New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-04-02
THE INDICTMENT VALID.
THE SHERIFF PLEADS NOT GUILTY.
JUDGE BARRETT DENIES THE MOTION TO oUAsH-A
SPEEDY TRIAL DESIRED.

SPEEDY TRIAL DESIRED.
The argument in the case of Sheriff Davidson wa
continued yesterday before Judge Barrett In tn
Court Of Oyer and Tssn 1s The counsel Ga foT tn
Grand Jury could not legally find Indictment
against the Sheriff, because the nvesi alton of hi
their term extended by the Legislature. District
Attorney Olney said that with reference TO the af
davit submitted by the defence he wished TO rea'
an affidavit made by Merritt Trmble. foreman o
the Oyer and TerIniner Grand Jury. This set
forth that since February the Grand Jury have
been engaged in investigating certain department.
nected with the .S6eria's office were brought to hi
February he was engaged on the matter, and or
February he brought the matter to the attention
of the Grand Jury.
Mr. Choate-The facts stated In the affidavit submitted
for the defence practically conceded These that
on the Monday February last, and not prior e
were brought to the attention Of the Grand Jury The
Court oyer and TepT e On as sI N. %
Oyer and Termner Grand Jury could have taken coen
Court on March 81 are invalid When the Grand jury
entered upon it's functions by ofegsation extend
by the Constitution II carried out to logical sequence
it would become grand nquisition, which might be con-
tinued indefinitely.
Judge Barrett-If 1t was lawfully constituted Grand
Jury II was authorized to finish all business pending or
Z as to The continuance of the Grand jury.
Mr. Choate-The Constitution provides that the Grand
seasons If the court decides that this Grand Jury was
valid it sit for ten or twenty years to inquire into the
conduct OF certain city officers and possibly 1t may be
needed for that length of time to clear out certain de-
Judge Barrett-Cannot the Legislature say that the
of the Court OF Oyer and Termner may be twice In
year continuously for two years, and is not the
Grand Jury part OF the Court 2
Mr.. Choste-There have been AnttReut Grand Juyies
and judges Shall they be continued indefinitely MeI-
rt Tmble and his associates on the Grand Jury are I'M
doubtody good to clear the filth from the pub
lie Offices but the system is wrong 4 this act is valid
there Is nothing prevent the Legislature nom
further and enactng that the Court and Grand Jury may
continue their session as long as they please.
Judge Bsuett-Tha is different question, and would
bring mp the cOnstitutionaty Of the Court.
Mr.. ChOate-The real question is, can there be two
grand iuiies sitting at the same time One might Indict
person the evidence presented and the other ignore
Mr. Ccckran-The General Sessions Grand Jury was
drawn on the first Monday in March.
Distrct-Atomey Olney-A Grand Jury of the Court of
Oyer and Termner and General Sessions Grand Jury
Both would bo legal bodies When one Grand
Jury presents case the other cannot take cog
of the Court OF oyer and Terniner at time For tho
a lei yS e law %r has S P cdn declared t
Judge BaTTett-The only question in my mind Is
my mind is whether the Grand Jury had the right to
beyond the business pending before 1t when the con-
tinning act was passed;
on the act The Grand Jury was then engaged nqurag
into the alleged misconduct OF certain public officials and
the Court of oyer and Termher and Grand jury are not
limited, but merely the time in the discretion OF the
Mr. ChOate insisted that the continuing act only
conferred on the Grand jury the power to finish
the inquiry they had begun; not to take up new
business.
Judge Barrett-The question raised is and
not altogether free from doubt The Grand Jury has
The power present the bill which It has DONE but the
difficulty in the argument behalf OF the defendant
ssts largely in separating the power of the Grand Jury
from the of the term OF the Court Ii the Court
under this act had the authority TO extend its terms
either general special then the Grand Jury continued
one Of the constituents OF the Court m I'll the term
ended or It was discharged by the Court The Court as
continued by it's orders under that act stated that the
of the continue ion for the transaction
tinued when this Grand Jury found these indictments
Every Indictment which was pending in
the On S S o court % 9Er ws and
pending before the Court that day Even under the
narrowes construction which be gy9n 70 this act
act until that business ushed-that IS until those
indictments were tried Under any construction of this
act the Grand Jury lawfully exists for all purposes OF
Grand Jury until the business which was pend
ing either before 1t or before the Court
on the third day of February, 1854 was finished The
pending before the Court does consist of the
business before the Grand Jury 1t is within the dscre
ton of the Court TO continue the term by until the
business pending is finished. The Legislature cannot
have contemplated such state OF things do not think
that is Just view be placed upon the act My best
judgment that the intention OF the was give the
Court the discretion where an extension of the term
required to extend the term generally for all purposes
and not to limit IL. therefore deny the motion.
Mr.. Cochran took an exception in behalf of |
Sheriff Davidson. MIR. Cochran then entered plea |
of not guilty on all the Indictments lie asked that |
the trial be set down for Friday The Sheriff, he |
said. was anxious for speedy tTial This !
finally agreed to. The question was then raised by |
the Disrict-Attorney as to the Sheriff drawing the
panel from which the jury Is to be selected. 1t
explained that the County Clerk actually drew the |
panel although the Sheriff was present Mr. Olney |
said he hoped all the panel would be served person
ally with the summonses 70 appear Mr. Cochran
offered to allow the Dlstrict-AttOmey to name the
deputy sheriff to serve the summOnses. The Dis
SAID he was not authorized to act