PROCEEDINGS.

sirable to take the excursion at all today. I am of the opinion that we had not better go at 1 o'clock as we had arranged. The boat is chartered, we can do with it as we please, and the refreshments have been provided. I suggest, however, that we remain at the hotel for lunch, and that we start on the excursion at Randolph street about 2:30. But before deciding on the hour, I think it is desirable to know how many present are desirous of going on the boat at all, and I ask for an expression of sentiment.

MR. PAYNE: In order to test the question I move that we abandon the excursion altogether. Unless we have special arrangements we will have some trouble on the lake.

MR. CREWS: Mr. Chairman, I second Judge Payne's motion. Being familiar with the lake; knowing that this assembly is an important one, and that good men are scarce enough already, and knowing also that members of the bar are not particularly fond of water in this shape, I second the motion. [Laughter.]

MR. BRADWELL: I am an old salt, and I don't fear those waves: but out of a kind regard for the ladies and the gentlemen who are not used to the water, I cheerfully third Judge Payne's motion. [Laughter.]

MR. GARY: I don't think any motion is necessary. It is simply desired to ascertain what those present may wish to do. The boat is at the service of the Association. If a considerable number desire to go on the lake, they can go; if they do not wish to go they need not go.

A vote was taken on Mr. Payne's motion and it was lost. MR. GARY: I would suggest that those who wish to go on the lake excursion stand up.

Thereupon twenty-six stood up.

MR. GARY: The boat will leave Randolph street at 2:30 P. M.

PRESIDENT HAMLINE: The next order of exercises is the report of the Committee on Grievances, by E. P. Williams, chairman.

PROCEEDINGS.

MR. WILLIAMS: The Committee on Grievances is not prepared to make a report; and on behalf of the committee, I wish to say that during the last two years no complaint has been presented to us. Outside we hear suggestions, but no complaints reach the committee. It remains with the members of this Association to make such complaints, if there be need of any. The experience of this Association in the last twenty years would indicate that this committee should be abolished. It is said our Supreme Court takes to task even members of this Association-saying even that they are guilty of unprofessional conduct-but no person, no member of this Association, no member of the bar outside of it, makes complaint in writing to this committee. That is why this committee is not prepared to make any report.

PRESIDENT HAMLINE: You have heard the report of the Chairman of this committee. No action is required. The next order of exercises is the general discussion of the subject, "Courts of Appeal and Legislation in Respect thereto." Before we enter upon the discussion of that subject, I will say that Mr. Robert E. Jenkins is here and he has kindly prepared an address on the jury system. He was to have delivered it last night, but the discussion continued to so late an hour that we were unable to receive the benefit of it. We will now hear from Mr. Jenkins, and then proceed with the discussion of the subject which comes next on the programme.

MR. JENKINS: Mr. President, under existing statutes and methods of selection, the character of juries in Cook county will reflect in large measure the character of the County Board then serving. An honest and efficient board, will mean honest and efficient grand jurors, and fairly good petit jurors. The County Board is authorized to select the grand jury whenever one is required. There are no limitations imposed as to methods of selection--this is a matter of discretion with the board. The system which has prevailed in Cook county, from a time when the memory of man runneth not to the contrary, has been for each member of the board to put two names on separate cards, into a hat, the hat is shaken, and the twenty-three names drawn out constitute the grand jury.

As the board consists of fifteen members, only thirty names are put into the hat and all of these but seven are drawn out. The opportunity afforded by this method of pro

PROCEEDINGS.

cedure for packing a grand jury, is probably unmatched among civilized men. Concert of action among a majority of the board could "fix" the grand jury whenever desired, and a corrupt majority had no fears of investigation or indictment so far as the regular panel was concerned. The result of such a practice has been necessarily a resort in times of emergency to the special venire, which is confessedly another method of packing a grand jury for special work. A great evil in itself, but one absolutely essential under the circumstances. The thing urgently needed is a system whereby a sufficient number of persons well qualified, say not less than one thousand, may be impartially selected once a year, their names put into a wheel, and a sufficient number drawn therefrom from time to time to constitute the grand juries. In such a manner, a body could be provided without bias or prejudice, and without reference to the persons or questions they were called upon to investigate.

Our law and practice with reference to petit juries are little better. The statute requires that in September in each year the county board shall make up a jury list of a sufficient number, not less than one-tenth of the legal voters of each town or precinct in the county. Sometimes this requirement has been technically complied with by adopting the entire printed lists of the election commissioners as the jury list. Usually, however, this provision has been ignored and the board has proceeded under subsequent sections to make up lists from time to time. These lists have contained at most only a few thousand names, and it has often happened that when the names were written upon cards and put into the box, the larger part thereof would be almost immediately drawn out to provide jurors for a single term of court.

Here again is an opportunity to get particular persons, or a particular class of persons upon the panel, if there be the purpose to put them there. Even when the board has made a special effort to secure good jurors, the result has been only a partial success, because the necessary information was not at hand to guide them to wise selections. All legal voters are not subject to, nor fit for jury service; and a list made up at random from the registry results in summoning many persons not qualified. This involves large expense. Much valuable time of the court is taken up in sifting the panel, and the jurors secured are not up to the statutory standard. Accord

PROCEEDINGS.

ing to this standard jurors, both grand and petit, should be of the age of twenty-one years and under sixty years, in possession of their natural faculties and not infirm or decrepit; "of fair character, of approved integrity, of sound judgment; well-informed, and who understand the English language."

These qualifications are ample, but in this great city, how shall a jury list be made up which contains the names of only such persons? Besides there are many thousands of voters exempt; such as lawyers, doctors, ministers, judges and clerks of election, members of State militia, firemen, policemen, teachers, persons holding office and others. Fairly complete lists of these exempt classes can be obtained, preserved and kept up to date by sufficient expense and care; but there is no source of information regarding the age of voters, nor as to their intelligence, character or acquaintance with the English language, to which the county board can resort. The board might employ canvassers. A suggestion was once made to have this experiment tried, but on careful consideration it was not adopted. Such canvassers would not improve the situation without a good board back of them.

With some boards we have had in Cook County, these employes would have been only so many more "tax-eating ward heelers," and the jury list selected by them ten fold worse than before. No effort can make the present system yield satisfactory results. Fifty years ago when everbody knew everybody else, it was sufficient; it is sufficient today in most of the counties of the State, but it is entirely inadequate for Chicago. Other large cities of the country have found it necessary to obtain special enactments for the selection of jurors.

In New York City grand jurors are selected once a year by a board consisting of the mayor and five designated presiding judges. This board meets in September each year at the office of the jury commissioner to select a list of names from which grand juries are drawn. The jury commissioner is secretary of the board. They may meet again and as often as necessary in order to keep the number of names on the list up to one thousand. These names are put into a box from which all grand juries are drawn.

The county of New York and also Kings County each has a jury commissioner who makes up the jury list and decides

PROCEEDINGS.

all questions as to qualifications for jury service. He may summon any person to appear and be examined as to his fitness, and may appoint the necessary clerks, assistants and messengers. The commissioners of taxes and all other public officials are required to render him assistance in procuring names. No person is qualified for jury service who does not own property worth $250, and no one is required to serve longer than twelve days in any one year except to finish a pending case. The jury list in Kings County must contain the names of five persons in each 1,000 inhabitants.

In Philadelphia the assessors are required to collect and preserve information regarding each property owner. Certain designated judges of the courts together with the sheriff constitute the board to make up the jury list. They meet in December each year and select a sufficient number of sober, healthy and discreet citizens to constitute the several panels of grand and petit jurors for all courts for the ensuing year. The names selected are put into the wheel. They are also certified to each court where they are to remain for public inspection. A quorum of the board, consisting of one judge from each court and the sheriff, must meet three weeks before the commencement of any term of court and draw from the wheel enough names for the grand and petit juries for the term. Any person having served is not liable for service again for three years. I regard this as an important provision, as I am sure there are a large number of men actively engaged in business who would willingly serve one term if they were not again liable for three years, and in a properly conducted system there is no reason why any one should be summoned more frequently.

Boston has a peculiar system. A list is prepared once a year by the board of registers of voters. It is then publicly posted for ten days, after which it is revised by the board of aldermen and becomes the jury list. It must contain the names of one person for each one hundred inhabitants. These names are all put into a box out of which all juries are drawn. When a grand jury is required, it is made up of the twentythree names first drawn.

The city of Baltimore is included in the jury system of the State of Maryland, which is entirely in the hands of the judges of the courts, this metropolis having certain special provisions, necessary on account of greater density of popu