The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1902-03-21
THE CIRCUIT COURT IN SESSION.
Grand Jurors Drawn and the Judge
Delivers an impressive Charge.

Court for 1902 began promptly Tues
day at 10 O'clock in the forenoon
Judge Bullock on the bench ana all
the court officials and members of the
bar at their proper places. The thirty
jurors summoned from various parts
of the county responded to their
names.
Mr.. r. B. Erwin having been sum-
mOned under the name of Irvine was
| excused.
Under the law the thirty names are
written on small slips of paper and
eighteen names are drawn therefrom
in open court by the judge, and tie
names of said eighteen persons cor
stitute the grand jury. This provision
of the law was observed and the fol-
| lowing names drawn from the box
NJ. L. Payne, c. A. Liddon, a. p.
Baskin, w, p. Williamson, NJ. p.
Frink, J. w. Reynolds, w. f. Nix
Frank Lyle, J. d. Price, J. O. billiard
| B. l.. Lewis, J. b. Griner, J. l.. PARA
more, c. F. Hayes, s. NJ. -Siblack, T.
A. Smith, Burrel Redding and w. w.
Geiger.
Under our statute law the grand
jury retires to private room and s.
lects its own foreman. This form Of
| the law was observed and Hon. VI. l..
Payne, of Fairfield, was made fore
man, which, considering the names of
those composing the grand jury may
well be considered an honor.
When the jury returned to the court
room and announced the selection of
foreman, Judge Bullock tL1n de-
livered most impressively his charge.
He dwelt at some length on the finan-
ces into which the grand jury is re-
quired to make very careful investi-
CATION. The court read at some
length all the law relating to this
subject. He next took up the subject
of health, which the statutes make it
his duty TO call specifically to the at
tention of grand juries. He read the
various sections of the law relating to
same, especially to section -, which
was recently published in these col
umns
Judge Bullock then read the oath
that was administered to the jurors,
and dwelt at some length on each
separate paragraph. He said that
very frequently men holding influen-
tial positions escaped punishment,
while the low, humble, needy and
friendless were unjustly convicted
He said that under our law ami under
the oath administered to the grand
jury this should not be. That the iav
is blind to all these things and is in
tended to give the same protection 20
one as TO another, and that no man
should be indicted through envy, hate
or malice, or escape punishment
through love, favor or affection, or
any improper influence whatever.
He cautioned, however, the grand
jury against bringing in indictments
unless the members were satisfied
that there was sufficient evidence TO
convict the person before a petit
jury. He said although the jury may
be morally conscious of the guilt of a
party, it were best not to bring in an
Indictment unless the evidence was
sufficient for conviction, because by
so doing it would be burdensome to
the tax payers, land would result IN the
accomplishment of no good purpose.
That it were better that ninety-nine
guilty men e. cape than that one
innocent man should suffer punish.
ment.
The grand jury then retired and the
civil docket was then sounded and is
as follows: T. {. I. Taliaferr0 vs.. A.
Laurent, ct al.
H. L, Anderson, trustee, VS.. the
Florida Central and Peninsular Rail-
way Company,
James Rosenheim vs.. J. l.. We lis
&Co.
L. P. Olin and husband VS.. S. r.
Esteps.
Jean K. Austin VS.. Frank A. league.
10