The Warner weekly sun. (Warner, Brown Co., Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1885, 1883-12-07

saryice. ara always found among the iarors several
| who, although their names were placed IN tue Jury
box. aud they have responded 20 the summons
are in public employment anu therefore eAenp'.
In selecting talesmen the marshal may Suinthou .
man or men from among the byStanders IN court
persons passing along the public Streets or from
auY OF the stores, banks, counting GoEses' onSos;
hotels, or residences ia the city. - me hethSu
adopted for selecting and procuring a jury is prlmi,
tive, inefficient. and ceasgrshl4. the result stlaIheh
by that method cannot be su'nclenuy '"""e"''"
JURY FIXING.
II Is the suhiect Of nellef and common report
flint the business Of Jury tXlug fOurlsLeS 10 aD
alarming extent in the Di3irir'. 1t IS asserted that
men live, support their families, ana even become
rich in the placUcs Of this uCtarIous profession A
The jury SYStom now exists, mat uusSi"pNIous men
shnnld safely conduct I lucrative I,!s'a7@s Il! "s-
launching lures in The District should occasion nc
surprise. VITA but twentY-SIN jurors. SuSA ~
usually serve, AN active jury tiXsr wOuld become
ACQUAINTED with a. east two or three OF them III .
few hours, and that would give nm u S|''Es
II is Recommended, in the interest OF justice anu 's
a matter Of economy, that tho number OF Jurors
should DO increased 10 torty-elgAt, thlt the 'Iuio VI
service should be reduced TO Que mouth, t4at w"erl
A deficiency exists in the jury, thal deh'l'h'S
should be supplied from the box, and tlat an I'm
proved system of drawing, selecting ana ,u"'"'a'
ing juries should be adopted without ae.aH.
sECUEING JUSTICE FOR THE GOVERNMENT
Independent Of those crimes IN tue
District Of Columbia, which are for odeuseS AFFECT
lug the citizens Of the District alone, there are
others OF q pup iC character WHICH, arc asAlust tHo
whole people Of the United States. In avery case
where 4 government official has committed u crime
against the government he las been prosecuted
with determined vgor. When the crime has been
committed and tyed outside Of the District, justice
has been accorded the government; Out when the
crime has been ommjtle aud !rled within the
District, justice has too frequently oeeu uenleu tue
government. A person III the elnlloy OI tae gov
eminent who betlayS his public trust commits a
crime against the United States. When that CRIME
Is perpetrated wlthin the District. past expert
fence proves that he should be tried before 4
jury other than that engaged IN the trial Of
the loca, crimes COmmitLe in the District.
Laws have been passed by congress broad enough
10 make eyery fraud or attempted fraud upon the
government a crime TO be severely punished. The
one great difficulty now encountered IS the want OF
4 proper jury system with which 10 enforce these
laws. All plans to letTaUd the government, or TO
steal from the pubic treasury, no matter where
COnlriYed, are mostly C~CnSummated in Washington,
and when the guilty parties are arrested thPIr trial
must Of necessity take place before 4 Jury dia"n
in the District. The arrest OF one set or detGndantSS
brings to them the sympathy and active an OF all
others engaged ID similar schemes. II the deIead-
ants are wealthy, as IS cftcn the case, by a liberal
expenditure Of money they secure me acQullntahce
and friendship Of prominent men VINO are or a So
ciai disposition, AID whose open aud public asso-
citation and cUmpanioushjp with the defendants Is
not without it. helrtui effect. 1t is not easy To de-
teTmine what method 20 ad0Ut for the trial OF these
public cases, as any change will he objected to be-
cause it may Increase expenses. Change OF venue
and special or struck Jurles Rave been aaOO'rui
elsewhere, 10 secure protection from q IdlIure Oh
justice because Of the defects OF local jurtes, and
both methods, wherever existing, are commended.
1t is OF the utmost importance that either or both
methods should prevail in the District.
submit that the desired end might be obtained
by extending lin such form and under such limita-
tons as may be adVisable) the jurisdiction OF tue
United States circuit and district courts for the judi
Cial district OF Maryland, so as TO include ;ho cog
nizancs Of crimes committed in the District OF
Columbia By this The circuit and district courts
of that judicial district would have original lUris-
diCtion over all crimes committed ia the District OF
Columbia which are ofeuses against the general
laws Of the United States, and their jurisdiction
would Do concurrent With that Of the courts IN the
District Of Columbia. so that the prosecutions aud
trials could be proceeded with in either courts. The
advantages to be derived are, that where the trials
take place in the circuit or district court III Mary
land, the jury would be drawn in the manner now
prescribed by law, from the people OF the entire
State Of Maryland, aud the chances Of obtaining
an impartial jury would be greatly increased.