New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-02-05

read by the jury. u was the unanimous testimony ="
all of them that they saw no newspaper ~ an "'u''
they were engaged In the case, ana about 'hh' =" w"
not think there was any room for mistake. He had not
the 81 ghtcs ground for su-pccting the integrity 4" "
racity these gentlemen who made this statement
under oath. nothing wa. presented which thc" rn'
pcion the good conduct of The fury n REGARD 10 wv
matter now charged Il had heel suggested thai ''
mission should issue 20 take testimony 'n'' ""'
practice entirely foreign 20 common law cont' hN'
II he felt that he had the discretion To DO So was Wv
matter before such would call for the eNrrc' VI
such discretion There was suggestion tuh' 'h'''
would be any witness who wOnld swear Ihai t'' "1'
the margin of the newspaper were IN ihe
OF the iuror. Even II this were true. ~ would not III
Guence the decision the Court unless % cond also 10
shown that the paper had beeu read 10y the Jury
II had been suggested that there might
be- Witnesses who were deferred from voluntarily
coming forward by public ciamor. bnt Wno IL
a commission issued would ht cuhp.Hrh y" " o.,
aud testify. But there was no avermeni tnai ~ o',, "
fact any such witnesses existed II amounted an az
plicatiun 20 IN Court TO send on row anu II iiinE
rourssiou 10 seek evidence 30 iBvalate the NtIulc,
aid even he had TIA power he would hot or lu,tntd
in granting that application one OF tne aaiao ,"
grounds fol the motion made yesterday was thal Ior-
nation had reached counsel Of conversations between
he inrv and other parties That was stated simply on
informal On-On the say-so0i third person not haIeG
Information of that SOFT would BE- coming to counsel an
The time bn no court could except upon sworn state
ments .-, A.. ,,,o ,,,,r, s,,h
iert me inry to crosse nomination. Ii had always been
question whether voluntary affidavit on the part OF
Juror the conduct OF another Juror cOulu ne re-
ceived The general rule that II could not He pad
never vet heard of practice Of compelling juror 10
testify TO misconduct III the jury box lie ana not see
anything in the paper that required lnqulsuon INTO the
conduct of the jury. There was nothing suspicious
about their aiidays bul they pore every evidence OF
Another ground alleged discovery Of new evidence
and the evidence in question was simply that oi Two IN
the ION and 2S OF June the prisoner was seen o lne
IN Lltayeuc-square, ana that ms conunc' ., an" his
sanity. Ii was well to consider what evidence hdd al
ready introduced on tle part OF Inc defence IN ne
same direction. Ihey had introduced evidence toucnn5j
the prisoners conduct and actions covering Tue Pto'
the LIST OF March down TO the day OF assassination
The evidence proposed 10 be offered Was tAdeS 81
the same character az that already introuuoeu anu
therefore, was essentially cumulative evidence. 80
There another consideration, ana titt "sS
whether sucn evidence. II introduced Wonl1 be hey 70
,i 'I IL l NV. ed his rr II might &c
very wed understood that the manner, resteSshess ana
excitement tne prisoner on .lat occasion W"uu 'h'"
der s"spc'on az 10 mis- SANITY ~ Iue al nus o. f'
VINO knew ucihin about MS circumstances; but Wtch
IL was huuUn mat time ne hId resolved upon
t,r COMMISSION Oh noIcde ana was awaiting oppor-
tuuty al. iut, resc>-ucSs NUIId bc quite culnydtHIe
sanity. The Court cou not conceive t'at gNl-
aeuce could operate To bring about dher-
in audon to TINS it might he remarked that the ali
dayJ flied 10y BraGden on the part ,oI
tnc prosecution showed that the defence Woud ne 1is
appointed with his tesIuouy, ami WouIu essen the
weight Oh what u-ut Toe elid ~ the ot"rI "I'Eos'
II Was !ur,uer --i Una tue defence hH7H "e %,l
to prove that one 81 tn expert witnesses hd ut''o
since t-y iiii tudl iuN opinion "i7 ui"' yi -
WIlcI hc uJ4 gwen ct, the tria. IL Was -tHtl Iie
~ru pN
ness Was noi a ground Tor new iI" Inlo' any Wv "
stances, GA least % a.. Whcn d "tht To a,'ln + "a
witness ditor tine CONCLUSION al tu' tll' ' van ,f
pace ID IN the power q" any "I'h'H9 10 .'' 80 ,,,.'r
ipJuicu upOL own testimony a,cI t tI'a N"s "'v',
NJ cyI.,uce ot thai kind coal. d. t'h4-lt - ,
Cour, in rcsarito new trial lie had considered ad thc
matters vucu oeeu pr.,cuIrd aud was completed 10
ONcIruic tuc motion Tor a new '.ld'. ,... , tho
Nh Scovllc noted an exception 10 Tue i"'pS VI '
Court.
Tur D.trct-Atonry TO request tie Court to pass
scIicuc., bat WAS interrupted ~ AIi a'o,hr' M'iu
asAcd cave o tAc Court 10 Ole formally IN mI'"h III
sIpport oil wAcn he had uied tue o".Nil !'71iu
lie desired to have D. Uu record u orlcr-t- IL hH. h''
oycrrucd 10y his Houo'rs dcci-i'h-lo nave an
10 ruc upon tine application made ~ nm yesterday 4"
cNunge certain matters irom Tue aIhHdNils PiGaen'e
b., tne pruscr ana exclude one or Two "IHGaN l.S
which were entirely lreyeiab' ana ought not 10 oe %"
Inc Court stated that had already ruled that what
ever related Ia Su,ocr IN te aludvds except H'cn MAJ
ters as went To Ms credDihu witness snCu.d be
su,ro ,cd but ne uhn that the portions Of the
alludyIts Oi tue iuf5 IN relation TO snyder were IM
proper The affidavit OF snyder attdcaeI
ia say that they rc-drded ms conduct is
suspicious. There was nOt-ing siandeIouS ia Their
Mr. scoyiuc thought that mere statement Of con-
c,us.uu WITHOUT :, ground support II improper
Iuo Court dd not tninA 1t was sandeiOus that II
Ought to exrun- ed TIe jury had nsn, 20 express
an opinion. Inc CIrt di no. pretend 10 express an!
! opinion himself GA tAat SUBJECT; he dd not ihlnk ii
"Sr Seville then flied motion in arrest Of Judgment,
winch was 0VcrIuied by the court ANA exception taken
Inc prisoner desire 10 ask oar HohoI' III ny own
Honor to preserve my rnts ID bhnc expect to nave
two or three tnr Ocst lawyers Ia America "ut "dh'
to know WhclhCI must maze aug HiO'IoH III ViI' ~
preserve the record 10: men
a.. t,iIri-Eytry n mt shall DE preserved.
How iuucu tlme nave Iii which 20 pre-
~ - .,,-'..,.,..,,.
s'',' ny .,, tlir ~, have not got 10 that yet.
~ t1- ed t.il be an lrra tOui. nIcr SEE
.1' -, ~, t,, ,i.,d s,I.t,- final nc uad uutll the
'"tt T,,, -, n, -. Iis mn -, 4, xr.,lInu,
n ,nilr&o. NOT exactly UIt; tHcre is no particular
time AXea prepIln- the exceptions. Inc term VIII
AIR. SEQ, ..ie-Huw long vii. havci
M ,,.ir-. :, term Viii oe Kept open long you
, ~
49,, ,,ri. nu.rI don't ar,rr any advantage shall be
I'll a. If mo. cNu.ct to have Iuy lawyers procured IN
'h'-h ~ & ir 1st of March to file NV bill
! .-i4..,..,.I.,'r.l
m. ,u1-Nts.