, 1879-02-01

he had criticised the 3tirg OH What hau been feh-
resented by soneh"ly to ht"'-i don't Know
VIM ,-..,
Witness slated tl,at the jury were discharged
a little before o'clock Friday night, A. !c ma
TO hasten to get the Q o'clock trAin, telling thc
Marshal that he would cali some other si'ae 'oF
his pay. IT,.
There wis n perjury indictment drawn, hut
the District ATTORNEY refused to give u !" thch.
As to whether Judge l,anrs said he TAD IL pre-
"nli the iurv, or any member Of 1t, AK him |
;or u, or .lrm.a! t; T.; of ntfn in any other way
~ think after the first surprise wsa over, or:
perhaps, after consultation, being tanotsnt Of
our rights ami nbttr.1 will say right hnre t!1at
manr things were proposcd-it was proposed That
We thoy!d write al, Indictment ourselves. One
Of The members nf nc jnsJ W. AZ. a. on afn. ,ev
referring to lie Reno Court Of 1nqu!ryE. and
hc thought l,o could wrlie an tnaiet1acnt.
tiine .lows, nc concluded Tint The signature Of
tllr District Attorney wns necessary tu tho in
1ietmcnt,- Indictments nit the way through
lad hccn signed b.. him and t!'t foremai',-so
and make i statement to the fndge,-.
take in tho indictments that we
had; hut thc majority 81 the tury concluded, II
they got before The Judge. he would discharge
the remarks and thr conversations had with the
Judge, "A understood"
Witness %tatrd that an effort wns made to
e., %dss Rsn, 70 p, x,r hs 5 s
do Il. Then Col. Turnfcv wrote out question
whiyl, covered the ground, but Mr.. bangs - gave
very cyasiyc reply, SO that It amo,!ntel to
co T,irnlcs. md to thIs Mr. HING. returned
reluctant "yesH for nm answer. The effect ns
thr question WIS that he took this attlun after
ennsaltation on this speeist question with Judge
"ro which he said yes or mol"
ut wa.n'ta good, square Yes, but II was
ycs." 4Hnlltes.l
NJ. knlcksrbockcE-As 4 member al tint
of the Jury in fndtrtfn, Mr.. lilhtard md order
lug tho Indictment prepared Tint It inIght be
returned into court, what WAS It that inllucnced
sou III the tinal ncton 10 not seeing Tint tndtct-
fncnt rcturnctll Was It Ju,1ec Blodgett, or was
III was simply bcca,lse VIC did not know how
| TO compel IT. II there hud been anv wny Within
our knowledge to cu,pct tue production of
tilt Indictment. or II We had known how to pre-
| pare nn indictment that we thought would
stick. an indictment would have gone III cer-
tatnly."
anime IN determining The amount that Mr;
Iltbbartl Ind nN1crstatcd his tccs In h's apnlat
reports1 In report covering. shy, tho year
from July !, 1870. to june ~, 1si' t you con.
taso than those that had been rufcrrcd 10 him
| during tint ycarl"
"rIic point appeared TO tho Jury one Of law.
! would fay that, perhaps. owing to On inaisect
feel inclined to.gtrc AZ much respect M was due
to his INTERPRETATION OF the law. l!opo judge
l3lodgott will correct me II am uofnE wrong.
II was ~ eonneetion With tie Indictment ln
tlle Custoln-llansc case. II WAS very
serious question With majority OF
the Jury whether to lnaiet those lnen separately
{ther. was q largo number VI thEtn) tor tile
fespeetiyp crimes wh!co they had ' committed, t,
.hry were all of ,iei1, at least, guilty Of CON
spracy an,. they believed. moreover, that an 10.
tllctment for euusp'raeY. as fur u they could
learn, was ti[lleult one to snstun,-to convict
Under; 81 solue. OF thc Jurors, with Judge
l'angs, II remember, called on Judge tlodEett,
and he gave III Interpretation u the law; and
they rcluEnea to tlIo Gsaid .'ury room
and reported what ho had tod them,--
tiM information, a,n', contrary to the belief Of
she Grand jury, The tiM'Ictnlent was. 1ound
neatnst those nen.tcmcn for censptraey."',
.Nit aarts tGsMn9ny ,l.a 9sets so a.n yoa
Of the law, which flibiard claimed 70 hare ioI
lowed iliat us had stsIl tlaacrstascu hia fces 1os
psriot of thrsn years to tile amount OF s1o,
"That Is not tny understanding. The indlct
mcnt was basch OH tho difference between tlst
two irterDrvtattona Of the law" ~,
Mr.: knott-ia sos', - examination a;., t!d ron yon ~
IN cnscs which mad been commenced during thu
ycar7
~ think MOTT
"1>u you know whether or not 1iibhard'
reports fur anY ono ot the three ycArs ncltsdct
alf The fceA received 10 new casea referred Il
him during ,hat yeqr1' ... II, ..u
,lc fees received IN cases commenced that year
but ihat he did not report In cases commenced
the previous year"
''Dii yuu talk With the Judge Friday cveninl
IN the hall r ,-.., -
, 4 o'clortr. i,nd becn exceedingly anxious l.
have Judge DlodCctt summoned before th
tury. II.auUhtcr.1 don't know but NV ites
: n,ny he wruty [rcnewcd 1aughter): but I eup
posed TIN Grand Jury wcro the supcriosx o
| judge Blotigett or nnybody In the unite
$ States. supposed Grind Juror wus bIcgc
t man than tho lrcsIdrht or anybody.
: fLa,cbtrr,l
III, Cu!Dcrsop-You ucan Ia tho sphere G
: thcir l,tica9
0 "Yct, sir, There was testimony Tint I'll,
+, hal hull con.ultctl Bradley md Jutige BltHlectt
D Thja cnu,o to Il, from ot!,tr partIcs hciorg til
|. ! iury unu the Cot1suitatlop vas said To b. ps /
j. iii character u{ lllbbar,j's rrports. IIu c!cr