Butler citizen. [volume] (Butler, Pa.) 1877-1922, 1879-12-03

subject into very careful consideration
and examined it as far as we are able
to in a short time, and come to the
following conclusion: 1t is alleged
here that the oath which was taken by
the Sheriff was not in the proper form
We have examined the oath of office
made by him on the same paper with
the general oath, and which is re-
corded in the recorders office, sccord-
ing to law, and we think he substan-
tially swore to everything that is re-
ouired of the Sheriff in regard to sum-
moning, etc., the grand jurors. 1t is
alleged that he ought to take the oath
to impartially draw and select grand
Jurors, but we say he has no power to
select at all therefore he took only
the oath required. In the following
January, before entering upon the
duties of drawing jurors at all, he took
the second oath, which is drawn up
in very formal way, and l see no
defect in it whatever, except the same
one suggested before, that he was not
sworn to impartially select, which he
could not do, and which certainly the
Legislature never intended by this act
that he should do. We conceive that
the Sheriff who summoned the grand
Jury was regularly sworn, and there
was no necessity for his taking the
oath eight or ten times year--every
time he draws a jury that he is not
required to take the oath except upon
entering upon the duties of his Office,
and also before he draws any jurors
at all, which, was done strictly accord
ing to law.
The next is that it is necessary for
the Sheriff and Jury Commissioners
to swear to their returns of the venire.
That is not only uncommon, but L
never heard of its being done. | am
aware that the Court in Westmoreland
county decided recently that it was
necessary, but I cannot find that the
act of 1884 or any subsequent act re-
quires it to be DONE In the present
case they signed the return. l doubt
whether that even is necessary, but
when they have done that it is all that
is required.
In regard to the venire it is certainly
by no means in proper form. 1t is in
the form which has been generally
used in this Commonwealth, with the
exception of one word, but at the same
time it is vicious form undoubtedly.
The venire commands the Sheriff to
draw from the wheel containing the
persons selected according to law to
be grand jurors, and then commands
him to summon "a persons to be grand
Jurors. The time to draw from the
wheel is surplusage and entirely un-
necessary. There is no such wheel /;
there never has been such a wheel
kept in Pennsylvania, except, perad-
venture, under the jury law in Phila-
delphia, but in no county in the State
is there separate wheel for grand
jurors. They are always drawn ac-
cording to law; first "a drawn from
the wheel are grand jurors; the next
traverse or petit jurors. The word
"grand" has been interlined there
where it ought not to have been. l
treat it as surplusage entirely and a
matter of no consequence. If the
motion had been made at the time
when the grand jury came forward to
be sworn, or when they came forward
to act on particular bills, the grand
jury would probably have been set
aside on account of the irregularity in
the venire; but it is entirely too late
to make the motion now. They can
not quash the grand jury after it has
been discharged for three months or
more 1t has gone-preformed its
duty. If it was anything that could
affect a party we might listen to it
with more gravity and more care, but
it can affect the interest of no one.
There was the regular number of grand
Jurors summoned and % out of "a are
sworn. They were all there, served,
found their bills, and if there was any
desire on the part of any person who
was going to be indicted to quash the
array, they could have challenged
either polls or array of the grand jury !;
but if they did not do it, they cannot
do it after the grand jury is discharged.
The party is bound to be present by
the terms of the recognizance, and
therefore he is treated as actually pres
ent. 1t is said that the case was con-
tinued at defendants request, but that
is matter of little moment and not
material There was afterward an
argument that this case shall be tried
on the fourth Monday of November,
instead of the third. l do not con-
ceive that after the grand jury has act
ed, found their bills and been dis
charged that a motion to quash the
array could be sustained at all or to
quash an indictment because it was
drawn by an improper grand jury.
Witnesses were called to prove that
the Sheriff did not summon the grand
Jurors in person. That / think, has
never been required since the present
mode of selecting grand jurors was
adopted by law There was time
when the Sheriff went out and selected
persons to serve as grand and traverse
jurors, which duty was judicial and
could not be delegated, but that ceased
from the time that the Sheriff and
Commissioners were directed to Sc
lect and draw the jury. If the jury
came that was the only question and
all the Courts required. The motion
is therefore overruled.
THR PROSECUTION MAKES ANOTHER AT
TEMPT TO SUSTAIN THE INDICTMENTS.
HARRISBURG, Nov. 28.-The Com
monwealtt appeared to much better
advantage in the Legislative Bribery
cases to-day than it did on the first
three days of the argument, and the
opinion is confidently expressed by
the counsel representing it that the
remaining indictments against the per-
sons accused of corrupt solicitation
and perjury will not be quashed Ger
IL