Trial of the Officers and Crew of the Privateer Savannah, on the Charge of Piracy, in the United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York. Warburton Adolphus Frederick
In a capital case, where the evidence is sufficient to convince you of the guilt of the prisoner, have you any conscientious scruples that would prevent your rendering a verdict of guilty?
A. No, sir.
By Mr. Larocque, for the prisoners:
Q. Have you read the account of the capture of the privateer Savannah in the newspapers?
A. I recollect reading it at the time—not since.
Q. Have you ever formed or expressed an opinion upon the guilt or innocence of these prisoners?
A. Not to my recollection.
Q. Have you ever formed or expressed an opinion whether the facts charged against them, if proved, constitute the offence of piracy?
A. I have not.
Challenge withdrawn. Juror sworn.
George Moeller called. Challenged for principal cause by Mr. Smith:
Q. In a capital case, where the evidence is sufficient to convince you of the guilt of the prisoner, have you any conscientious scruples that would prevent your finding a verdict of guilty?
A. No, sir.
By Mr. Larocque, for the prisoners:
Q. Have you read the account of the capture of the Savannah? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these prisoners?
A. No, sir.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion as to whether, if the facts were proved, as alleged, it was piracy?
A. I do not know what the facts are, sir. I have only read an account of the capture.
Challenge withdrawn. Juror sworn.
Robert Taylor called. Challenged for principal cause, by Mr. Smith:
Q. In a capital case, where the evidence is sufficient to convince you of the guilt of the prisoner, have you any conscientious scruples that would prevent your finding a verdict of guilty?
A. No, sir.
By Mr. Larocque, for the prisoners:
Q. You read of the capture of the privateer Savannah?
A. I think I have.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoners?
A. Not that I know of, sir.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion whether the facts, if proved, constitute the offence of piracy?
A. No, sir, not any.
Challenge withdrawn. Juror sworn.
Daniel Bixby called. Challenged for principal cause, by Mr. Smith:
Q. In a capital case, where the evidence is sufficient to convince you of the guilt of the prisoner, have you any conscientious scruples that would prevent your finding a verdict of guilty?
A. I have not.
By Mr. Larocque:
Q. Have you ever formed or expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoners?
A. I have not.
Q. Or whether the facts, if proved, constitute the offence of piracy?
A. No, sir.
Challenge withdrawn. Juror sworn.
Ira L. Cady called. Challenged for principal cause, by Mr. Smith:
Q. In a capital case, where the evidence is sufficient to convince you of the guilt of the prisoner, have you any conscientious scruples that would prevent your finding a verdict of guilty?
A. No, sir.
By Mr. Larocque:
Q. You know what this case is for?
A. I believe I understand it.
Q. An indictment of piracy against the privateersmen captured on the Savannah?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion upon the guilt or innocence of the prisoners?
A. I do not recollect that I have.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion whether the facts, if proved, constitute piracy?
A. I do not think I have.
Q. Have you any opinion now upon either of these subjects?
A. I cannot say that I am entirely indifferent of opinion on the subject, but still I have not formed any definite opinion.
Q. Your mind, however, is not entirely unbiased upon the question?
A. Well, no, sir—not if I understand the question; that is, the question whether the facts, if proved, constitute the offence of piracy?
Mr. Larocque submitted that the juror was not indifferent.
Mr. Evarts: All that has been said by the juror is that, on the question of whether the facts charged constitute the offence of piracy, he has no fixed opinion; but he cannot say he has no opinion on the subject. He is ready to receive instruction from the Court.
Mr. Larocque contended that, as the question of whether the facts alleged constituted piracy, or not, was a most important one to be discussed, they were entitled to have the mind of the juror entirely blank and unbiased on that subject.
The Court: Let us see what the state of mind of the juror is.
Q. You mentioned, in response to a question put to you, that you had read an account in the newspapers of the capture of this vessel.
A. I was not asked that question. I have no mind made up in respect to the subject that would prevent my finding a verdict in accordance with the evidence; but I said I was not entirely devoid of an opinion in regard to the case—that is, the offence.
Q. Have you read an account of the capture of this vessel?
A. Yes, sir; I read it at the time.
Q. Is it from the account, thus read, of the transaction of the capture, that you found this opinion upon?
A. No, sir; it is not that. It is upon the general subject that I mean to be understood—not in reference to this case particularly.
Q. Do you say, upon the general question, that you have an opinion?
A. Well, not fully made up. I have the shadow of an opinion about it.
Q. Not a fixed opinion?
A. No, sir; I would be governed by the law and instructions of the Court.
Q. You are open to the control of your opinion upon the facts and law as developed in the course of the trial?
A. Certainly, sir.
The Court: We do not think the objection sustained.
Challenged peremptorily by the prisoners.
Samuel Mudget called. Challenged for principal cause.
By Mr. Smith:
Q. In a capital case, where the evidence is sufficient, in your opinion, to convict the prisoner, have you any conscientious scruples that would prevent your finding a verdict of guilty?
A. I have not.
By Mr. Larocque:
Q. You have read the account of the capture of the privateer Savannah?
A. Yes, sir; at the time.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion upon the guilt or innocence