The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-10-11

particularlS-haVe changed that rule,
and it applies to all personal property,
except such as was excepted by the
statute, and this watch, as understand,
is not excepted. There. is a question,
however, that may be suggested by this
one as respects the qualification that he
should be taxpayer, and as respects
his having served on jury within two
years; there IS some room, l think, for
controversy here, which I simply call
attention to.
It would seem that this act of Con-
gress provided the method of the selec-
ton of jurors; it provided for the list
being made up by the Probate Judge
and the Clerk of the District Court.
CThe Judge read sec. 4 OF the Poland
Bill, providing the manner in which
Jurors are to be drawn, etc
The Territorial Statute says that not
withstanding they may answer the de-
scription of persons mentioned in the
United States law, still they are not
competent, and they must answer an
other qualification, which Is, that they
must be taxpayers. and that they must
not have. served on q jury within two
years. These are additional Qualifica-
tons to the ones mentioned in the
United States law. 1t occurred to me
ftS W 10 EAd4l1Al41ilS N14l0 5tetALNC @4A4
do not know whether there is any
decision on it or mott am confident
that the question has not been passed
upon; but it would seem to me that If
the Territorial Legislature can impose
other tests, they may cut down this 200
names very materially, so that there
would be very few left. They are limit
ed TO 200, and 1t Is found that they do
not last half the year.
The other objection made to this in
dictment is, that the evidence shows
that the juror Majors, and another
juror, had served on a jury in trial of
case within two years next preceding
the time they were selected by the Pro-
bate Judge and the clerk of this Court,
and infer within two years from the
time they served on a grand jury.
[The Judge read the law on this
point.l
Proceeding he said: "You will OBJ
serve that the language here is, that he
has served as a grand or petit juror
within two years next preceding the
time they were selected. 1t does not
state whether it is a juror that has
served for term, or whether his name
has simply been drawn as juror and
examined and found incompetent, or
whether he has actually served in the
trial of Il case. The description is
general, that he has served as grand
or petit juror within two years next
preceding the time of the selection.
Now, there are different classes of
| Jurors. One is what IS known in COM
mon parlance as the regular panel ];
another class Is termed talesmen, who
serve in one case. These jurors Majors
and the other) it seems had, within a
wear, or within two years ut least, their
names drawn out Of the jury box, and
| thew had served in one case. Section
of the act known as the Poland Bill
provides the method of selecting jurors.
Read part of the section.l Continuing
he said: There is nothing said as to
| whether the names Of these persons
shall be placed back IN the box or not
There seem to be reasons why they
should be placed back.
! One object, / presume, in providing
| this method is TO get rid of what Is
known in some places as professional
Jurors" and probably another reason
is, and particularly would it be = reason
here, where Jurors serve for the whole
term, both grandand petit, thatin alrthC
courts, as far as know, the petit juror:
serve for one or two weeks only; but
here l understand they serve for the
whole term. 1t is n great burden upon
man TO be required to serve, at the
fees fixed, during the whole term; anC
in stating that their names should no
be placed back in the box it refers t
those who have served during the term
One reason for this probably was t
equalize rthe burden upon eligible per
sons as near as possible. ii that IS so il
would be unequal law to say that those
who serve during the 'Yhol
term were placed upon tn,
same footing as those who's
names were simply drawn and did no
serve. The reasons for the one case 81
not hold good, and the statute here say
nothing about those who were draw
out to serve in one ease, whether thei
name should be placed back into tn,
box or not. It is true that If enough
were not drawn out at first, the Fegula
panel, / presume, could be filled up IN
? der this provision. But Congress scenes
to have had In view the fact that tn
Judge should order enough drawn on
to constitute the regular panel jury
and these were drawn out for speeia
duty. Nothing is said as to whethe
names should be placed back into tn,
box or not. ] am informed the D1stric
l anu 40 ~ LIZ ON@1C
districts have construed this law u
= mean the names drawn ont in the reg
uIar method, and not to those draw
daring the term for special servic
: for one case. If that is the proper con
, struction OF this law, then TO cor
strue this statute of the Territory o
Utah as applying to a juror whose nam
! is simply drawn ont to serve in one ease
to hold it to apply to that, would be K
! hold that the Legislature intended, not
/, withstanding the intention OF Congress
. that where q jurors name was draw
tout TO serve in one case, and his nam
was put back into the box, that he wa
. not q competent juror. ] am dispOsei
. to hold that the construction which ha
. been given to this section OF IN
!. Poland law is proper co truction
, ! that where they are drawn for specia
: duty to serve simply IN one cas-
: that their names may again b
. put back into the box and be draw
: to serve az regular jurors, notWith
standing they may have served in on
: case. That being SO, l am disposed {
: construe this statute of the Territor,
with reference TO the act OF Congress
and to hold that the intention of tn
: Territorial Legislature was to conform
; TO the act Of Congress. And in speakin
I; of grand and petit jurors, they intende
4 ] e. rrrar41 r1ra-