The Globe. MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 1878.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1218, 28 January 1878, Page 2

The Globe. MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 1878.

On move than one occasion attention has been called to the defectiveness of the present system of payment of special jurors. As at present fixed no matter whether the case upon which they are drawn lasts half a day or a week, the remuneration is the same, £l. It is true that in special cases, such as that of Turner v. Wilson, tried some sessions hack, the judge lias power to increase this. But even when this is done the payment is totally inadequate to the time lost. It must be recollected, moreover, that the special juries are taken from a class of gentlemen whose time is exceedingly valuable, and that in many cases their detention on a jury causes considerable direct pecuniary loss, besides that of time. Of course in discharging a public duty this is to bo looked for to a certain extent, but it is still the duty of the Government and the Legislature, so far as possible, to see that this does not press too hardly. This being the case we are glad to find that the Government have not lost sight of the matter. A deputation of infiueutial citizens of Wellington recently waited upon the Hon. Mr Sheehan, and this was one of the subjects brought under his notice. Amongst other suggestions made was that the Government should bring in a measure to reduce the number of jurors to four, as is the case in Victoria and New South Wales. It was pointed out that this system had been in force for many years in the colonies referred to. and worked admirably. There was, the deputation urged, therefore no special reason against its introduction here. In the absence of any details as to the working of the system of special juries of four we cannot express any decided opinion upon the proposal made by the deputation. At first sight, however, it appears to be advantageous in that there are so many fewer gentlemen withdrawn from their business to adjust the disputes of parties going to law, So far as this is concerned, it certainly seems an improvement on the old number. We fail to see any especial virtue or magic in the number twelve. Four gentlemen versed in business matters—as the majority of special jurors generally are — can decide upon the merits of the case presented to them as well as the twelve. As we have said, until the details of the working are fully before us, it is impossible to decide finally which system is the best. We are glad to notice, however, that the Government intend considering the whole matter of our jury system with a view to amendments being made next session. They have already stated in the House that they intend considering the advisableness of making the payment of jurors by the day instead of by the case, and Mr. Sheehan reiterated his promise to the deputation at Wellington. Ho also stated, as regarded the question of the reduction of the number, that while not pledging the Government to introduce a Bill to that effect, he would send to Sydney and Melbourne for copies of the Acts under which the system has worked there, and also any information that might be available as to the details. If when these arrive there appears to he no valid reason for declining to introduce the system here, we trust Mr. Sheehan will see his way to do so. At any rate, it is to he hoped that the Government will their promise as to the amendment in It}.}}' relating to the payment of special Juror*, —— • —» A few days hack wo took occasion to congratulate the City Council on the adoption of a bye-law which would, to souje extent at least, prevent the danger to foot passenger.) which lias existed so long. That bye-law has .alyffl come into .force and been in operation, and wo are jboqu4 to say that the satisfaction felt at Its jntrpductign has boon considerably modified by the way ij> which, up to the present, its provisions have been ignored. Hero and there may ho observed a semblance of compliance with it, but generally the vehicles—more particularly

the licensed ones—dash round the particular corners affected by the bye-law as of old, to the infinite peril of pedestrians. Ihe City Council having made a byelaw the necessity for which no one will venture to doubt—they should take means to ensure its being carried out strictly. Whether they or the police authorities are to blame; we know not. but the fact remains that, in the most frequented thoroughfare in the city—that by the Bank of New Zealand corner—the byelaw is systematically broken. We hope that some vigorous measures will at once be taken, by enforcing the fining provisions of the bye-law, to put a stop to this practice. A few fines imposed will have a most salutary effect; but, until this is done, wo fear the enactment of our City Council will receive but scant respect at hands of the Jehus of Christchurch.