One may be compelled to answer questions before a grand jury though there be no specific charge pending ; Wilson v. U. S., 221 U. S. 361, 31 Sup. Ct. 538, 55 L. Ed. 771, Ann. Cas. 1912D, 55g.
In Massachusetts it is not necessary to show that those affirming had conscientious scruples about taking the oath ; Com. v. Fisher, 7 Gray (Mass.) 492 ; Cora. v. Smith, 9 Mass. 107 ; but In New Jer sey it was originally held that it would be necessary to show this or the indictment would be invalid ; State v. Rockafellow, 6 N. J. L. 332 ; but since then by the N. J. Crim. Code § 63, it is provided that ob jection to the Indictment for form or substance shall be by demurrer or motion to quash before the jury are sworn in and not after, and an objection to af firmance not made as so provided will not avail.
On being sworn or affirmed, and having received the charge of the court, the grand jury are organized, and may proceed to transact the business which may be laid be fore them ; 2 Burr. 1088 ; Bacon, Abr, Juries, A. See Pierce v. State, 12 Tex. 210. The grand jury constitute a regular body until discharged by the court, • or by operation of law, as where they cannot continue, by virtue of an act of assembly, beyond a certain day. But although they have been formally dis charged by the court, if they have not sepa rated, they may be called back and fresh bills be submitted to them; 9 C. & P. 43. W hen properly organized, in some states, it meets and adjourns upon its own motion, and it may lawfully proceed in the perform ance of its duties whether the court is in session or ,not, until the final adjournment of the court ; Nealon v. People, 39 Ill. App. 481. In other states it is always discharged from time to time by the court, to which it reports at each session. The grand juries in the federal courts usually meet and adjourn on their own motion.
A charge to the grand jury delivered by Mr. Jus tice Field in the district of California is reported In 2 Sawy. 667, Fed. Cas. No. 18,255. The duties and functions of the grand jury are admirably stated and particularly the difference between those of grand jurors of the state courts and of the national courts ; those of the state courts having very great inquisitorial powers conferred upon them by stat ute; those of the United States courts having no general authority of an inquisitorial character.
The absence of such a power in the federal stat utes is attributed to the fact that the examination of books and accounts of the officers of the federal government is provided for by law or by executive regulation, and when upon such examination, an unsatisfactory condition is found the matter is brought before the grand jury by the proper au thority.
Justice Field considers that the phrase in the oath discriminating subjects of inquiry which shall "oth erwise come to your knowledge touching the present service" authorizes them to act upon their own knowledge or observations or evidence before them but not upon mere rumor or reports.
The jurisdiction of the grand jury is co extensive with that of the court for which they inquire, both as to the offences triable there and the territory over which such court has jurisdiction.
The mode of doing business. The fore man acts as president, and the jury usually appoint one of their number to perform the duties of secretary. No records are to• be kept of the acts of the grand jury, except for their own use, because their proceedings are to be secret. Bills of indictment against of fenders are then supplied by the attorney general, or other officer representing gov ernment. See Shattuck v. State, 11 Ind. 473 ; U. S. v. Reed, 2 Blatchf. 435, Fed. Cas. No. 16,134. On these bills are indorsed the names of the witnesses by whose testimony they are supported. The jury are also re quired to make true presentment of all such matters as have otherwise come to their knowledge. These presentments, which are technically so called, are, in practice, usually made at the close of the session of the grand jury, and include offences of which they had personal knowledge : they should name the authors of the offences, with a view to in dictment. The witnesses in support of a bill are to be examined in all cases under oath, even when members of the jury itself tes tify,—as they may do.