Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-03-10

nth carpenters, not anywhere near In
line with plumbers. merely in line
With ordinary skilled workmen. Now
that Is what this does. Five dollars
q day - only fair proposition And
1t Is just as important to my MIND
to regulate the pay OF the jurors 80
that you win attract he best men IN
your community to serve on the pan
ell as it is to attract the best lawyers
to hold the court. / believe one Is
lust as important as the other, and
/ hope this amendment viii be adopt
ed.
Mr.: GILLIN of Penobscot: Mr..
President and honorable members Of
the Senate. simply wish to say that
I thoroughly endorse every word that
the learned senator from PiscataQuis
has said, I hope and trust that the
members Of this Senate win adopt
that amendment.
/ believe that attorneys who are
continuously practising in the courts
of the State and see the labors that
jurors go through. and know the ex-
penditures in our cities while living
away from their business, that five
dollars a day is not sufficient for such
men as we are getting.
/ need not say, gentlemen of this
Senate. that time and time and time
again jurors stop out all night long
on civil and criminal cases.
hope and trust that the Senate
may adopt the amendment as pre-
scented.
Mr.. COBB of Kennebec: Mr.. Presi-
dent, 1t is not often that agree with
SO many distinguished gentlemen. I
have always respected lawyers, but
it seems to me / have never agreed
with SO many lawyers as / have dur.
ing this session.
1t seems to me there lie one point
that has not been brought out here.
Go not wish to go on record as being
extravagant; / am conservative, but
IL want a man to have all he de-
serves. l believe that these men,
these jurymen. most of them are sure
ly worth five dollars. Someone has
said here today that juryrnen do not
have very arduous duty to perform.
l never had the honor to be on a.
jury, but have had experience in
being up all night many times, and /
have heard of jurymen who had to
stay up all night, and I think they
earned their three or five or more
dollars.
The one point I wish to bring out
mere Is this, in regard to the work.
You take man from the various
walks of life. away from his business,
1t may be week or more many times
more. and that takes him away and
breaks up his business whatever It il.
1t is worth good deal more than Ave
dollars day, and l say for that rea-
son, besides the fact of what 1t is
really worth, that he should have that
pay.
have been told by our distinguish
ed men from our distinguished pro-
fession that they have talked before
jurymen and there were some men
on the panel, no matter what they
said, and no matter how much truth
there was in their argument you
could not make any impression on
some jurors. Perhaps five dollars a
day will exclude some of the men
that the lawyers cannot impress and
will give us men these lawyers can
make an impression upon. It seems
to me that when we go into our
courts we want some men there who
are willing to get at the truth and
abide by the truth, and go to their
juryroom and give a man a fair deal.
1 say for one that five dollars a
day is none too much.
Mr.. BEMIS Of Somerset: Mr.. Pres
ident, it may seem out of place in me,
as a farmer and one who has served
on the jury several times. to oppose
this increase to five dollars. Now
believe, gentlemen, that four dollars Is
a reasonable price. and as one who
has served on the board of the select
men in my town. we have never found
any serious trouble in getting the
very best men from my locality to
serve as jurors at three dollars per
day.
believe that this increase to four
dollars per day viii satisfy the men
who are to serve on juries hereafter,
and it seems to me at this time a
reasonable and fair increase in the
pay of jurors.
Mr.. THOMBS: Mr.. President, at
the risk Of being ruled out Of order
again, I now desipe to conclude the
remarks which I have addressed to
the Senate this morning. And first.
in taking up the discussion where 7
laid it down, I desire to say that the
Committee on Legal Affairs reported
this matter back to the LEGISLATURE
believing that upon it this Legislature
might determine what its policy
would be during this session with
respect to a general advance of sal
aries. Now, gentlemen, that was the
principal reason in reporting it back
in the manner in which il came. The
Legal Affairs Committee would not
have been offended, and are not OF
course at any action that these two
bodies may take upon the report.
Now more directly in reply to fine
argument advanced on the amend
ment, Mr.. President. I desire to cali
your attention, gentlemen Of the Sen
ate, to the manner in which we select
jurymen. Any gentleman in this Sem
ate who has had experience, similar
as the gentleman who has
Just preceded me has had, knows that
the jury list in the towns ia made mn
by the selectmen. ! think the select
men in making up the j,,rv LIST
knowing well the men in their own