People v. Merhige

For a statement of facts see former opinion, People v. Merhige, 212 Mich. 601. Other necessary facts will be stated later in this opinion. Defendant has been convicted of robbery. He, on error, contends:

1. That a challenge to the array should have been sustained because the board of jury commissioners of the county returned no women to serve as jurors in the superior court of Grand Rapids. Women having *97requisite qualifications are entitled to act as jurors. And the qualifications of jurors are matters of legislative control. People v. Barltz, 212 Mich. 580. Act No. 505, Local Acts 1903,…