The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-12-20
CnALLLSGING GRAND jurors.
Case In whica Judge scudder's Receut he
cision L. BcipR Discussed.

NEw BRUNSWICK, N. j., Dec 19.-Judgc
bcudder's decision removing the foreman OF
tho Grand Jury upon the challenge Of the Pub
liz Prosecutor. because he WINS related to two OF
tho accused directors ofthe State Bank. Is likely
to be reviewed sooner than WIS anticipated.
The case OF Abram Beach. tho negro indicted
for the murder of Eugene Munday. near Mo-
tuchcn. last fall was act down for trial to-day.
J. Kearnoy Rice tho doiendant's counsel. moved
10 auash tho indictment on several grounds.
among which wns the claim that tho Court hnd
no power TO remove the foreman OF the Grand
Jury as was done. and that no lcgal cause OK
istcd for the removal. Hc contendcd. there
foro. that the Grand Jury which found tho In
dictment against his client was Illegally consti-
tuted.. and that it's proceedings we're conse-
duentlv void.
Mr. Rice gave some particulars as TO the origin
OF the Grand Jury system which are curious.
Some OF them are to ho found In rare book in
the library. Of NJ. Tiiicn. who possesses. 1t is
beloved tho only copy in this country and
there they were obtained By the New York Com.
missioncrs appointed to invoetigato tho enhlect
of the Jury system with reference 10 the onlco OF
Commissioner of Jurors. II seems that about
1907. when tho Norman Kings had taken up
their residence In Britain. they appointed "A
Norman noble in each OF the political divisions
called shires. corresponding to our countios
Tho Office OF Shirevc now Sheriff. which Ia of
more ancient Saxon origin. WIS. super
seded Tor g. timo by these nobles,,, to
were directed to select certain frecholders in
their respective shires to act ms the Kings
special friends and advisers, who were to keep
watch upon his Saxon subjects aud inform
upon any who showed signs Of disaffectiOn or
were guilty of other offences against the Crown.
Hence arose the numn Of the accusing jury"
Tothcir power ard prerogativcs tho High 'Shcr-
iffs succeeded. Mr. Rice averred that the books
contain no record Of any attempt having boon
made TO interfere with the Sheriff IN the selcc-
tion of Grand Juries. The first Limitation to
their power that appears is found In statute
in the reign Of George Ill. which required the
Church warden 10 altlN list OF grind and petit
jurors thirty days before the holding OF tho scs-
sions. In the reign OF Henry VIII. II appear.
ing that the Shcriiis had returned rs grand
jurors some men who had been uiiainted Of
! trenSOn, g.. and there being no legal way TO
reach them. statute WAS passed directing tho
courts to issue prcccpts to the Shrriff-. COM
manding them To return Jurors according 10
| law under penalty ~ f2O. Mr.. Rice cuntendrd
| that although in some other States the courts
have power by statute TO select the foreman Of n
| Grand jury, there being no such statutory
| terrain challenge TO the Grand Jury nor set
aside the foreman whom the sheriff has dcsig-
| nated.
| Mr.. Fishers name bo taken from ts place rs
first grand Juror and put AT the foot OF tho list
az tho twenty-fourih, which, as only twenty
| three were sworn. practically excluded him
| from the Grand Jury.
judge scudder interrupted Mr.. Rice TO point
| out that the Sheriu's return does not show that
he selected any foreman. hut simply that he re-
| turns twenty-iour men TO act ns grand jurors.
| Mr. Rice replied that according 10 the usngo
| in the state the first Juror summoned acted RS
! grand Juror. He cited further cascs 10 Show
| that private interest is not good ground for
| challenging grand luryman.
| Prosecutor Cowenhovrn responded briefly
| that the question hat already been decided II
Mr.. Rice should succeed IN establishing amy one
| ~ the Grand Jury which hns just dispersed
would br nDoriiyc. and iis twenty eight indict-
! ments would he cancelled.
| At the instance OF the Prosecutor the trial was
adjourned till tomorrow.