The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1886-02-26

Sdlu III LIS AHcoSdBe, OF perhaps AC
never read the document after receiving
it from the hands of its author.
But it Murray is not inconsistent he
is nUthirg. Following the above
fiat declaration that the Assembly can
not legislate on the subject, His Excel
lency, IN the very next sentence, says
that Amy Territorial legislation should
be in aid of the purpose of Congress to
bring into the jury room competent
jurors" Did anyone ever before wit
ness such fioundering in an official
paper? Besides his almost idiotic
changing of base, he bungles- and
plumbers in other directions, making
positively ridiculous spectacle of him
self. The purpose of Congress" is
presumed to be expressed in its
laws. The Poland law expressed
the purpose of Congress in the
matter of selecting jurors for
the District Courts of Utah; those jur
ors were to be selected, one-half by
probate judges, and oEe-haif by the
clerks of the courts. and the jurors so
selected we're to try all cases, civil and
criminal, in the District Courts. The
purpose of Congress here expressed
was not that the jurors for one term
should be selected as prescribed. and
the jurors for all other terms picked III
from the streets by preludiced Marsha
who would guarantee them to convict
or acquir as he preferred, before they
were put into the box. The bill which
Murray first vetoed was in direct aid of
the purpose of Congress as expressed in
the Congressional law, and the bill
killed on Tuesday was also in direct aid
of the purpose of Congress save in the
matter of exceptions which were put in
to satisfy the Governor. The purpose
OF Congress" was that the fve-sixths
majority class of the communit, should
have one-half the jurors, and the one
sixth minority class one-half.
Murray is not content to veto the bill
before him, but steps out of his way to
attack the law of Congress, which he
denounces as being faulty, be-
cause it permits the fve-sixths majority
of the community any representation on
juries. 1t would be like the fellow. when
filed with exalted ideas of his own
greatness-and with something else
equally eleYadnR-to veto the Con-
gressional law which has been in opera
ton twelve years.
Is Murray an autocratic ass, or q
idiot? In his veto message
to the first jury bill, he raised objection
to the supplemental jurors" sitting in |
trials for bigamy and unlawful cohab-
itation. The Legislature overcame his
objection by excepting those cases, and |
now His E1cellency presents as one
eason for rejecting the new bill the
fact that it does net exclude the jurors
from trying cases of perjury, attempt
at bribery, assaults upon officers, and
conspiracies against citizens, jurymen
and officials" We respectfully suggest
to His Rxc.llency that these are not all
the offenses named in the catalogue of
crime. He should have named all or
none, from the trial of which honest,
air jurors are to be prohibited.
We arc glad the bill has been
killed. The measure presented con-
fusion which the people of Utah do not
want to make. 1t could have served no
good purpose except in rare instances,
and would have proven expensive and
LIE. as have a law of
which we can be proud, and which does
not show on its face humiliating sur
render or a bargain, or let US have none.
We believe Congress will readily pass
the first jury bill vetoed By Murray, or
amend the present law so as to make
the number of persons selected for jury
service during the year, 600 or 300, in
stead of 200. The appeal should be
made to the national legislature, and
nc think the argument that would con-
vince acknowledgements of the neces
'ityof the amendmentisc contained in the
Governors veto message. At any rate,
that message should find its way to
Washington as specimen of Executive
and argument in Utah.