WOMEN AS JURORS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 24, 29 January 1912, Page 11

WOMEN AS JURORS.

EXPERIENCE IN AMERICA. SOME INTERESTING VERDICTS. Mixed juries of men and "women having been tried out with varying success in several of the woman suffrage States, California, the newest recruit, | now goes atill further (declares the Literary Digest of New York), and exI penment« with juries made up entirely of women. The doings .of two euch juries have already been recorded in despatches to the eastern prees of America, and the only conclusion they eeem to poini to is that pome women make good jurore and 6ome do not. In the firat caeft an all-women jury in Watte, Cal., came to aai agreement within twenty minutes after hearing the cvi* donee and returned a verdict which won wide applauce from the press for its dispassionate common-sense. In the second ca«e a eimilar jury in the neighbouringcity of Los Angeles so acquitted iteelf as to confirm the cyniciem of those editore who declare that twelve women can never be persuaded to. agree on anything. In both cases the baro f&cte, as telegraphed to the eaetern press, are more interesting than most of the comment which they evokeIn Watte, Mr. A. A. King, editor of the Watta News, was tried before a jury of women on the charge of publishing obecene and indecent language in hie newspaper, flnd wae acquitted. A Californi&n correspondent at the New Ygrk Sun tejl« the story sc follow* ;~- "VV&ttft is town eeven milea aonth of Los Angeles. King accused a town trustee of applying profane epithets to him, printing the exact epithets hurled by th.c trustee, which Deflected on hie parentage. "The people of the town are. in sympathy with the editor, and there was a demonstration, in his favour when the case wa« called this morning. - ! "Thirty-eix women summoned for jury 1 duty responded. When the twelve were chosen the case Went to trial, and witnesses repeated the exact words. i j "The-women heard the profanity with- [ out a quiver The jurors said that the I language .was profane simply, and not obscene. They eaid it wae lees of a shock when they read ll in a newspaper in their homes than when they heard it from men In front of saloon* aa they walked along the streets. j " ' Yet euch men,' said on^ juror, 'never are arrested. Why should we punish the editor?' When King was acquitted the women cheered." The Memphis "Commercial Appeal" adds the information that the editor thus acquitted had been a vigorous opponent of the woman-suffxage cause during the. j recent campaign. The women's verdict, remarks the Chicago, Tribune, was, "rich i in common sense, and the Knoxville Sentinel agrees that "it was no doubt j 3 common-sense ending of a eomewhat trivial case." Yet in spite, of this apI parently satisfactory outcome at least one newspaper ftfitic pretends to find cause for alarm in the fact that the women were allowed to wear their hats in the jury-box. Says the editor of the ,San Francisco Post: — "Of course, this is a little thing, but it does not jibe with that slogan of equal suffrage concerning 'equal rights for all and special privileges to none.' That battle-cry wav raised during the late campaign. Here we have one of the first I jurywomen on one of the first juries J composed of women asking for something that has the earmarks of a special privilege, a little one, but a special privilege just the same. . „ , "If the ladies, are permitted to wear their hats in the* jury-box* the Legislature should provide that they Wear hats of uniform size and without hat-< pins. Qn mixed juries the men compelled to eit in the box w|th "jury women' would be' on tenterhooks through a. trial attempting to" dodge 'the halpina. A bald-headed man with ; poor eyesight compelled to serve on a jury of uu's sort would be luoky to retain his scalp, at the end of a long session. "Agailj a variety of, hats would tend to distractfthe attention of some jurywonien from the work before them. A jurywoman with a large variety of millinery might change het hat ovtry day, and keep the less fortunate feminine mem' here of the jury busy getting Ideas of creations of their -own, to the detriment' of their interest in the trial." • . California's second experiment with ,a jury of twelve "good women aud true" had a very different ending, The case was that of I f . ( H. Nagor, accused ot violating the speed laws on hie motorcycle, and the trial took place in, Loa | Angeles. Says a despatch, from that | city to the New York Herald : — "Twelve women-jurors argued for an 1 hoar to-day as to where they would go for luncheon, and 12 different places were named, but no two of the jurors could agree upon one. The Magistrate, hungry himself, begged them to agree, but they just wouldn't, and they and he went without luncheon. "Exasperated, the court ordered the jury locked up. There were four hours and a half of continuous talking _ thjtt frequently penetrated the corridor*. | Somewhat dishevelled and flushed 12 wpI men filed into court and announced that they could not agree on a verdict either. 'Just because,' was one woman's explanfr tion of her refusal to convict. She w*s Mrs. Nora E. Danford, the forewoman. i Upon the demand of the court she explained that she had no confidence in the .District- Attorney's case, "The jury was discharged, and the I Magistrate announced that men would I be selected next time to try the case. 1 ' "It will be seen, then," remarks tfcs Pittsburg Chronicle Telegraph, "that there may be bad woman juries as weU as good ones, just as we find a varying standard of fitness among juries of tb4 other sex; as to how the" average of fitness oil the park of male and female juries compares further demonstration must be awaited." In the State of Washington recent legislation has made jury service on the part of women optional instead of compulsory. There a,nd in Colorado the mixed jury is bepojning alniost a. commonplace, although it seems to have brought in its wake some minor but embarrassing problems which atill await solution. Thus, in the Memphis, Commercial Appeal we read*.' — "A most embarrassing issue was raised in Seattle when two women and ten men were empanelled o» a jury in a, murder case, under the Federal Constitution the jury had to be locked up. Members cannot be separated. The women protented, and wore excused by the Court. Counsel raised objections to this. The trial continued, but the paint of law is yet to be settled by the Supreme. Court. Objection* have- been raised by women to malo members of the jury smoking in the jury-room, ana male members of the jury objected to women members gearing hate in the jury-box. These, are minor matters," Despatches from Seattle and Tapoma report that women jurors hava ahown themselves "consistently anxious to punish the 'guilty 11 — jnore bo, in fact, than men jurore,