The Monmouth inquirer., 1926-04-15
FILLING THE JURY BOX
The Delays Commonly Prevailing In
x America Unknown In England,

< America Unknown In England,
The long delay in the selection OF
the jury in the second trial of Lee
O'Neil Brown in Chicago when
three weeks were consumed, In
the course of which 800 veniremen
were summoned by the court, serves
to call public attention again to the
need for more expeditions methods Of
selecting Juries in important cases.
1--WE have on another occasion re-
ferred to the Gilhooley and Shea
cases." says a writer in the Journal Of
Criminal Law and Criminology. 'In
the former nine and a half weeks
were required to complete the panel,
and in the latter thirteen and half
weeks. In the Gilhooley case 4,151
veniremen were summoned, nearly
100000 words being used in conduct
ing the examination of them. The
cost in fees to veniremen and jurors
amounted to more than $4,000 and
their hotel expenses aggregated $4,000
more.
an the first trial of Shea 9,425 ven
iremen were summoned, of whom
1921 were actually examined, the
cost in jury fees alone amounting to
more than $4,000. In San Francisco
niaety-one days were consumed
in the selection of jury to
try Patrick Calhoun on the charge Of
bribery, and in the Cooper case in
Tanneasee several weeks were SINH
larry consumed.
aside from the waste of time and
expense such delays tend to increase
the aversion to jury duty or the part
of professional and business men,
thus rendering the task of selection
more difficult. 1t is not to be wonder
ed at that man who is confronted
with the prospect of being kept away
from his home and business in a vir-
tual state of imprisonment for weeks
and possibly months before the trial
is really started should when asked
If he knows any reason why he cam
not render an impartial verdict re-
solve the doubt in favor of his own
comfort and liberty by protesting a
prejudice which really does not exist
in his mind.
.Tn our judgement It should be
necessary to ask yenireman only
two questions: first, whether he is
in any way related to the accused or
his victim, and second, whether he
knows OF any reason why he cannot
render verdict in accordance with
the evidence presented.
"The irrelevant. long drawn out in.
terrogatories often resorted to by
counsel are unnecessary and ought
not to be resrmitted. In the Gilhooley
case refen ed to above one juror was
Intercepted for an hour and three
quarters In regard to his past life, his
domestic, business and social relation
ships and many other matters which
were immateriaL
Another Juror was asked seventy
three questions by counsel for defencs
and almost as many by the prose-
cutting attorney. In the Iroquois
Theatre fire case Jurors were asked
whether they were opposed to dane
ing, whether they were fond of music,
whether they believed in theatre
going, whether they had any preju-
dices against city people, whether any
OF their families were ever hurt in a
fire, what newspapers they were ae-
customed to read and many other
questions of a similar character.
According to the English practice
tha requirement. of due process Of law
in the selection of jurors is fully salts.
fed by the two inquiries mentioned
above, and the protracted rambling
interrogatories which have come to be
a regular feature of nearly every JIM
portant trial in this country are not
permitted. The result is that rarely
more than an hour is ever consumed
by an English court in completing q
panel in the most difficult case.S