Year: 1870

Tnomas Jackson, tine man who lodged Douglass
from door to door OF gin null in the First ward on
registration DAY hast fall october 29 aud who finally
snoL his nyin9 victim In the back OF the head while
trying to get away actually, through COUNSEL tried
yesterday shrk the indictment found against him
for the offence The case came up before Cunning
s. Bedford, Jr, City Judge, At the Court OF General


Sessions on motion to quash the last Indictment,
which is for murder III the nrst degree


Mr.. Klntzing appeared for Jackson. while Dis
trict Attorney Garvin represented the people.
IL appeared from the statement OF counsel that
the Grand Jury OF the Oyer and Ternlner found an
indictment for manslaugDter against Jackson on
the 18th OF November, 1859, and was transferred
by the finding Of On indictment for murder In the


first degree by the Grand Jury OF the Sessions on the
ing In the same transaction. TINS mouon was that
the last Indictment be Quashed and the second bill
be re-esiaplished as The only proper Indictment
finding VI Indictment for murder in tnat case was
subversive OF pubic justice and fraud upon the


action OF the former Grand Jury and upon the rights
OF the defendants that there was no change OF facts
before the second Grand Jury ana that the indict.
ment found BY them was unjust and oppressive, and
produced by q prejudice which dd not exist at the
time o the nndlnE Of the nrst Indictment In Inc
course OF his remarks the counsel said that at no dis
tant period talludlng 10 the approaching trial o!
McFarand} he would de5caas as large upon TACT TO
winch he would only now ailude-vlL., that there
was less OF cold-blooded premeditased murder IN
this county than In any other county In the STATE


In concluding mis- argument the counsel said that the
reporter OF certain newspaper claimed within the
last three months 90 have been present in the Grand
Jury room and published their proceedings. He the
c0unsel} Qeant TO SIT that matter and see whether
the public prosecutor permitted such a Migrant
abuse 10 exist


District Attorney GarvIn In replying to the srgu-
men OF the counsel SAID he listened III vain for tue
citation OF any principle Of law why grand jury
might not had . second indictment. That body
might find bill for minor offence on imperfect
testimony or by the misnanagement OF the foreman,
or from other Causes, and IT would be nonstrous
doctrine II man we're to 20 unwbipped OF justice
simply because grand jury made mistake In not
first finding an indictment for murder The District
Attorney quoted the testimony OF BranniRan to show
that Jackson was guilty OF deliberate and premedi
tated murder and mentioned numerous authorities
to show that the Court has the power to quash an
the other Indictment stands. Judge Garvln repened
with Indignation the statement OF the counsel that
the District Attorney permitted reporters 70 be
present n " snaa Jury room Pd sag case
be would invite the gentleman 10 prosecute
the offender In conclusion the District Attorney
reiterated the statement that the case now before
the Court was on the papers clear case Of WpEd6r
and he attributed the nndng OF the rst Indictment
for mansAu2hter BY the Grand Jury to the fact that
in some way they were misled as 70 what were the
leading facts against the accused. Counsel further
remarked that when his Honor, Judge Bedford was
thoroughness never surpassed and scarcely equalied
that he became favorte Of the bench; and that In
every direction ne tthe COUNSEL had testimonials In
his favor from those who sat as jurors; that he
pursued the full benefit OF the law, aud sought
10 strike down any man unless he was pursued
either TO his death or to the loss OF his liberty IN
obedience to legal f0rmalities ana legal proceedings
Counsel submitted htS motion, confidently feeling
that the fidelity TO pr0prety and TO the oath OF oce
which characterized his Honor would influence him
IN its consideration.


The Judge took the papers and reserved his