Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/745

 IN EB EDWABD S. MAY. 737 �In re Edward S. May. �{District Court, E. D. Michigan. , 1880.) �CONTEMPT— JUBOR — CONFERHING 'WITH A PAETT TO THE SOIT — RkV. ST, �j 725.— Under section 725 of the Revised Statutes, a juror in a federal court is guilty of a contempt in cormptly confeiTing with a pirty to a suit during the trial, it appearing that the court had expresslT forbidden the jury to converse with any one regarding the case. �Semble.— It seems that he would be guilty of contempt even if no such direction were given. �Contempt — Answbk of Rbspondent. — In proceedings for criminal con- tempt the answer of the respondent, in so far as it contains statement» of facts, must be taken as true ; if false, the government is remitted to a prosecution for perjury. �Bame — Samb. — But the answer must be credible and consistent with itselt ; and if the respondent state facts which are inconsistent with his avowed purpose and intention, the court will be at liberty to draw its own inf er- ences f rom the facts stated. �Motion for an attachment for contempt of court. �Eespondent was duly empanelled as a juror in the case of The United States v. Sigmund and Feist Rothschild, indicted with Marcus Burnstine and others for conspiracy to defraud the government. A petition and affidavits having been produeed tending to show that respondent had been guilty of miscon- duct in his capacity of juror, an order was issued to show cause why he should not be attached for contempt. Upon the trial of the principal case the jury were cautioned not to talk with any person, nor allow any persou to talk with them, and upon a subsequent day the court again took occasion to direct the jury not to allow any person to converse with them concerning the case, and to accept no treats or hospitality from any person interested in or connected with the case. �The order to show cause set forth that on the twenty-eighth of December, 1879, respondent went in the night-time to the house of Marcus Burnstine, one of the said defendants, but not then on trial, for the purpose of corruptly conferring with said Burnstine of and concerning said cause, and of and concerning the verdict to be rendered therein, and did then and there talk with said Burnstine, and did allow Burnstine �v.l.no.lO— 47 ��� �