The Washington times., 1902-01-22
Arguments Heard Yesterday
CoRcerningLegaliB ofPaRes
Drawn for January Term Of
District Courts.
OPINION UNDER ADJUSTMENT.
District Attorney Claims People En-
titled 10 Protection and Cannot
Be Deprived Inadvertently Or De-
libeTdtely.

1t now rests with the Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia to decide
whether CT not the grand and petit juries
drawn for service in the Supreme Court
of the District were legally organized.
This question was propounded yesterday
to the members of the court, and after
hearing arguments pro and con they took
the matter under advisement.
Question Raised on Appeal.
The question OF the legality of the juries
was presented to the court in connection
with the appeal OF William Clark, indicted
for larceny on January 10 last. The pris-
oner was not represented by counsel when
called for arraignment before Justice An
derson, presiding in Criminal Court No. /,
and the court assigned Mr.. X. Ross Perry,
of the firm of R. Ross Perry & Son. and
d. W. Baker, of the firm of Lambert &
Baker, to defend the accused.
On the advice of his counsel Clark filed
a plea in abatement to the Indictment.
This was answered by District Attorney
Gould, representing the Government, with
demurrer, which was sustained by the
court.
An appeal from this judgment was
taken and a special appeal to the Court
of Appeals for the District allowed.
The Question of Validity.
The juries drawn for service in the Su-
preme Court of the District and the Police
Court were selected under the power of a
joint resolution passed by Congress on
December Il last as an amendment TO the
code which went into effect on January l,
1902. This resolution, however, was not
signed by the President until the night
OF January last.
In the meantime the iuries had been
drawn, and on January 6, 1902, were or
ganized by the justices presiding in the
different branches of the court. The Joint
resolution not having been signed by the
President until after January l, 1902, the
date on which the code went into effect
and after the iuries had been organized, it
was contended that their organization was
illegal.
Jury Illegally Constituted.
1t was contended by counsel for Clark
that the lower court erred in holding that
the body of men who returned the indict-
nent against him was a legally consti-
tuted grand jury.
III opposing lne position taken by COun-
sci for Clark, District Attorney Gould did
not consider that the fact that the Joint
resolution under which the jury was
drawn had not been signed until January
&, affected the status in any way. He
argued that the court has every right to
eonstrue the act of Congress most liber-
ally, especially when the result to be at
tanned is for the benefit of the community
at large.
February Term Provided For.
In the event that the Court of Appeals
does not hand down a decision before Fri
day, or if there is no special legislation
providing for the organization of grand
and petit juries for the Supreme Court
of the District or the Police Court, the
justices of the former will meet in gem
eral term and change the rules so as TO
secure the service of jurors during the
month of February.
So. at this time, the only thing certain
is that provision Will he made TO secure
jurors for service during the coming term