Skip to main content

Kilmarnock Sheriff Court— Absent Juryman

Volume 91: debated on Tuesday 19 March 1901

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Samuel Reid, a working mason, residing at Stevenston, Ayrshire, who was cited to attend the sheriff' court at Kilmarnock on 27th July last, and failed to attend: whether he is aware that the notice was not served owing to his having been absent from home in the course of his employment, leaving his house shut up; and as he is not a proprietor, and has no property, and his name does not appear in any roll save as a tenant, whether he is eligible as a juror; and whether, under the circumstances, the Lord Advocate can see his way to remit the fine of £6 1s. 1d. imposed, as Samuel Reid has a family of nine children, is in delicate health, and is dependent upon his wages.

I have made full inquiry into the matter brought to my notice by my hon. friend. I find it to be the fact that Samuel Reid's name is on the jury list, and that it had been placed there erroneously, as he is not qualified to act. But I also find that Reid was duly summoned and personally received the notice in ample time to have attended. It was his duty to attend; and, at least, it would have been proper for him to send explanations at the time of his failure to attend, which he did not do. He has not been treated unjustly. But in view of the man's circumstances as stated by my hon. friend, and of the fact that he was not qualified to act as a juror, I hope that an approach to Exchequer for the remission of the fine may be successful.