Show ilear RS discharged V another fcc tilla rAcHon n of ill judge da I 1 J A zinc zane 1 t front V belve we wc glean tile the I 1 1 aw bollow iii I 1 th the grand jury come came luto into court nt at 1030 luday tu lu day and pi III resented ono one indictment under the ibe of ali elie united unite d baates mr dickty then arose and stated elated that ill ere was a v to tiling to the elie attention ol of tile court which hid been discussed informally anti otherwise in the grand jury loom fount at least oue member of tha grand jury claimed the tight to say he be admitted lie should 61 find au in indictment or not whet when at tin it mine anic time thue lio lie admitted tho lite nl d dance clice s to warrant it claiming abit th tt it would boa bot a usurpation on oil ilia part of 0 the luu grind grand jut jury J tv 11 ud oil an all indictment under certain notwithstanding alie evidence warranted it mr 11 C aay then stated elated t the it a object objection io u ans vas in rotation to finding boding more milre than one indictment tar for unlawful cob in ill a certain period the be juror refe referred ried to laid kid be would do no such thio thing in spite of ou being b L i a i c ij jl ti d e d t bat i i i t his il ig billi 0 at i 11 required t in u under n d r t the 1 e 1 0 s tr a e i 1 0 n a 0 t t the he coult auit under abe circumstances sir cikay 11 city thought the juror incompetent the bourl cour tor for ilia his itallie iriaine and sir mr clayton was named as tile the juror mr clayton said yes he w was is the tap aae and desired to correct mr mcka mckay in ili one particular tim that lie be had bad not I 1 to indict where tho the viar ranted that lie he had voted tor for indictment to in ill that 1 I cast clr 3 ir mckay stated that the point lie aninao ninao WAS hat the ahe juror to fl flud lid more than ihan one indictment the juror assumed as to my flay whether vili ether the law was laid down correctly by tho the court or 01 not lot etwas it was noi disputed thattie iliac grand guior bad a ra bt to say sar whether bether in tile the idea was or not but tile grand juror 11 claimed cl that even bete the evit evidence lence was sufficient the ol of more than oue was wa the law of fixed the elie maxi maximum fourn punishment for 1101 AWful cohabitation it which lie termed tile the junior jun lor offense i a at t six months imprisonment and lid line and to flud find two or more indict meals against a n nian he be might bo be punished to even a greater extent than for or polygamy pa 1 ga my 3 Mr 1 r mckay stated further that there was another juror he be asked to have taken off for substantially tile same seasons ica sons jacob blot itz and he be was informed that t there were others mr davis tilted stated tb itan in cei taia casas ho he had the santa fanic opinion as ai mr moritz sir was itce by the coal t and said ho he believed it N rig unconstitutional to find more anoro than one indictment c the constitution provides that excess he fines anus or d punishments shall not be imposed ile he said he be dill did vote for or indictment where the evidence warranted arraut cd it if but to go a back toil find an indictment for very every day or cv deiy minute or week lie he would not indict ilia ri derice showed shoed the defendant had bad been livin livans iu in unlawful cohabitation for he would rind but one indictment ludi cLinent lie ile bad advised with one talked with till no one except pei ills ids vi alie ife mr air ind mr davis thought thit that where bartic had been Ind indicted letca tried aud convicted those etim douht alit to have a chance ch after they c came out then it they live within tho the uw law they were ready to indict chent the flie collit theu then each cacti of abo other jurors as to ebether lie he took look tile the same po position but they nil all responded in the negative court mr blo iltz mr dails and mr clayton I 1 not nm surprised gentlemen that after you took the anth aou did that you ion would in gate and lilot aiuto all abo matters diatte that atie bron brought ht before you and the evidence w i as 3 you oil u would ai eliud ad tile the truth and nothing but the truth thu thit you would not be influenced hy by fear favor or affectation or by illy any toward or or hope thoi beof but bill I 1 in it all your bour presentments you would you present the ll 11 uth that you will state that you y will not do it claytob C la atou 1 I have stated that I 1 would slid and ila did so court the effect of bour our sta is to that effect cl ayton I 1 dout dont understand it bat way court nieu Meu must ho be careful when they take oaths moritz wn had D eil dence wo IVO tale take a ote note court but you havo have no I 1 igat to state boull you would not dolt Youcan Bot arille with wit your our like ih it ill this conat Itis it h astonishing that men havo have not more i fur their oaths ilian that where Ill here tin tile ClI evidence defice i IS sufficient have no discretion whatever hate cr it it ii Is to indict you last indict it if it Is not lot you cannot indict indi et you have no wore moro than this court has bits when vt lei a case Is submitted to it if tile the evidence is vile one way ivay the coult under ita oath cannot flud find another it a 1 case eadels easels IS submitted to the coal a evidence ii with tho ilia plaintiff it cannot find tho the facts facia the othur is way ly so alth ith a gried jury tiou ou I 1 have I 1 ave not ilot the slightest you move directly ac oaths ind lind alie 1 acol ding Lothe to alie evidence you likic no I 1 light abt to kiy any 3 ou oil will not indict though tile evidence may be cleat you y oll no right to say a 1 law la Is tut ional or wrong after tile hie court charges you lc ie ill ahe 1 law I it I 1 la 3 the duty ot of the court to cherzo 1 oil u hat the lwis law Is with 1 till respect to your out duties ni as rand furois jurvig and lias has so charged you yon gentlemen you ale ill 0 excused its to sit sic on a grand rl 1 nil jury boxt ciulo you come colne the conic c at I 1 nnie two aro questioned as aou ou in ili this cascas case as in members of the ci fiand ind jury answer and honestly hout atly blid baid if 11 you fro eo on oil the llie grand jury oti oil must be governed goser ned by your our oaths mr mr daviet and mr air clay to leu you I 1 ath a you aie discharged ironi front tills this grand rand jury this afternoon mr mado at hii argument art ciment in ut of the elie proposition that bat tho the collit had pcr to fill 1111 the vacant places lit in lite lie granil ran jury jill lie ile read the dech decision de cislon loll of if llie 0 Su supreme court lit in the Cl clanton avison case at draling he legality lS lity ol of ilia pen venire in acs lit in uli of ill ll 11 ii 11 petit 1 1 1 T can contended that it was 11 thin I 1 1 lion or of the boint t to adopt tile open course lit in the pro acut lne at atthe lie close of 0 lii his mr nc mc ica icay 7 nioca that lut nil an open aien meltire immitt and the conil that it bo a fur for bix names na inia find and bi be aji alii lii 4 p r ome dirig was waa foll followed oled is as tile n I 1 lines 11 I 1 e s on oil the ply litt iia were exhaust t d tile mand jill anic r lor for the december acab er fetal tc ain vi M ral lit in all ax a consequence be lude up cati lely by bv tin tile open J pen venire process milieu lieu a wall lie ile no question as a tu to tile ob b tain iii a i body i if to their liking in every ever I 1 cepl t upon this of ile open mitre tw itse 3 ij scott 3 T camby isby aud and 1 gebhardt acre selected elected to lill fill up the grand piry jury chich it I 1 now anticipated aill be better belter jilted for or tile llie pin pews ol of livres culian |