Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-02-09
OPPOSES JURY PLAN
District System Attacked by
Attorney in Police Court.
MOVES TO SET ASIDE TRIAL
Assistant United States Attorney
Declares Objection Is Frivolous.
Court Declines to Rule.
MOVES TO SET ASIDE TRIAL

The method of drawing juries in the
District of Columbia was vigorously at
tackled in the United States branch OF
the Police Court today when Attorney
John W. Patterson. coiored, who was APP
pearing for Richard Flynn, colored, on
charge of assaulting street car con-
ductor filed Il motion with Judge ,k1mbaii
whereby lie challenged the jury ana
moved that the court auash or set aside
the case.
He contended that certain sections Oh
tho District code were unconstitutional,
in that they delegate to the jury commas
sion. comnosed Of the United States mar
shall. clerk of the Supreme Court ana the
collector of taxes. but do not declare how
The names of persons intended to be put
in the jury box shall be placed In the
box, nor did they declare when or where
the names shall he placed III the jury
box.
1T was also declared that the sections
do not state who shall put the names Ill
the hoy 10 he drawn from. nor how many
additional names shall be put In the DON
after a given number of names snail
have been drawn therefrom
Declared to Be Invalid.
1t was further contended in the mo-
void. in that they are defective, vague,
indefinite and uncertain. One OF the
principal contentious of the motion was
that the sections of the code are drawn
with such extreme laxity and ambiguity
that they afford an extensive opportunity
for the discrimination In favor OF one
class of citizens as against anotner-
In his argument to the court. ATTORNEY
Patterson commended that the chief clerk
of the Supreme Court has no right to
designate any one to draw the names
from the jury box, and that he must DO
il himself, according to sections or the
District code He said the names are put
in such a way to enable parties to
place such names as are desirable IN the
box.
manner of drawing the juries was clear
ly demonstrated in the jury which had
been drawn to sit in the case ne was
about to defend, in that there was but
one colored man on the jury. lie stated
that in many of the grand juries, which
consist of twenty-tllree men, there is as
a rule but one colored man. He contend-
ed that the male population OF the DIS
trict consisted of one-third colored peo-
pie, representatives of whom could be
drawn to sit on jurleS.
He stated that it was only a case of
discrimination against the colored race.
but that if so desired, any person could
be Disseminated against by the present
method.
Assistant United States Attorney Given
told the court that the matter was
frivolous one. and tAat the motion filed
by Attorney Patterson was mot worth
the paper it was written upon
Judge Declines to Take Action.
Judge Kimball, held that the juries of
the Criminal Courts and Police Court are
drawn by the same methods and from the
same box, and that whether the drawing
of the juries should be done by the clerk
of the Supreme Court or not was not for
him to determine.
He cited that as there was no assist
ant of the Supreme Court clerk the draw
ing must be done by some one designated
by the chief clerk, such as a deputy
clerk. He commended that if the mean
ing of the motion was taken-that If the
clerk of the Supreme Court was unable
TO attend to his duties and not able to
draw the names-the entire courts of the
District might possibly be tied up until
he could do SO, and therefore he declined
to take action on the motion.