Page 125 279 Wells v. Iron Co. 48 N. H. 534..... .... 163 C. 3 Amer. Dec. 678.. Wilkins v. Ellett, 9 Wall. 740; 108 U. 'S. -; S. C. 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 641. 418 Wilkinson v. Leland, 2 Pet. 627.... 155 Williams v. Baker, 7 Wall. 144..... 189 Williams v. Benedict, 8 How. 107... 335 Williams v. Ingell, 21 Pick. 288.... 450 Williams v. Jackson, 107 U. S. 478; 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 814.... Williams v. Nottawa, 104 U. S. 209 101, 262, 263 Williams v. Robbins, 16 Gray, 77... 134 Willison v. Watkins, 3 Pet. 43..... 412 Willoughby v. Willoughby, 1 Term Rep. 763.. 362 362 Paga Wilson v. Gaines, 103 U. S. 417..198, 199 Yates v. Milwaukee, 10 Wall. 497- 443 451 418 Yonley v. Lavender, 21 Wall. 276... 335 Sections 5512 and 5515 of the Revised Statutes, providing for the indictment of election officers for misconduct at elections, held not repugnant to or in violation of the constitution of the United States. The objection to a juror that he is disqualified to act as such, under section 820 of the Revised Statutes, which disqualifies a person as a juror if he voluntarily took any part in the rebellion, held waived by a party under indictment after he has pleaded not guilty to the indictment, and gone to trial without making such objection. Objections by reason of irregularities of this nature should be raised by the defendant, either on motion to quash the indictment or by plea in abatement, if he had no opportunity or did not see fit to challenge the array. The action of the court in excluding particular persons, who might properly have served on a jury, is not enough to vitiate all the proceedings, so as to render them null and void. Such action might afford sufficient ground for quashing the indictment, if the objection is timely and properly made. On a Certificate of Division in Opinion between the Judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Florida. |