The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-02-18

there Is that striking difference between the State and
United States courts. Now. would be very glad n
could DO nsce IN this bill 10 The jurors OF the Common
wealth OF Nassach usetts without enaging this sum 50
much ar To make Al unreasonable or ptopoTlonaiely
higher lhan die compensation allowed them ny The State
would be glad 10 put then upon proper footing IN ths
respect but IL strikes that three dollars loo large
pay Ii is about twice what we give 10 our Iurymen IN
The ate courts and 10 me too great IN proportion
TO what The State pays them
Mr. DAYTON. | wish To make single observation
know from my practice in these courts that individuals
are net olen summoned from remote parts oil the Con
monaealh TO serve as Jurors and venufe 20 say ,,a'
the experience OF majority OF The professional genie
men m tins chamber will tell them al once thai lhe gea
body OF Jurors who in these courts are summoned
from places contiguous 10 that IN when the court Is heiu
speak from experience IN my own secuon OF the eoun-
try and say there is difficulty because The pay OF Ju
rors in the United States greater Than mat
which we pay IN the State courts II = neanS houDe
proper to give Them some little per diem, and we ana so.
But this matter OF paying jurors is not question oil pay
il is not matter OF dollars and cents AS general
thing men have looked upon as rendition OF their du
ties citizens 10 the public and they get their femune
ration in the fact that when their interests are al stake
other citizens will render the same service
Now, with regard to grand Jurors, win us we pay
them nothing And permit me TO say, u you pay nom
ing in my olnon you get better and more Intelligent
class OF Jurors general thing But, without gong
into any explanation Of the subject that is matter OF ex'
perience and not, tor one, at all disposed 70 III,
crease the amount that is paid TO Jurors IN me courts OF
the United States That is all have 10 ray about It, II
seems 10 me that the amount in this bill is beyond
what is paid in most Of the States of the Union and |
know of no reason why distinction should be made ID
behalf of those who the federal against
those who serve the State government
! Several SENATORS. Question
| MIR HALE Mr. President, want to answer a ques-
ton that was put to by the senator from Georgia
The senator asked me hat we paid IN New Hampshire
10 iurymen' | will simply say that have seen my col,
league s'nGe that question was put ana ma tnat ihe
State Of New Hampshire pays a higher sum than Ills
bill proposes, poor as that State is ~
| Mr. GWIN | hope the amendment will pass, be-
cause from my experience am confident that It IS
not too large amount to pay juror, | was Tor many
wears marshal the State OF MISSISSIPPI and never on
any found Jurors who paid their expenses out OF
dollar and quarter day AT the close OF my con-
ne Xion with that office, il used 10 be point with the mar
shall select wealthy who were able TO pay the ex
penses of trip and the court used 10 ne them 5000 II
they did not attend They were always getting oil by
excuses account OF The expense or other causes and
we had to select the rich OF the country, and the
Judge in order enforce their attendance, imposed this
large fine upon them when they failed 10 appear.
Mr. HALE demanded the yeas and nays on the amend
ment; which ordered.
The question being taken by yeas and nays they stood
as follows
! YEAS-Messrs Badger Bradbury, Dodge of Iowa,
Downs, Gwn, Hale, Jones, Soue, aud Spiuance-9
NAYS-Messrs Baldwin, Befrlen, Chase, Clarke DAVIS
OF Massachusetts, Davis OF Mississippi, Dawson, Dayton,
Dickinson, Dodge Wisconsin, Fech Hamiln Houston
Kt. Morton, Norris, Seward, Smit, IuTney, Underwood
and Walker-H
No quorum having voted,
On motion, the Senate adjourned.