The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-12-31
TRIAL BY SPECIAL JURY.
PROVED EXPEDITIONS IN THE NEU-
FIELD MURDER CASE.

Case with n Special Jury, but the De-
fence Objected-Mon From the Special
Jury List Are In tho Jury Box, Though.
The trial OF William Neuield for the murder
OF Mrs Annie Kronman. which ended on FRI
day In the conviction OF the defendant. was the
fret case to be tried under the Special Jury
law. This law was framed by Justice Barrett
OF the Supreme Court and enacted In 1896 II
provided for a Special Commissioner OF Juries.
to be appointed by the Appellate Division
OF the Supreme Court In counties whose popu-
lation is 100000 or over. and to serve for not
more than Ave years. being removable at the
pleasure OF the appointing power His salary
was nxed at not more than $4,000. which IL the
salary OF tho Special Commissioner for New
York county. who is Henry Winthrop Gray. a
brother OF Judge John Clinton Gray OF the
Court OF Appeals.
Under the law the Special Com missioner
must obtain the jury list from the regular
Commissioner OF Jurors. From II he must So
lect. as his judgment may dictate. not less
than 5000 names. which shall constitute tho
special jury list. These men he summons be-
fore him for examination as to their aualilca-
tions for Jurors. He determines their qualin-
cations according to their answers to Ques-
lions suggested by the requirements OF the
law. Under this law Juror must be;
A male citizen OF at least ten years resi-
denoe In the county and not less than 80 or
more than 20 years OF age.
He must be possessed OF oil his natural faoul-
ties. and must not be innrm.
He shall be free from all legal exceptions. Of
good character. OF approved integrity. intelii-
gent. OF sound judgment. able to read and
write the English language correctly. and he
shall have adequate knowledge OF the duties OF
Juror.
He must be man who has never been found
guilty OF a Grim nal offence and who has never
been found guilty OF fraud or misconduct by q
civil court.
Persons not eligible as jurors under this law
arc:
ANY person who possesses suoh conscen-
tions opinions IA wonld preclude his findings
defendant guilty OF the crime charged II II be
punishable with death
Any person who doubts his ability to lay
aside opinions and Impressions found from
newspaper reaiing or hearsay and to render
an impartial verdict upon evidence. uninfu-
Any, person who possesses opin ions which
would prevent his finding q verdict OF guilty
Any person who avows such a prejudice
against any law OF the state as would preclude
his finding defendant guilty OF violating such
Any person who evows such a prejudice
against, any particular defence 10 y crime
charged a. would prevent his giving a fair and
impartial trial upon the merits Of such de-
fence.
ANY person who avows that he cannot. In all
In his own behalf the full benefit OF the
statutory, provision that his neglect or refusal
to so testify does not create any presum ption
against him.
This preliminary catechlsm makes It un-
10 court most OF tho ausstIons that are asked
OF the ordinary JURORS and thus much time Is
panel Of taoaen from a tho spec , al jury ls
Application must be made BY either the Dis
trlct Attorney or the defendant to the Appellate
Division. The application must set forth that
the case to be tried Ia OF such Importance.
that It has received such newspaper notice
on that great dliicu,y viii be experisnced In in
getting Jury from the ordinary list, II the
Court eee ess The he to be true
furnish panel from the special list Tor the
In the Neuirld case a panel OF thir,y-,wo
taIesmen was furnished and Jury was Sc
cured In three hours. II was out eleven min
utes. and returned a verdict Of guilty.
v hen the law was enacted II contained a pro-
Special Jury LEI were EXEMPT from ordinary
clause was aiterwsrd repealed, SO that at now "
ordinary jury duty. Some OF those on tho
speGlal list are now serving as Jurors in the
There is no clause In the Special Jury law
which forUids a man changing his mind and.
ia the examination OF tHlssmen In the Moli-
were on the specihl list were then ineligible ~
jurors. because they had changed their mind
since their eligibility for special Jurors had
been approved.
The con.,itutionality Of this law was que,-
toned last January. and to test It the question
was taken to the Court Of Appeals. which de-
ciied. Justice John Clinton, Gray writing the
opinion and oil the other Judges concurr.ng.
that the law was constitutional. There
are st!i some lawyers who hold that.
although the law is not contrary to the
State Constitution. II ia. .nevsrtheless.
In CONFIRMATION OF the Constitution OF the
United States. Those who hold this opinion
base IL upon the provisions OF the Fourteenth
Amendment. which guarantees to all citizens
OF the United States an equal right before the
law. provision OF the Special Jury law pro-
vdes that a person ,rled by special jury has
40 right Of appeal when he challenges q Jurors
impartiality and the challenge is ovcrrulod.
II II pointed out that person tried by an
ordinary Jury has the right of appeal in this
case and therefore, 1t IL held. that tho person
tried 10y the special jury has not the Same
rights as ono trie by any ordinary Jury.
The DISTRICT Attorney applied for q special
jury In tho Molineux case. The defence on
posed the application on the ground that the
case was down Tor trial in the Supreme Court
when the application was made for q special
jury In tho Court Of General Sessions. Tho OPP
pication was denied.