The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-04-17


| trct with such services"
Here was express authority conferred
upon me by law to direct from what boxes
| the Jurors should be drawn; and here is
| indicated the precise object which | had
! in view when my instructions to Mr.. Plea
SAINTS were given.
The second ground OF the motion which
was made the other day to quash the Uenire
Is therefore untenabe: and | shall give
the clerk. for reasons too obvious to need
to he stated. the same Instructions as gave
with reference TO the present Uenire.
Third. The remaining objection which
was then urged TO the present Uenire was
that the number OF jurors drawn for it
! from the boxes having proved insufficient,
Others were summoned by the Marshal
not i'm accordance with the provision OF the
law OF 1879. which directs that ''all iu-
rors. including those summoned during
the session OF the court. shall be publicly
drawn - from the boxes, but that he sum-
moned mer OF his own selection.
The additional jurors summoned In the
present instance were selected under an
order issued by myself on the 9TH OF April,
waici. was the fourth day OF s"o present
term. directing the Marshal TO summon
from bystqnders as many petit jurors as
would be necessary, with those already in
attendance. to make up the whole number
OF the Uenire to twenty-four men.
The Jury law OF 1879 H. a general law re-
lating 10 "all jurors" and has been held
by Chief-Justice Waite and Judge Bond.
sitting together. not to conflict with section
| S0i OF the Revised Statutes, which relates
particularly to petit jurors. The law OF
| 1879 expressly repeals some OF the sections
OF CHAPTER FIFTEEN relating TO iuries, but
does not repeal other sections; so that, on
the maxim erpreSSiO uniuS ercttsio az
! terilS. section S0i still remains in force.
That section provides that:
"When. from challenges or otherwise,
there is not petit jury to determine any
| civil or criminal cause, the marshal or his
| deputy shall. by the order Of the court in
which such defect Of JUROR happens. re-
turn iurymen from bystanders sufficient TO
complete the panel"
II was under this section that my order
TO the Marshal OF the 9Th instant was Is
sued; and it was because jurors had been
thus summoned by the Marshal, and not
drawn from the boxes, that this Celire was
objected to by the defence IN the present
case.
1t is obvious that a literal compliance
with the law OF 1879, directing that jurors
required i'm the emergencies occurring du-
ring the term OF Il court shall be drawn
! from boxes and then summoned, Is often
imDraoticablc. To send ont while making
I'D a Jury during the term OF court for
men selected by lot from all the localities
in which they may happen to reside
| throughout a large district, hundreds OF
miles in dimensions, would entail most
embarrassing delays. 1t would also be at
tended by great uncertainties; for it is
obvious that the jury commissioners
cannot be we'll acquainted with the
men whose names they put in the
boxes, scattered as these are over an area
embracing sixty or seventy counties and
cities: or know with certainty either their
places OF residence or their exact names,
or the condition OF their health, or whether
or not they have removed from the district,
or have died. The Court can therefore have
no assurance that the men thus selected 10y
LOT will. when sent for, be found and
brought into court from the greater or less
distances from which they are summoned
4 literal adherence TO the jury law OF
1879 and a discardal OF the unrepealed pro-
visions OF section S0i, would work in fire.
ouent cases. and would have operated in
the present case, delay OF proceedings
equivalent to a paralyzing obstruction ol
the business OF the court. Congress could
not have meant to impose upon the pro-
ceedings OF courts the delays adyerted to,
The Jury law OF 1879 and section SOi
must therefore be construed together, and
when so construed do not see that there
can be any irregularity or illegality in sum
moning from bystanders during any cur
rent term tdleSmen enough TO complete the
panels necessary for the transaction OF the
business Of the court. / think the Court
ruled in strict accordance with the letter
and i'm full accordance with the spirit OF the
law i'm refusing last Thursday To quash the
reaire from which the panel Of the jury in
the present case was made up. And here
announce that il at the trial OF these elec-
ton cases. or OF any other cases, il shall b'
found that from L" challenges or otherwise .
panels cannot he completed from drawn
Jurors. | will direct the Marshal TO summon
from bystanders a sufficient number o.
Jurors to L" complete the panels"
other Points.
Mr.. Friend, who was Il member OF the
Jury, and who j. "A young man lonly tWen
tv-two), desires il emphatlcally stated tha
he j. an ollt-and-Out Democrat" an(
never voted any other ticket whatever. L
is with pleasure that we make the state
mcnt for him.
There were three colored men on thu
iurv. one Of them is so nearly white thai
those present in the iury-room mt the hOte
where they lodged did not know that h'
was cOlOred until the first night, when h'
selected IA black man for his bed-ielow.
The reporters have been told over ant
over again that they ought to impress
upon Democrats the duty OF serving upor
United States juries when summoned.
Such people are evidently under The
impression that a great many Democrats
rot excused" from this jury. That i
not a fact. There is only one Democrat
marked excused" Possibly there may
have been one OF two others excused. an(
not so marked. Several were reported "no
found" and three were struck of by The
District Attorney in the exercise OF th'
RIGHT accorded him by the law.
Judge Crump's objection TO filling w
cancies from ..bv-Standers went to tn,
noint that several OF the 4" "by-standers
whose names were called off were not by
ISLANDERS i'm the usual acccptation OF The
form but had been summoned here by tn,
Marshal from distant counties to fill tht
vacancies which he anticipated would oc
cur.
! After the Jury was discharged, so far a,
service in this case is concerned, District
Attorney Waddill asked il all the otheI
election eases would take the same course
: and the Court said yes.
In response to another question from
him. the Court said il was unnecessary fo
the accused to renew their recognizances
that the present ones would hold gooC
, until thc i7tb of July, which term woul,
be but a continuation of the present one
Judge Hughes. after the conspiracy cas-
had Tins been disposed Of, read an opinion
in a civil case against Mr.. Munford. TIVE