Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-12-12

had read the Attorney Generals letter to the Pres
dent regarding this case In response 10 Mr. Bliss
letter, and whether, from all he had read and
heard. he had formed and now entertained, an
opinion regarding the guilt or innocence OF the
accused, Which 1t would require evidence 70 re-
move.
THE COURT SAID
that the juror could not be interrosated expert
mentally or without challenge. He overrured
the motion to be permitted 10 examine the Jury
without challenge
Mr.. Davidge asked II the court held that I'm case
the defendants took the initiative with the first
juror they should take the initiative with all the
others
This proposition was very earnestly comhattei
MI Merrick stated that. for the sake OF saving
time, he would renew his proposition 10 alternate
In the matter OF challenges.
"Do you accept this iUrGr?" asked the court ana
receiving no answer said, 1.-The juror shall be
Sw0rn.'
MR. BARRETT CHALLENGED BY THE DEFENSE.
II challenge the juror said Mr. Ingersol al
don't propose to have a Juror here who has said
that he is against the defendant / don't propose
TO be tried by any such Jurors
Mr. lngersol then proceeded TO interrogate the
juror, who said he had an opinion, which would
require evidence TO change It.
Now" said Mr.. Ingersoll, 81 challenge that
81 Think said Judge wylie. "that the cause is
SUFFICIENT Mr. Barrett Is excused"
Mr. THOMAS WALSH CHALLENGED FOR CAUSE
Mr. Thomas Walsh was next called.
"Do you challenge this Juror" asked the court
81 challenge this juror first for cause" said Mr.
Ingersoll.
"Well, what are your causes?" asked the court
MI lngerSoll then enumerated all or the legal
d1SquaficationS OF q Juror. and said those were
his causes. He then lnterrog ated the Juror who
said he had read about the case, and had an
opinion as TO the guilt innocence OF the defen-
dantS that II would require evidence to change It.
Mr. Nerrick submitted to the court whether
such an opinion as required evidence to change 1t
disqualified juror.
SOIL, Mr. walsh said that his opinion was OF such
character that IL might interfere with his Impair
tlal consideration OF the Case
ANOTHER JUROR CALLED.
Isaac Eiker was called.
"We have nothing to say about this Juror said
Mr.. IngersolL
Mr. WILSON oyERRULED.
Mr. Wilson claimed that the government should
now pass upon the Juror but the court overruled
him. holding that the defense must 60 through the
panel.
MR.. wM. r. BROWN EXAMINED UNDER CHALLENGE
Mr.. VIM. r. Brown was then called and exam
1ned under challenge by Mr. IngersoI for the
causes that he had served on jury within two
years and also for favor.
Mr. Brown said that he had served on a fury I'm
March, 1881, but did not know whether me was
Mr.. BROWN EXCUSED
After some discussion Mr. Brown was excused
from the panel.
Mr. GEORGE T. DUNLOP CHALLENGED By THE DE-
FENsE.
George T. Dunlop was called and challenged by
Mr. Ingersoll.
Mr. Dunlop said in reply to Mr. 1ngersolrs qucs-
uonS that he had formed an opinion based upon
newspaper reports unfavorable to one party
which would require evidence to remove Moth
Ing would influence him in the trial but the testi-
I'VE challenge him." said Mr. Ingersoll "for
cauSe-for favor"
II think he is competent, said Judge Wylie
"for the reason that he declares that he would be
dence."
Mr.. Wilson wanted to ask some questions to see
whether he would challen re peremptor1ly.
Mr.. lngersoll also insisted on this as right He
said he wanted to ask whether the juror bad
Rad the letter OF the Attorney General or Mr.
Bliss or whether he was kinsman Of one of the
counsel for the government How else was de-
fendant to determine whether TO challenge peremp.
torlly! Was he TO Judge 10y mans phy ySiognomy.
or by the cut OF his clothes?
Judge Mylle said that the very words "peremp-
tory challenge" indicated that IL was challenge
Without reason or without inquiry. When they
challenged for cause they had right to make In
qulrleS. They could make investigation, under a
challenge for causes, in relation to all legal disaual-
lncationS All private causes which might induce
a peremptory challenge must be determined in a
private way.
Mr.: Wilson said then that for his client, Gen.
Brady, he desired to challenge for cause.
Judge Wylie said he would not hear renewal
OF the challenge.
Mr.. Merrlck said that the defendants should
each OF them severally be required to Offer their
challenges before they proceeded to interroyate
the juror at all Evidently there was disposition
10 nink the decision OF the court.
Judge Wyl1e SAID that he could not permit all of
the defendants through their counsel to examine
Jurors Seriatim under the same cause.
Mr.. wilson having noted exception 70 the
ruling OF the court, after some discussion Mr. In
gersoii said: ION the part of the defendants,
peremp.orlly challenge Mr.. Dunlop"
mi. Dunlop, you are eXcuS ID" said the court
Ihen, at l2:i5 pm, q recess for half an hour
was taken.
MIR, Jen Cnanllnr for ady