New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-04-17
SHERIFF DAVIDSON ON TRIAL.
FIVE HOURS SPENT IN GETTING A JURY.

,,,. ,,.srn,oxv EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED To-
pAy-pECIsIoNs IN THE CASES OF BowE AND
wERTHEIMER
Five bonrs were spent yesterday in getting jury
10 try the indictment against Shenn DAVIDSON.
One hundred and fifty jurors had been summoned;
seWentv-fye appeared and thirty were called
before the panel was completed. The hTst one
called. Robert O'Brien, stoek-broker, OF NO. ~
East Twenty-sixth-st, became the foreman. Her
mann Miller, of No. $50 East Sixty-hth-st. super
intendent of the Deyoe Manufacturing G0mpaan n
had friend who had said to HIM that Dsyldson
was a good fellow" He was promptly chslIenge9
by the District Attorney but the court oyer-rpled
the challenge and ne T%s pus The same
result was reached in the case of Nathan Eckstlen
of No. 347 1hrd-ave. He had asked man Wh AZ
"petit' in his summons meant, and thGHught ,r ne
The judge took different view Amos H. prev W
ster of the Second Ward placed his hanu oIE ne
his ear and leaned forward 10 such ludicIpus
fashion in his effort to hear the first question
the court room rang with laughter lie was muGn
6ewildeTed but understood Sx t1s SIu' William H.
Warner, of No. las West f1iteentGniI Si
member of the, Union League eU r o Cs&O,
ment was denounced in resolutions, knew ho'hl1s
about them, and had no opinion IN the cast ne
was accented but was retired on peremptoIy cba
So"ge A. finally made up the jury consisted of the
following besides the foreman;
Joseph f. Reth. wiremaker, Of No. 237 ThiTd ave
FEMINIST Charles p Pierce cashier of the American In
snrance Company; William W. Iiance, broker OF NO. 81
chant of No 27 West Fftyseventh.st; Ahram Selgel,
Philip Brode. George II. soue, Philo D Ely soiomoh
Late and Patrick OConnor.
No one was admitted to the courtroom except
the lawyers. iuroIs witnesses and TeP9Tersi Judge
Barrett was on the bench; Shenh DAVIDSON SAT
with his counsel. Joseph H. ChOate, Aaron >, van
deTpoel and w. Bourke Cochran. DlstIlct-Attolhey
Olney and Assistant Adams appeared for the prose
cution. The indictment contains Two counts, 1 th
for extortion and the other for grand larceny III the
second degree and is based on alleged lase repre-
sensations by which the Sheriff obtained more
money iT t%e LmGlow Street jail for OctO-
Der last than he was entitled c,to.Y - teG
After the jury had been sworn M 70 elect
which. count he would try. MIR. OmeN argueI
against this motion and said that the ldehy ol nt
Transactions was all that was necessary. me coSt1
rncd that the prosecution could not be required TO
elect at this stage of the case $1,000. ~, inv,
MIR. Adams made the opening address 10 the jury
In it he said
The offence is charged against public officer who by
the force of his position had the handing 0l m
cnrred in the Ludlow street Jail for cooks and cleaners
and also TO 70 cents day l9r e9cl Oh Cel ~ m
CITY hin for these charges TO which were attached sew
era receipts from cooks and cleaners as Voncn1,s 20
show that receipts not ssned OX t1e pei" e
whose names @ wsTs S Sn pad any such sun
as claimed In the case Of scd P 9dT Pced1ng s
ye,ys He never aid any cleaning; he pad 500 per
month as salary. OF prisoners c,ean le J'l I
mn little Iater-thas all The fact s that me She I'm
only paid ont $50 and charged ana coiecle - H.
falsely pretended he had paid the larger "uch No n'
paid only the lesser sum. 80
Mr. Adams was interrupted by Mr.. Choate and Mr..
Vanderpoel. who objected to his bringing ID mat
tiers not connected with the direct points III ISSUE
and the court sustained the oDJec'l9n' nc
testimony for the prosecution viii be begun
this morning. Both SIDES said that they copid IL; n
ish the trial TODAY The Judge warned the Jury
NOT 70 talk with ANYBODY or allow any one to talk
10 them about the case and also not to talk among
themseves about 1T until they came to CONSIDER
their verdict. Lido
BEFORE the trial began Judge Barrett gave his DC
cisions in the cases of Warden B0we and clerk
Jacoh Werthemer. In the case of Bowe, who had
In,nr,sd to the Indictment charging him with per-
iury. the Judge held that the oath taken by HIM
was NOT such an oath the law would c0nStIue u
he peIiurv aud that the demurrer should he sus,
famed and the prisoner discharged. In the case OF
Wertheiner the court sustained the Indictment ana
overruled the demurrer.