ceedings were a part of the proceedings of that court. See page 423. In People, ex rel. Hackley, v. Kelly, 21 How. Pr. 54, the supreme court of this department at general term held that the grand jury was an adjunct of the court as well as the petit jury. It was there insisted that the commitment was illegal because the contempt did not occur in the presence of the court, but in the grand jury room before the jury as an independent body. Leonard, J., answered this contention by saying that when summoned, sworn and organized the grand jury are a constituent part of the court for the performance of the functions and duties devolved upon the court, as much as a body of twelve petit jurors impanelled for the trial of a person charged with crime. When the witness has been brought before the grand jury to testify he is for the time in the custody or under the control of the court and the grand jury. He stands in the same relation to the court as a witness on the stand before the court and a petit jury.' See, also, Bergh's Case, 16 Abb. Pr. (N. S.) 266; People v. Briggs, 60 How. Pr. 21. * # * 8224. Grand jury defined. The grand jury must consist of not less than sixteen and not more than twenty-three persons, and the presence of at least sixteen is necessary for the transaction of any business. A common-law grand jury must contain not over twenty-three nor under twelve. 4 Bl. Com. 302. It is error to swear twenty-four persons as a grand jury. People v. King, 2 Caines, 98. A conviction will not be reversed because the indictment purports to have been found by twenty-four grand jurors, if the objections were not taken in court below. Conkey v. People, 1 Abb. Dec. 418; 5 Park. 31. § 225. For what courts to be drawn; the order.- A grand jury must be drawn for every term of the following courts: 1. The court of oyer and terminer, except in the city and county of New York, and the county of Kings, and except for extraordinary or adjourned terms; 2. The court of general sessions of the city and county of New York and the court of sessions of the county of Kings; and 3. The city courts whenever an indictment can be there found. See People v. Rugg, 98 N. Y. 545; 3 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 176. 226. For what courts to be drawn; the order. A grand jury may also be drawn. 1. For every other court of sessions, when specially ordered by the court or by the board of supervisors; 2. For the court of oyer and terminer in the city and county of New York, upon the order of a judge of the supreme court, elected in the first judicial district; 3. For the court of oyer and terminer of the county of Kings, upon the order of a judge of the supreme court elected in the second judicial district. See People v. Rugg, 98 N. Y. 545; 3 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 172. $227. For what courts to be drawn; the order. — If made by the court or a judge thereof, the order for a grand jury must be entered upon its minutes, and a copy thereof filed with the county clerk at least twenty days before the term for which the jury is ordered. If made by the board of supervisors a copy thereof, certified by the clerk of the board, must be filed with the county clerk, at least twenty days before the term; and when so filed, is conclusive evidence of the authority for drawing the jury. See People v. Rugg, 98 N. Y. 545; 3 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 176. § 228. Misdescription in order. A misdescription of the title of the court in an order for a grand jury does not affect the validity of the order, if it can be plainly understood therefrom what court is intended. $229. Mode of selecting grand jurors. - The mode of selecting grand jurors is prescribed by special statutes. See 2 Birdseye's Statutes, 1268: Code Civil Proc., § 1041. § 230. If sixteen grand jurors do not appear, additional number to be ordered. If at any court of oyer and terminer or court of sessions, except in the counties of Genesee, Orleans, and St. Lawrence, there shall not appear at least sixteen persons, duly qualified to serve as grand jurors, who have been summoned, or if the number of grand jurors attending shall be reduced below sixteen, such court must, by order to be entered in its minutes, require the clerk of the county to draw, and the sheriff to summon, such additional number of grand jurors as shall be necessary, and must specify the number required in the order. § 231. Manner of designating the additional grand jurors. The clerk of the county must forthwith bring into the court the box containing the names of the grand jurors, from which grand jurors in the county are required to be drawn ; and he must, in the presence of the court, proceed publicly to draw the number of grand jurors specified in the order; and when such drawing is completed, he must make two lists of the persons 30 drawn, each of which must be certified by him to be a correct list of the names of the persons so drawn by him, one of which he must file in his office, and the other he must deliver to the sheriff. § 232. Manner of designating the additional grand jurors. The sheriff must accordingly, ir. the manner required in respect to the grand jurors originally drawn, forthwith summon the persons whose names are drawn or designated in the list, provided in section two hundred and thirty-one, to appear in the court requiring their attendance at the time designated, and they must attend and serve as if they had been originally summoned as grand jurors, and subject to the same penalties, unless excused or discharged by the court. $233. Manner of designating the additional grand jurors. In the counties of Genesee, Orleans and St. Lawrence, the names of the persons required to complete the grand jury may in the discretion of the court, be drawn as provided in the last section, or may be publicly designated by the court, from the bystanders or the body of the county. § 234. Summoning the additional grand jurors, and compelling their attendance. The sheriff must accordingly, in the manner required in respect to the grand jurors originally drawn, forthwith summon the persons whose names are drawn or designated, as provided in the last two sections, who must attend and serve as if they had been originally summoned as grand jurors, and are subject to the same penalties, unless excused or discharged by the court. 235. When new grand jury may be summoned for the same court. If a crime be committed during the sitting of the court, after the discharge of the grand jury, the court may, in its discretion, direct an order to be entered, that the sheriff summon another grand jury; and the same shall be summoned, in the manner prescribed for grand juries in general. See Allen v. People, 57 Barb. 338. § 236. Grand jury, how drawn when more than a sufficient number attends. When more than twenty-three persons summoned as grand jurors attend for service, the clerk must prepare separate ballots containing their names, folded as nearly alike as possible, and so that the names cannot be seen, and must deposit them in a box. He must then openly draw out of the box twenty-three ballots; and the persons whose names are drawn constitute the grand jury. The names remaining in the box, as well as those drawn, must be returned to the box of drawn grand jurors. $237. Who may challenge an individual grand juror.— The district attorney in behalf of the people and also a person held to answer a charge for a crime may challenge an individual grand juror. [Amended 1892, ch. 279; in effect Sept. 1, 1892. See 2 Hawk P. C., ch. 25, § 16; 1 Bish. Crim. Proc., § 876. § 238. Causes of discharge of the panel. There is no challenge allowed to the panel or to the array of the grand jury, but the court may, in its discretion, at any time discharge the panel and order another to be summoned, for one or more of the following causes: 1. That the requisite number of ballots was not drawn from the grand jury box of the county; 2. That notice of the drawing of the grand jury was not given; 3. That the drawing was not had, in the presence of the officers designated by law; and 4. That the drawing was not had, at least fourteen days before the court. See People v. Hooghkerk, 96 N. Y. 158; People v. Fitzpatrick, 30 Hun, 493; 66 How. Pr. 14; 1 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 433; People v. Petrea, 30 Hun, 102, 103; 92 N. Y. 128: Carpenter v. People, 64 id. 483; People v. Jewett, 3 Wend. 214; People v. Harriott, 3 Park. 112; Dolan v. People, 64 N. Y. 485; People v. Duff, 65 How. Pr. 374, 375; U. S. v. Tallman, 10 Blatchf. 31. 239. Causes of challenge to an individual grand juror. A challenge to an individual grand juror may be interposed for one or more of the following causes, and for these only: 1. That he is a minor; 2. That he is an alien; 3. That he is insane; 4. That he is the prosecutor upon a charge against the defendant; 5. That he is a witness for either party, if the court is satisfied in the exercise of a sound discretion that he cannot act impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party challenging. [Amended 1892, ch. 279; in effect Sept. 1, 1892. 6. That a state of mind exists on his part, in reference to the case or to either party, which satisfies the court, in the exercise of sound discretion, that he cannot act impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party challenging. See Abbott's Crim. Brief, § 94; 4 Crim. Law Mag. 174; People v. Hooghkerk, 96 N. Y. 158. Not essential that a grand juror shall be a freeholder. Dolan v. People, 64 N. Y. 485; People v. Jewett, 6 Wend. 386. But see State v. Hamlin, 47 Conn. 95; 36 Am. Rep. 54. The following is taken from 23 Alb. L. J. 324: The question whether the personal incompetency of a grand juror can be taken advantage of after indictment found is much mooted. In the affirmative are Alabama, Virginia, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, North Carolina, New Jersey, Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas, Nebraska and Rhode Island. In the negative, Massachusetts, New York, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Minnesota. But it is almost universally held that the objection must be raised before general issue, either on motion to quash, or by plea in abateState v. Easter, 30 Ohio St. 542; 27 Am. Rep. 478; Whart. Cr. Pl., § 350, etc. Thus, in State v. Easter, supra, it was held not a good plea to an indictment for murder, that one of the grand jury which found the indictment was a nephew of the murdered man. This case contains a learned review of the authorities, but does not decide the question whether the objection would be good after indictment and before general issue. ment. In Wallace v. State, 2 Lea, 29, among recent cases, it was held that objections to the manner of selection and appointment of a grand jury can only be taken by plea in abatement. And in Reich v. State, 55 Ga. 73; 21 Am. Rep. 265, it was held that it is a good plea in abatement that one of the grand jurors was an alien; and so that the venire summoning the grand jury was not sealed. State v. Flemming, 66 Me. 142; 22 Am. Rep. 552. The most recent reported decision on this point is State v. Davis, 12 R. I. 492, holding that an objection to a grand juror for want of the statutory qualifications may be raised by plea of abatement. The court in this well-considered case observe: " The attorney-general contends that the objection comes too late after the jury has been impanelled and sworn. He cites cases which hold that such is the rule: Com v. Smith, 9 Mass. 107, 110; Com. v. Gee, 6 Cush. 174; People v. Jewett, 3 Wend. 314, 321; at least if the accused has previously been held to answer. People v. Beatty, 14 Cal. 566. Other cases hold that the objection may be taken by plea in abatement. State v. Rockafellow, 6 N. J. Law, 332; Com. v. Cherry, 2 Va. Cas. 20; Stanley v. State, 16 Tex. 557; State v. Middleton, 5 Port. 484; Barney v. State, 12 S. & Marsh. 68; State v. Duncan, 6 Yerg. 271, Doyle v. State, 17 Ohio, 222: Huling v. State, id. 583; Kitrol v. State, 9 Fla. 9. We think these latter cases rest on the |