The Adams Papers Digital Edition is undergoing active maintenance while we work on improvements to the system. You may experience slow performance or the inability to access content. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. We will endeavor to return to full capabilities as soon as possible.
. Min. Bk. 85, SCJ
Ipswich, June 1770, N–5; Min. Bk. 93, SCJ
Salem, Nov. 1770, C–10. Withdrawal of a juror was a means of continuing, or terminating
short of judgment, an action in which a jury had been empaneled. It was generally
done with consent of all the parties, but, at least in later practice, might be done
on the motion of one party on grounds of surprise and the like. The practice also
might be allowed where the jury, upon deliberation, could not reach a verdict. See
Wood, Institute of the Laws of England
600; cases collected in annotation, 48 L.R.A.
432 (1900). The reason for its use here and the distinction between this practice
and the later continuance (note 8
below) are not known.