Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1874-12-31
NEEDED REFORM IN OUR JURY
SYSTEM.

SYSTEM.
Il is to be hoped that the Legislature
this Winter will amend the present
cumbersome and expensive Jury law
passed in 1873. 1t has been fairly tried
and with but very unsatisfactory re-
suits. inner the present law, every
eiector in the county, good, bad and
Indifferent, churchman and hoodlum.
saint and sinner, are subject to jury
duty. The names OF all are placedi in a
box, from which the Clerk and Judge
draw, alternately, the number required
to constitute a panel for each term.
Those drawn, after once serving. are
net subject to serve again until the
whole number in the box shall have
been exhausted. thereby forcing liti-
giants to accept as jurors all sorts Of
men, whether fitted for the service or
not. Each juror, for his attendance.
is allowed. out of the County Treasury.
three dollars per day and fifteen cents
per mile each way as travelling fees.
This amounts to but a tritla TO the
juryman. but in the aggregate reates
alarge Indebtedness against the coun-
ties.
1t certainly seems that this law was
passed with but little consideration.
Men entirely untitled are as liable to
be drawn as the best citizens in the
county. and an enormous expense is
entailed upon the people. Juries are
selected by lot, like prizes in a lottery.
with no attention whatever paid to
their qualifications. This should be
remedied. The law should provide
that the judges and some other officer
say the Chairman of the Board of
Commissioners-should select fromthe
assessment roll a sufficien: number of
persons, with some qualifications to be
provided. to serve at each term as
Jurors. BY this method liti-ants could,
with some degree of confidence, ex-
pect to cur a jury to try their
causes composed of men of worth and
character. The miserable farce of
keeping a jury locked up for weeks,
for fear some n might purchase
them, would be avoided and the Jury
system amount in practice TO what it is
in theory, viz: 1.-THE bulwarks of our
liberties" The mere selection of
jurors by chance from the motley crew
of electors in a county, is mor likely
to bring disgrace upon the time-hon-
ored system than to promote i'll any
manner the proper administration of
justice.
Another very Objectionable feature
OF the present law is, that it exemp;s
within certain limits, persons upon the
payment of the sum of twenty-five dol
lars. This is certainly a piece OF favorit-
ism which works unfairly toward those
unable to buy themselves off, aad is of
very doubtful constitutionality. The
change we have suggested would re-
move this objection.
In many cases involving, say $40. 900
or upward, and in i'm portant criminal
cases, provision should be made for
"struck" or special juries. This is
done by selecting some given number
of qualified persons, say forty-eight
to ninety-six, by the officers whose
duty it is, under the law, to make such
selection, and then submit the list 10
the parties to the action and allow them
to strike off alternately until twelve
remain, these twelve to be summoned
and sworn to try the cause. This, we
opine, would avoid, still further, the
difficulties surrounding the system
and enable litigant parties to come into
court with some degree of confidence
Of obtaining q verdict in accordance
with the law and evidence.
We make these suggestions in the
hope that the matter may be discussed
by the press, and that the attention OF
the Legislature will be directed to the
subject at an early period of its session.