SCARCITY OF JURORS.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3401, 4 February 1920, Page 7

SCARCITY OF JURORS.

GRAND JURY OF TWELVE. UNIQUI:J 1N ,TL'DGl~3’b‘ In'XPERIIn'NCE “I have never before known the like in my experience -of nearly half a century,” stated Mr Justice Chapman at Auckland on Monday nlorning in commenting on the fact. that only 12 men were a\'ail':~lble to act on this Grand Jury at the .Supreme Court, His Honour stated it was usual to have 23 men sworn in for the jury, and he has Known cases where there ‘had been as few as 18, but he thought he had never before known the number to be less. On this occasion, however, from :1 combination of cireunlstanee's, such as illhealth. absence, ete.. the actual panel suinmoned on this 0(3C8tSl0l1.l1{1d been reduced to 15, of \\'llom‘t\vo did not ‘attend, while one had to be teniporarily excused on account of another member of the same firm; being on the jury. That reduced the nunibez‘ of-jul'ol-s to twelve. The difiiculty caused was that in order -to present a. true bill 12 of the jurors must agree. ‘With 18 to 20 jurors there was '.-Il\v2ly.s' room for a difference of opinion; in the present instance there was no such scope, and absolute unanimity xvas required. In the circumstances he reeommen(ler;l that there should be such a ditterenee of opinion ‘the jul'y, instead of throwing out the bill. should report the nintter to him. it nli,r,_>;ht be possible that. either later to-day or to-Inorro\\',- 3 larger mlmber_of jurors might be got to-g'ethc-I'. That. hC-we'vel', was merely 3. suggestion; it was within the rights of the jury to net as they thought fit.