Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/397

 350

and those who do not know how to read and write French, are excluded. Men of seventy; those who live by means of daily manual labor; and those who have already served during the same year or the year next preceding, are excused. A list is annually made up for each canton by a commission consisting of the local just ice of the peace (juge de paix) and his assis tants with the mayors of each commune. They pick out a certain percentage of all its citizens who are not disqualified, selecting whom they please. These lists are transmitted to the clerk of the trial court of the arrondissement. Another commission, consisting of the presiding judge of the court, the justices of the peace, and the members of the legislative council of the department (conseillers généraux) then strikes off half the names. It may also add new names, not exceeding in number a quar ter of those in the first lists. Before each term of court forty names are then drawn by lot from the final list, as the jurors for the term. . . . Senator Victor Leydet has proposed to restore in substance the practice of the first two Republics. He has recently brought for ward a bill for an Act putting any citizen enjoying civil and political rights and on the electoral list, on the jury list also, pro vided he is between forty and sixty years old, and can read and write. Excuses will be re ceived on the ground of ill-health, other public duties, or serious injury to the man's family should he leave them to attend court. The last proviso suggests one of the ob vious defects in the present system. No jury fees are paid to jurors residing in the court town. Those living at the distance of two kilometres can demand about sixty cents for each myriametre traveled, towards indemnifying them for their necessary trav eling expenses. Nothing is paid by way of remuneration for services. Senator Leydet's bill proposes a change in this respect, letting the government, from time to time, fix a small compensation for the jurors in each department, according to its particular conditions, of say not over ten francs a day. . ..

In January, 1904, the Minister of Justice,. M. Vallé, announced his general adhesion to the views of Senator Leydet. He would, however, adhere to thirty as the minimum age. The matter will soon come before Parliament for decision; and it seems prob able that some steps in the way of reforming the present system will be adopted. COMMENTING on the Merger Decision, the Albany Law Journal for April says : It can hardly be disputed, we think, that under the so-called Anti-Trust Law of 1900,. rigorously applied and enforced, ancient rights hitherto held to be incontestable, are abridged, industrial tendencies that promote the increase of national wealth are checked, and business thrown into inextricable con fusion. But we have the comforting assur ance from the administration, through its chief iegal officer, the attorney-general, that there'isno intention to "run amuck" among the great corporations of the country. In other words, the government having settled the interpretation of the Anti-Trust Act through this great test case, will wink at its continued violation. However inconsistent this attitude may be, it is exceedingly politic as well as fortunate, for it has been estimated by competent authority that eighty-five per cent, of the railroad mileage of the country is controlled by railroad systems operating in violation of the law as it has now been de clared and sustained by the Supreme Court. The only remedy for this anomalous and dis quieting condition of affairs would seem tobe an amendment of the Anti-Trust Act, which was passed primarily to meet a parti san emergency in a difficult campaign in which Democrats were making party capital by attacks upon the trusts, so as to make it apply only to unreasonable restraints of trade. But again, "partisan emergencies" may block this obviously wise and reasonable course. THE Peonage Cases are the subject of an interesting article by Honorable William Wirt Howe, in the Columbia Law Rcvinv for April. These cases arise under the Thir-