Maryland independent. [volume] (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1874-current, 1892-06-17

II il we're fsst as stated hy the IseE-
PExDvsr that Judge Briscoe wasashown the
new jury law by the Clerk "a the dfst day Of
court, and this had been done prior to the
drawing Of the jury, then the FSmes would
have been in error in undertaking to shift the
blame from she Judge TO others. What, the
Times admit that it could crr7 No, impossible.
1t cannot err. The fact that the Judge may
not have been shown the jury law until after
the drawing has nothing to do with the case.
II be knew Of it on the first day OF the term it
was sufficient as he could at any time that day
have corrected any error cecafriug in the
drawing Knowing nothing Of the facts our
self, our knowledge was acquired from what
others told as, smong whom was the Judge
himself which ought TO be good proof.
The Clerk told us on the first day Of the
term that be had called the Judges attention
to the new law, and we called on him on
Thursday of last week, and in answer to the
direct question, he reiterated his 6rst state
ment. Judge Briscoe duncg the argument Of
the motion to quash, stated that be bad seen,
considered the law, and formed his opinion, |
that his attention had been called to il by the
Clerk, and so decided snd emphatic was he
about his opinion that the counsel who OPEN
ed the case remarked, "Well your honor, II
the Court has made up is mind, further argu-
m.ut is useless,n aud took his seat, where
upon the Judge said, "Go on, go on, the
Court nay change its mind" Mr. John H.
Mitchell will, | think, verify this statement
as to what the Judge said, if any will call
upon him, who really want to know the facts.
TIE Times is also ia error In ststiag that the
Sun and other leading papers Of the ate
that published the laws sereatsm had not
reached tn. jury law. We beg leave to in
form our neighbor, if it will be informed, and
We feel compelled to do 50, else we may be
again censured for not imparting oui knowl-
edge grstuitously, that the San and Herald
are the two papers that published the laws,
and the Herald began to publish them on
May 9th, end the Sun on the 10th, and con-
tinuously for one week before court commenc-
ed, AID if our neighbor will take the pains to
lock, he will End the jury law in those publ
cations. But the Times canuot err. Pshawl
what is the use Of talking, We refrained
calling any special attention to the matter, at
the time Il happened for the reason that We
deemed IL smdH waiter and one of those ext
gencies occurring every day in courts In the
trial of cases, but as our neighbor fearing
some one might attempt TO make psiitieat cap
adI out of small matter, or TO exhibit-hi
spleen towards US by seeking to Put upon US
others mistakes, or in its hot haste to defend
Judge Brscoe when none was necessary,
said so much about small matter In its
issue of two weeks ago, when no one else had
said any thing about il, rejecting therein, so
unnecessarily upon us, We felt compelled to
state 'the facts as we got them from the nc-
tual participants in the small mailer. AMI
thought that would end the small watter.-
But our uugenerous neighhor, ''went let up,
and we are .gain, 10 self-defrnse, compelled u
refer to the small matter. We trust now that
those indiscreet political cranks, whom We
have nit heard OF, but Of course exist, who ar
seeking to dispar,ge the capacity of young
and promising Judge, will shut up their fly
tr~ps aud that Our aeighbor will forgive US
our sins, and that Judge Briscoe may never
give another opinion which may b. over
,uled by majority of the court apgi thus
remove all causes for further Goniroserss on
the subject, let the small matter er |.
g. >.--1-a ~