Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1849-07-31

as mach as any mao, but be thought that the gu.
siness could not be expedited oy inc auopuon -
the resolution. ana he moved 10 lay il on The Ia
bic, which was agreed 10. ~ tter
The Code was again taken up. No isr'hei
amendments were proposed. but several suggested
by members for future action.
On motion OF Mr.. KINNEY, the Senate al
jourued. r,ro.mr.
The House resu ned the consideration oil inc
4ih part of The Code, viz: Chapter log, "Oi !u'
ries generally" The question was upon MT.
PERRCW'S amendment, moved yesterday 20
Mr.. CONWAY'S amendment, the substance OF
both Of which are given in yesterdays report
MIR. ROBINSON indicated an amendment
which he should offer, requiring no properly
qualification of juror.
Mr.. CONWAY further enforced The proprley
Of his own amendment.
Mr.. WHITTLE suggested mooincation mat
a jpror must be "cili1en,' &c.
Mr.. PERROW read number OF sections
which he should offer as substitute Tor The bill
10 ensure good jury and fair trial. 1t pro,
vides that Juror must DE citizen, Over - anu
under Co years of age. and owning an estate OF
500.
MIR. HIETT hoped the property qualification
would be done away with entirely
Mr.. PERROW'S amendment was rejected.
Mr.. CONWAY accepted Mr.. WHITES
amendment.
Mr.. SMITH moved substitute, viz: requir-
ing Juror TO DO qualified 10 vote in the election
of members OF the General Assembly and 10 own
property, real or personal, 10 the value OF S9Uo'
Mr.. S. thought no man should be compelled 10
serve on ufies who has not The privileges OF
freeman.
MIR. ROBINSON would sustain MIR. SMITH ;
substitute, if the property qualification were lei'
out.
Mr. PANNILL protested against the proposed
property or money qualification, and ne should
thoroughly oppose this odious feature.
Mr. COOK moved the previous question, which
was sustained
MIR. SMITH agreed 10 strike out tho latter
part Of his substitute in regard TO The $500.
Mr. SMITHS substitute was lost.
MIR. DORMAN moved o substitute, requiring
q Juror to be citizen and over twenty one
years of age.
MIR WATSON said, as general rule when
man has not little properly there must De
some defec, in that man, and no should lie dis
qualified as juror. Juries, in three cases ou'
of five, are composed of loa(ers, who procure
themselves TO be put on iuries. He hoped thai
the House would not dispense with property
qualification, particularly in criminal cases.
Mr.. HlETT thought, under the provisions Of
the Code, the sheriff would not summon loafers
MIR. WATSON said, moreover it was mol
proper that poor men should be burlhened with
this labor.
Mr. IRVING thought there were provisions In
the Code guarding against tho evils Appreciated
by Mr.. WATSON.
MIR. THOMAS would prefer Mr.. CONWAY's
substitute, if il embraced discrimination be-
tween the juries in the Superior and County
Courts II was the law which had worked wei
for l0l years. He agreed with MIR WATSON
as 10 the propriety Of property qualification.
Mr.. SfRO fHER hoped Mr. CONWAY
would not agree to Mr.. THOMAS suggestion
Hs thought the discrimination, il there be any
| should be in favor Of the County Courts, where
from the less law learning in the tribunal, lure
are more calculated TO run wild.
Mr.. TONNES said our jury system is very
defective and is laughed at. Our |ures are nov
constituted Of worthless men and reckless scamps
10 whom you would scarcely entrust The trial d
dog. The trial by Jury, one Of The beasts o
the Bill of Rights, is daily trenched upon, espe
cial.y by the Code, which does away with The
Jury of twelve. Mr.. L. argued that jufies shoult
be made more respectable by excluding pauper
and men Of reckless character, and by inducing
The selection Of the honest yeomaDry OF TIT
| country. MIR. t., however, was not for higt
but moderate property qualification MIR. L
dwell upon The importance of having good CRANE
uties, the custodians of the peace and morals o
The public
Mr.. DORMAN replied TO Messrs. Thomas
and Townes-and argued, that uuder the plesen
law, property qualification was not practically
carried out. Mr.. u. protested agalnst The propo
sition TO require Juror to have more properly
Than member Of The Legislature. who makes "
| tue ancient trial by Jury.
Mr.. CLAIBORNE opposed Mr. Dorman's
substitute end was ia favor OF adhering TO IN,
property qualification. He was Tor placing lh
burIhen on those who can afJrd to bear it,
Destroy This propery-qualfcalio and lht
saerffs will lake up The drunken and worthless
individuals, hanging around The court houses, |,
constitute grand jures.
Mr.. COOK could mol sustain Mr.. Dorman'
substitute. He did no! think that any persor
should be placed on grand juries the guardian!
OF The public morals, unless he have an interes
ia the community. He suggested that Mr.. Dor
mans substitute be SO modified. SO as to require
grand jurors 10 BIZ ireeholders.
MIR. DORMAN then modified his substitute
so as TO require that petit juror in civil case!
must be citizen over 81 years OF age but a pc
iii Juror in criminal cases and grand juror must
In addition, be freebooter.
Mr.. MAYO showed the fallacy of requiring q
property qualification tor Jurors in civil suits
A man may in the morning have the necessary
$500 or Other sum, bull may lose it before he
comes INFO court. and be suddenly disqualified. =
h!r. M. sustained MIR. DoImau's substitute, a.
modified
MIR. GOODSON said the whole thing depended
on the court and sheriffs-and not on The l. sis
lalure here. In " ashington county drunken
juror was scarcely ever seen. Good Judges anc
good sheriff. will secure good Jurors.
Mr.. DORMAN said that he was informed
that The 5h part Of the Code provided for the
qualification 0; g;and jurors and Jurors in Grim
inal cases-and he would, therefore, strike out the
later portion Of his substitute.
Mr.. HART called the previous question,
which was suslaiued-and Mr.. PANNILL asked
The ayes and noes on Mr.. Dormans substitute
which was agreed 10: ayes 50 noes A.
MIR HARRISON OF L. said the choice was
now between Mr. DoRMAN's substitute, requiring
no properly qualification and the provision in the
Coce, reqnifing property qualification Of the
Value OF $500. MIR H. asked if The tribunal
should not command The confidence OF those
(mostiy property htdersj tor whom il was de.
signed Rand, il il does no, command such con-
fdence, they will abandon lhe jury and go be-
tore 'hs judge. Mr. II. ARGUED thai juries chosen
upon The principle OF Mr. Dormans substitute
could not COMMAND conLdsuce. He was opposed
10 giving ID The judge the power to select Jurors.
Il was very improper, also, that tie jury bnrthen
The cases often occupying several days-shou!d
be thrown on The poor, who cannot well b2ar it,
instead of on property holders, who can bear il.
Mr PARNiLL ieil bound, 10 duy 10 the peo.
pie, TO protest against The atiempt made 10 dis
quality The poor man, and 10 make them unfit 10
decide upon the rights of citizens. II il was
bur'hen, the poor man would cheerfnlIy bear it,
so as 10 De placed on an equally with his richer
neiehbors Mr. P. cited Dr. FIanklins illustra.
lion of The yo;er 9Th his jackass, as his property
qualidcalion-and WIN lost his vote by The death
OF his ass.
Mr. ROBINSON regarded This duty as a bur-
then, which should be taken from the poor man.
Mr. R. should sustain the section in the Code.