Mr. Evarts: We think the juror's knowledge of the language is shown, by his own examination, to be such as should at least entitle the Government to ask that he should stand aside until it is seen if the panel shall be filled from other jurors—if that right exists. Your honor held, in the case of the United States v. Douglass—a piracy case tried some ten years ago—that that right did exist.
The Court: I think we have since qualified that in the case of Shackleford. It was intended to settle that debatable question, and it was held that the Act of Congress, requiring the empanneling of jurors to be according to the practice in State Courts, did not necessarily draw after it this right of setting aside. We think the objection taken is not sustained.
Juror sworn.
Matthew P. Bogart 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 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?