than when ten citizens arc summonct
asa grand jury the court may, by direction t.
its clerk, limit the number of persons to serv
thereon to not less than six. The minute Of thi
court at the October term, 1876. recites that tn
court doth fix the number of grand jurors a
seven," and thereupon six persons (naminl
ibem) were sworn as the grand jury tor tina
term. All this is in one and the same paragraph
of the minutes of tho court at that term and b
six persons would have constituted legal gram
jury at that term, If the court had 30 directed
be contended that the grand Jury at tina. tern
was a legal body, because the court snbstantia!l
did 80 direct when it said that six persons wer