Daily press and Dakotaian. [volume] (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1875-1880, 1880-03-13

verdict according to the law Of the land?
Defendant objected, because of the form.
and the objection was sustained.
The prosecuting attorney then asked the
following question: MIR. Withee-this ia
an Indictment in which the defendant ia
charged with . felony. The government
purposes to support its case in part BY Indi
an testimony. The Law Of the land allows
that such testimony is competent. Have
you any opinions on the subject of auch spe-
cies of testimony as would disqualify you
from weighing such testimony impartiaily?
Objected to BY the defendant. and ruled
Out, because Of the shape and form.
The court then allowed the following
to be put: Nj. Withee-thtsgis an action
bv indictment against the ACKNOWLEDGMENT
bv the United ststesss The government
purposes to support its case in part by In
dian testimony. The Law of the land de-
clsres that such testimony ts competent
Are you sensible Of any such prejudice OF
has therein as may effect your action as a
Juror?
The defendant having no objection, the
question was put and the juror replied
that he bad such.
The prosecution put another question Of
like purport, which was overruled.
The prosecution asked the following
question:: Do you hold any opinions
which may disqualfy you from rendering q
verdict In this case according to the ev.-
dence! No objection.
Tue juror replied that he had.
Flank M. Withee was accepted and
Joseph Williams was then called, and
after being subjected to similar interroga-
tons, was accepted and sworn.
John Clementson was next called, cues.
TONED, and peremptorily challenged by the
defense.
T.F Hanly, next called, was accepted and
sworn.
George Norbeck vas called and per.
emp'orily challenged by the defence.
Frederick He;ser was next called and
accepted ana sworn. ~
DR.. Wixon was next called and per.
emptorily challenged by the prosecution.
George w .Gllcrist was next called and
accepted and sworn.
William Elliot was called and excused
by the defense.
Torger Nielsen was called and excused by
the defense.
Newman c. Nash was next called and e1
custd BY the defense.
William B. Fauss was called and excused
BY the defense. ~
Daniel 8. Waldo was called and excused
hy the defense.
Francis w. Harrison was called and &C.
copied and .sworn.
Frank 8. Emerson was called and &C.
cepted and sworn.
Arthur J. Parshall was called and &C.
cepted and sworn.
Charles F. Mallahan was called and
accepted and sworn.
Scion NJ. Daboll was called and excused
BY the prosecution.
William Sims, being called, stated that
he had an opinion in the case and was
challenged for cause by the prosecution.
G. w. Harlan was called and excused by
the defense.
Chsuucey Wright was called and accepted
and aworn.
William Il. Ball, being called, stated that
he had q prejudice or bias which he thought
would influence him in determining the YER
dict. He was challenged for cause BY the
defense .ia
Jacob Branch was called and excused by
the defense.
The. regular panel was then exhausted,
and there being only eleven jurors in the
box, the United States attorney moved that
. venire issue requiring the marshal tosum-
mons jurors from without this city aud
county. To this the defendants objected, but
said they would have nothing to say until
the ~jurors were brought in.
After an address to the jury, in regard to
their duty, they were dismissed BY tho
JUICE in the charge of sworn officers and the
c ,ort was adjourned until $50 Saturday
morning.
SATURDAY FORENOON
was devoted to waiting for the return Of
Deputy Marshal Burdick, who had gone
out into the granger fields with . special
venire for four fresh jnrymen, it being the
special request Of the prosecution that no
residents Of our city be brought 10 a.jurou.
About noon the officer returned, bringing
with him P. X. slear, Dela.us Hinman,
Robert Crsbs and G. w. Leaning.
SATURDAY AFTERNOON.
The eleven sworn Jurors we're brought In
to court and further proceedings ordered 10