Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-06-24

~ IL not QouoteQ by some OF the members OF
the bar that such jury would be legal one.
That such jury in some instances be most
excellent one is clearly obvious, and would I'M
doubtsdly meet the approval Of those who be-
lieve women fully competent TO perform such
public duties.
PRocHEDINoe GOVERNED BY THE COMMON LAW.
Before the law Of 1881 the coroner's Jury in
the District was composed Of twelve members,
which number is generally admitted to be the
common law Jury. The common law also
governs the procedure Of the coroner and his
jury, except, Of course where otherwise gov
erned by statutory enactment. when six Of
6O) "they shall be sworn and the coroner shall
proceed with the inquest" This is said to be
the English law Of today, and 1t is generally be-
lieved that this fact induced Congress in 1881
to do away with the common law Jury of twelve
| and provide instead jury Of six members.
An act OF Congress approved July z 1888,
made an appropriation for the pay Of the cor
oner Of the District, although 1t is not doubted
that the Office existed from the very organiza-
tion OF the District BY an act Of the legisla-
tive assembly Of the District Of August 81, 1871,
the Office Of coroner for the District was Gre
ated, and two days later the assembly provided
for the appointment of that officer, placing his
appointment in the hands Of the governor By
natural descent the appointment Of the coroner
OF tho District became vested in the Com
missioners Of the District He now re-
ceives an annual salary OF $4,000,
pointing power. While it cannot be doubted
for an instant that Chief Justice Bingham. in
the matter Of the application of Col. Ainsworth
few days ago, rightfully decided that there
was no such officer here as deputy coroner.
still there is sdch an officer the assistant to
the coroner" In the District deficiency act Of
March 8. 1898, is found this paragraph: ITO
enable the coroner Of the District Of Columbia
TO employ an assistant for the coming year and
through the next fiscal year, &600." The
sentence is rather ambiguous one, but is un-
derstood to mean the employment Of an as
ing June so, 1894. 1t will be observed that the
duties Of the assistant to the coroner are not
defined in the act. although the appropriation
was presumably intended for the compensation
Of the deputy coroner. Now that such an off,
Ger does not exist, the question naturally arises
can the appropriation be used at all?
UNANIMOUS VERDICT.
Another question which arose here in con-
nection with the inquest over the victims of
the Ford's Theater building disaster was, Does
the law here require q unanimous
jury? The question was asked by q
STAR reporter of a number of the prominent
members of the District bar. and the replies
received were about evenly divided between an
unanimous and a majority VOTE In the fourth
American and English Encyclopedia of Law.
under the heading Of Coroner" it is stated
that ''the verdict shall be signed by the jury
and coroner" In support Of this statement
both English and American authorities are
quoted. Such is conceded to be the law here
by those who have investigated the authorities
upon the subject, and hence it is concluded that
in the District an unanimous vote lis required.
1t is also not doubted that upon failure to
agree a new inquest would be both legal and
necessary.