Mr. Adelbert Moot, of Buffalo, proposes Mr. John Lord O'Brien, of Buffalo.

Mr. Hiram C. Todd, of Saratoga Springs, proposes Mr. Wyman S. Bascom, of Fort Edward.

Mr. Charles F. Bostwick, of New York City, proposes Mr. J. Robert Rubin, of New York.

Senator Root, of New York, proposes Elihu Root, Jr., of New York.

Mr. Simon Fleischmann, of Buffalo, proposes Mr. Frederick M. Czaki, of New York.

Mr. Louis L. Waters, of Syracuse, proposes Mr. Henry A. Dickinson, of Cortland.

Mr. Robert J. Fish, of Oneida, proposes Mr. Edwin J. Brown, of Oneida, and Mr. James Moore, of Oneida.

Mr. James Emerson Carpenter, of New York, proposes Mr. Howard S. Harrington, of New York.

Mr. Frederick E. Wadhams, of Albany, proposes Mr. Roscoe R. Mitchell, of Buffalo.

I move that the applications be referred to the Committee on Admissions.

The President:

They will be so ordered. Now an opportunity for miscellaneous business.

Albert Hessberg, of Albany:

Mr. President, I have a communcation here from Calvin S. McChesney, of Troy, in relation to a Commissioner of Jurors.

The following is a copy of the communication as presented:

AN ARGUMENT AGAINST COMMISSIONERS OF

JURORS

In the Cumming and Gilbert Edition of Consolidated Laws of New York are eight different acts of the Legislature creating the office of Commissioner of Jurors for various counties. Fourteen different counties are named, but, as the language of the acts makes them fit a certain range of population, a change in population would change their application to counties. One statute, Laws 1899, chapter 441, after specifying certain counties to which it applies, provides that the Board of Supervisors of any county may establish the office of Commissioner thereunder. At least one general statute, Laws 1894, chapter 557, is not printed in the Cumming and Gilbert edition. As Rensselaer county has a Commissioner appointed under this act of 1894 there are at least fifteen counties having such an officer. The exact number could only be obtained by inquiry in each county, but the exact number is unimportant for the purposes of this article.

These acts creating the office of Commissioner of Jurors bear dates from 1894 to 1906, and, while some of them are founded on older acts, notably that of Kings county, the period named seems to have been that of the greatest activity in legislation of this character. They are alike in the essentials. The methods of appointment vary; in some the size of the list is to be fixed by Judges; the terms of office and salaries vary; in some counties he may have assistants and office room, in others not; in some the town officers are directed to give him assistance in making the list, in others they are not, and he is left to his own personal powers of selection. In one county his list is subject to review, and

any Judge of a Court of Record may, upon the application of any person who deems himself or another person qualified and the qualification is established, order the name or names added. This would be of greater importance if such men as litigants need in the trial of their causes had ever shown any eagerness to get on jury lists. But even in this act the language is, "The commissioner alone shall decide upon their qualification," etc.

In the main the acts are all alike. The Commissioner is an appointive officer and is given the sole power of selection and is the sole judge of the qualification of the jurors whose names he places on his lists. His powers are best summed up in the language of Laws 1899, chapter 441, entitled: "An act to create a commissioner of jurors in the sev"eral counties of this state," as follows: "Trial jurors 'must be selected by the commissioner of jurors who must "alone decide upon their qualifications and exemptions, except as otherwise expressly prescribed by law. But this "section does not impair the right to challenge a particular "juror at the trial," etc.

66

66

The Commissioner is given all possible power of selection and rejection of men who are to pass upon questions of property, of liberty and of life itself. He is the absolute monarch, a Czar who may pick and choose without question. If an absolute monarchy under an all powerful, all wise, absolutely just and wholly beneficent monarch be the best form of government then the Commissioner system is the best method of selecting jurors if only the Commissioner be likewise omniscient, omnipotent and altogether just. But can we hope for more under the present system of appointment of Commissioners than from the house of Romanoff?

The practical working of the system can be seen in the county of Rensselaer, which has a Commissioner appointed

pursuant to the provisions of chapter 557, Laws 1894. This act as amended by chapter 679, Laws 1896, provides that the grand and petit jurors " shall be selected by a person "to be designated by the County Judge, Surrogate and County Clerk of each such county who shall be known as "the commissioner of jurors."

66

Attention is respectfully called to the fact that the above quotation contains all that is said in the act about the selection of jurors. He is not directed thereby to any source of information nor is any officer or individual required to give him assistance.

There is a minimum of names for the list of grand jurors but no maximum or minimum for the list of petit jurors. He is to hear and pass upon claims for exemption, but is not even required to put on all persons qualified and not exempt. He alone has power to say what individuals of the available jurymen shall act as trial jurors in his county.

Rensselaer county has a population of 122,276, and of this number the two cities have, respectively, Troy 76,813, and Rensselaer 10,711. The remainder of the county having 34,752. All by the federal census of 1910.

The total list of petit jurors for the year 1911 filed by said Commissioner contained 4,531 names for the entire county, made up of 1,322 from the city of Troy, 255 from the city of Rensselaer, and 2,954 from the remainder of the county. The list as filed gives Troy .0172 per cent; Rensselaer .0238, and the remainder of the county .085 per cent of the population on the jury list. In other words, Troy, with over sixty-two per cent of the population of the county, has less than thirty per cent of the jury list. In fact, the number of Troy men actually drawn from this list to serve on the regular panels of the Rensselaer Supreme and County Courts for 1911 has varied from six to seven

teen, the actual average of Troy names in the nine regular panels of forty-eight each, drawn in 1911, being 11.66, a little less than one in four on each panel.

No long discussion is needed to show the unfairness and unjustness of this distribution of jurors. After all due allowance for extra exemptions be made it is inconceivable that any city of over 76,000 inhabitants should have less than 1,400 men fit for jury duty or that less than two per cent of its population is ready for such service, while the rural districts have over eight per cent. Whether the discrimination be intentional or not it is unjust to the municipality and unfair to its people to deprive them of the services of their own men as jurors in causes affecting their own rights.

In one of the towns of Rensselaer county having less than three thousand total population there arose in the fall of 1910 a sharp political contest within one of the great political parties for the position of town committeeman. Afterwards it was a matter of current gossip in the neighborhood that those who had opposed the winner would, in the vernacular, "Get theirs" when the jury list was made up. After the filing of the list for 1911, hereinbefore referred to, it was carefully examined, in connection with the assessment-rolls of the town, by people who knew personally the individuals, and who were as well qualified as any to select trial jurors from the assessment-rolls. This examination disclosed the fact that the names of at least fifty-nine men, citizens, voters and taxpayers in said town, and qualified to serve as jurors, had been omitted from said jury list. A large percentage of the men whose names were omitted were not only qualified to serve, but were of the particular type that a litigant would like to have on a jury, being