Year: 1872

important Decision by Judge Ingra-
ham-Objections of Dcfcnda nt's Counsel
10 the Indictments Review ved-AssOciate ed
Counsel Properly Employed by the
Observation-Disclosures in Which Secrecy
Is Enjoined Upon a Grand Jury-De.
nial OF the Motion-Tweed to be Called
UP for Arraignment and Trial ON
Monday Next.


In the Court OF Oyer and Terminer yesterday,
Judge Ingraham presiding, final decision was
given the long-contested motion to quash the
indictments found against william NJ. Tweed. The
Court had been engaged during the morning ses-
sion in trying cases on the criminal calendar, the
offenders being principally petty burglars. pick
pockets and thrd-rate homlcides. After the re-
cess, however, 1t was apparent TO the Court, from
the presence Of eminent counsel within the bar,
that some decision was expected from him in a
case OF greater magnitude than any of those he
had spent the morning hours in trying, and i'm
%ediaiey he called up the case Of the People
present, but was represented by counsel.


THE CASE OF TWEED.


Judge Ingraham said IL observe that there are
many OF the counsel engaged in the Tweed case in
Court, and may as well, therefore, state at once
ton to all the points discussed in reference to the
motion made In the case last week, and to all the
matters outside of the Indictment and have come
20 the conclusion that they are insufficient to war
rant my granting the motion The reasons which
have Influenced me TO this decision will be found in
will therefore be denied, and the further hearing
of the case must be taken on Monday, Us originally
axed.


INGRAHAn's OPINION


a motion is made in this case to qnash the Indictment
Is made Tor several causes which In NOV
lng papers OF them for matters appearing on
in the various counts therein 1t is founded part
affdavts and the minutes of the Grand Jury well
the indictment itself Among other matters relied
r. by the By % s q ne
that he believed the publications were made by Of
held that the admissey OF the pubcssions a.
from newspapers could be sanctioned for any pur-
pose and that in order 70 warrant their Introduction 1t
must be shown that the counsel the author, or
assumed the responsibility OF the publication BY his
Of the belief OF the person making the affidavit that the
counsel responsible the authorship thereof This


no evidence OF such TACT and the publication, as well
as the affidavit are both TO be diregarded aordng
no prot OF the facts for which they used Although
the practice does admit of striking matters used
on motion except for the purpose OF preventing libel
tne Court yet such matter and ought to be disre
garded In the disposition OF the motion furnishing
ground on which any decision by the Court can be made
shall therefore treat those pubca and this affidavit
as not TO be considered In deciding the ion before
Another matter which has been hinted
on ths motion is that the counsel who appeared before
Wasactng was actuated by motives hostile the de-
tenaant There was no such charge directly made as
cnusrsnna me counsel for the defendant II II in
sehoea ee bound TO say there was nothing appearing
on me papers before which warranted IL in regard
20 eitner Of the counsel The Attorney General, AS
ne enis law c otesr Of the State and the associate
with Of e q1aed plc. ms Aorney lrsss0n are anS 10
be presumed acting in the proper discharge OF
public duties wrong motives are TO be imputed
duty 70 cheek IL Whether The act Of appeerns before
She Grand jury was In accordance with the law o. no