St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-01-26

tainted and who might come into court
under it and secure yerdicts fixing their
standard Of virtue. AS the bill now
stands it would foment Quarrels
and The judiciary recommends that it
do not pass.
Representative Hompe-I am not
lawyer and did not draw this
bill. A request by gentleman
in a certain town in my county
led me to introduce it. Attor-
ney General Ciapp drew the bill up. lt
is necessary with certain class OF peo-
pie in this world to attack the character
of every woman, and it was to protect
her that this bill was drawn. 1t is bill
to protect our wives and not the prostl-
tutes of this country from base column
MES. [ ask for further consideration
of the bill.
Representative Morgan should be
unwilling to vote for any measure as
for bill Which will punish the Scoun-
drel who stands in public places and as
sails the character OF pure women with
his foul tongue.
Representative Fleming-The object
of the bill is meritorious. 1t needs re-
vision. though, before it can become a
law. | recommend that the bill pass
back to its friends for amendment.
Representative HOmpe-It rarely oc-
ours that bill on its first introduction
is not open to amendment. l would
move that the bill be recommitted to
the judiciary committee for amend
ment.
Representative keys-I would read
the law of 1881 on this point, which di-
rectly reaches the main point of this
bill. My experience with parties who
came into court under this law of 1881,
is that one is as bad as the another. L
think the bill should not pass.
Representative Stevens would IA
vor the return to the judiciary commit
tee of this bill.
Representative Haven - The bill
seems to me a fruitful source for black
mail.
for amendment and change.
In calling up HI. F. los, Representa-
tive I'll. T. Stevens stated that its pur-
pose was to provide that III civil cases,
where three-fourthS of jury were of
one opinion as to the verdict, that
opinion should prevail as against the
present rule neceSsitating the entire
twelve to agree. The bill is an amend
ment to section 4, article /, of the con-
stitution. MIR. Stevens argument for
its passage is covered by the following
extract from all article entitled 1.-The
American Jury System" in the Ameri-
can Law Review of November
Der, 1888.
'lt is objected that juries hang. The
fact is admitted. But that IS not the
fault Of jurors, but of the unit rule,
which requires twelve men to think eX-
actly alike about issues of fact depend
ing OH doubtful and conflicting evil
dence, and fairly open to controversy
and diversity OF opinion. This
rule had its origin i'll the dark ages,
and is one of the common law relics Of
barbariSm and superstition which still
survive. 1t has no sanction in the eX-
perience or practice of other nations. In
Greece and Rome, and in all the other
ancient nations that had ii jury, or a
body which represented jury, the
agreement of a majority was sufficient.
Mr. Hallam, in his work on the Middle
Ages, while commenting trial by jury,
declares that the requirement of I'M
annuity is "a prosperous relic OF bar
barism.' q The principle of call
ing on a given number OF citizens to
hear evidence and settle controversies
between their neighbors, accord
ing to the right of the mat
ter, is so rational and natural
that no credit can be claimed for any
nation or people for practicing it. But
the rule that the twelve citizens called
on to discharge that duty should be i'm
priSOned without meat or drink, fire or
candIe,n until they unanimously agreed
on verdict, could have originated only
in a government where despotism and
superstition held supreme sway. +" x
Our government is founded on
the rule of the Majority
The bill was made the special order
for next Thursday at noon.
The Davis &C.. r. bill to raise the fees
of jurors in justice courts from 80 cents
to 81 was criticised by Representative
Fleming as follows;
ut is plain to be seen that the gentle
man desires the passage of this bill
solely to prevent the trial of cases i'll
justice courts before jury; to compel
litigants to appear before the justice
alone"
Nevertheless it was recommended to
pass.
As the hour for adjournment drew
nigh Representative Crosstield intro
duced resolution making Mr.. Adams
comparing clerk of the enrolling COM
mittee.
Representative Faricy-I move to adj
journ.
Representative Crossfield-If the gen
tleman will Withdraw that motion
for
Speaker-Will the gentleman from
Scott
Representative Faricy-I insist upon
my motion.
Speaker-The house stands adjourned.
Representative Crossiield (sotto voce}
1t was mean in him to insist upon that
motion. He may want something him.
self some time.
SPECIAL. ORDERS MADE.
The following bill from the Judiciary
committee Substitute for House File
No. so will be the special order Wednes-
day at noon:
An Act to Amend Subdivision of Section 6
of Chapter 62 of the General Statutes of
1878 Relating to Divorce.
That subdivision 5 OF section Of chapter
So of the General Statutes of 1878 is
hereby amended so as TO read as follows:
Willful desertion Of one party by the other
for the period of two years next preceding
the fling of the complaint.
The Willrich bill blouse File No. 1000,
allowing persons charged with
criminal offense to plead guilty before
district Judge, and without the action of
the grand Jury, will be the special order
Friday at noon. Judge McCluer drew
the bill, and Attorney General Clapp
regards it as unconstitutional.