The times., 1899-01-11
SETBACK FOR SENATOR QUAY.
Application for Writ of CcrtiOrnri
Denied hN the Court.

Philadelphia, Jan. 10.-The Supreme
Court, at HOS O'Clock this morning. an
nounced that it had decided against Sem
ator Quay's appeal for writ of certiorari.
AS soon as the justices entered the court
room Chief Justice Sterrett, holding pa
per in his hand. said:
In the matter of Matthew S. Quay.
Richard r. Quay and Benjamin ]. Hay
wood the rule is discharged and the pc
tition is dismissed at the cost of the pc
titioners.'
written by the chief justice, was as fol-
lows:
IN re petition of NJ. S. Quay, r. K.
Quay and Benjamin C. Haywood Tor rule
to show cause why writ of certiorari
should not issue to the Court of Quarter
Sessions of Philadelphia. This rule to
show cause why writ OF certiorari should
not be granted to bring into this court
certain indictments and the proceedings
Herewith now pending in the Court OF
Quarter Sessions of the Peace for the coun-
ty OF Philadelphia, to November Sessions.
1898. Nos. S2S. 329, $3.50, 33l. and 352 with
stay of all proceedings in said court, was
granted by Justices Green and Williams
in vacation on January Z. the sixth day
of the present term. On December 10.
1885, the district attorneys answer to the
petition and rule was filed and on jan
uary following the petitioners replica
tion was filed.
"On the return day of the rule, the
parties appeared by counsel and all the
questions alleged to be involved were fully
and ably argued. Our jurisdiction to
grant the relief prayed for by the petit
tioners is challenged by one OF the reasons
assigned by the district attorney in sup
port Of his motion to quash the petition
and all proceedings hereunder
That question has been so often con-
sidered and decided adversely to the Com
mcnwealth's contention that it is ulnaras-
sary to consume time in its discussion.
We have repeatedly held that when a
proper case for the exercise of the super
visory power invoked by these petitioners
is presented it is still our duty to grant
relief by sending the record to the proper
court Of another county for trial or de-
failing one of our justices to preside at
the trial as the circumstances of each
meritorious case may require.
We are clearly of the opinion that we
have no authority whatever in this pro-
ceeding to review the action of the court
below on the demurrers and motion 10
quash, and We, therefore. express 10
opinion in. relation thereto. The only
other contention of the petitioners that
requires notice is that they cannot have
fair and impartial trial in the Court of
Quarter Sessions of the Peace of Philadel-
phia County. where said indictments are
still pending on issues of fact raised by
their pleas of not guilty
We cannot assent to this proposition.
On the contrary, we are satisfied that the
petitioners can and will have a fair and
impartial trial in that court before a
competent and unprecedented judge and a
fair and impartial jury. II we thought
otherwise we would not hesitate moment
to send the indictments to another juris-
diction for trial. The learned judges
who. by virtue of their commissions as
judges of the four separate Common Pleas
Court of this county are judges of the
Courts of Oyer and Terminer and Quarter
Sessions of the Peace, etc, are twelve in
number, and sit in said courts in pur-
suance of previous assignment under con-
stitutional provision