The National Register.
London, England, 1808-02-07 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER..

sentiments upon the subject. We only deprecate the manner in
which the strictures of The Independent W hig have been con-
ducted ; and the bad confegnemes which must emue should the
Jurors, as is apprehended, cozuu►cnce a prosecution against the
Editor of that Paper.
•

ln every case, both civil and criminal, there must he some tri-
bunal trout which there is no appeal : and the w isdoni nf our
forefathers has in our country coinmitted the final decision of all
cause, in which the lives and tibertieA of the people are con-
cerned, to twelve impartial men, of the rank of the accused.
Thew men are to decide the cause entirely by the er idettce be-
fore them ; and that t.yr cry thing may be made plain to their
understandi”,s, and that no dubiety tthatcver in•ty be left with
regard to .toy essential point, the late does not permit them to
deliver a verdict until they have all become unanimous in their
opinion (tithe guilt or innocense.of the accused. do nation ha,
ever devised WIN' evpedient by which person :1 liberty could be
MOW COMpletrly secured to the :atbieet ; and the irn.:tances are
ihnucterahle in which Ent.lish 11:C. aStT 1 ittd the inno-
cence of-their Veers if/ CIVII;UICe of all the arts anti threats of the
vector ve power.
nut if such has been fennd to be the so perior ben-tits of a ,lur
as a final tribunal in criminal t aßtsgother MI-
N% ISC to rail against this institution, for ets as c.innot be
separated from any hilMMlCStablistuneng. '-;•1 nnu h is the
partialitr of Juries guarded by the manner in w hick they are se_
leen tl, that bribery or private ioilueoce i altoi,ether out of the
question; and if, therefore, on any occasion, a Jury decides in
opro.ation to what the spectator just, it is certainly lir
110 11:C.11!S fair, that this opinion should entitle the spectator to
brand the Jury with the odious crime of deliberate perjury.
Twelve men, though appl % all their penetration to di,cover
the truth of the evidence brought hei'ore them, may possibly- b.•
led into mistakes, may condemn the innocent and acquit the
guilty ; lint this is much less likely than that a clamour should he
excited either for or against the Itemised among the public at
large, who have neither heard nor weighed the evidence, nor,
under the solemn obligation of an oath, have deliberately made
up their decision.

We would neither '''(rat. the mouths of men, nor hind up their
pens, to prevent t hemfrom delivering, their opinions, either i t
ref:lrd to the verdict of a jury or any tither question. They
may expatiate on tile evidence ; they may point out tote circum-
stances on sy filch, in their opinion, a verdict ought to have
turned ; they may declare, that their decision woul,t have been
different, had they at on tho trial. So far, certainly, the pm,
may go, otherwiw its freedom is a mere dead letter. But the
fulependent Whig 14. far from being eontetaed t, ith this degree of
liberty ; it directly asserts, that the man whit nos found inno-
cent is guilty, that the e‘ 'device clearly demonstrated him to be
so.hnil that the jury, n ith Open eves. committed a direct and
del iherite act of petjurv. This is a serious, and, indeed, n
grant charge it is such a‘; cannot be passed over by the jury,
either in their capacity of a public tribunal, or as private MM.
77,c 11.6 i,• ha- threatened to publish tho names and resideoce of
all the
,ittranen, as it le to already done that of their foreman
and thus, as it were, to set a marl; upon them as perjured men,
ho otmht to be hooted and expelled from soeiety, this
Sittintioli Of things, the jury have no other resource but a legal
prosecution to rescue thou from a load of perpetual infamy.
(fa prosecution should be commeueed tv.:ainst The Indept relent
high, there is little doubt of its beim; successful. Even if the
jar, men should prefer tilt' civil form of prosecution atat site for
damages, it is impossible that the iVhig should make geed it-
chargos ; fir that would be to make one jury judge the verdict
of another. But if the criminal form of prosecution should be
preferred, as most probably it will, even the truth of its alle-
gations could not be urged in its defence. By this metros the
freedom of the press, and the inviolability of the decisions de-
livered by juries, will come to an issue, and the former will
suffer as Intuit by the criminal folly of men who abase it for
improper purposes. Well may it be alleged, that the I rule-
je relent Whig is in our days, one of the greatest enemies of the
press.

_
It the jury seemed, indeed, to decide directly against evi-
dence, it V,.;V: Ihr p rf; Vince or tt-e Judge to have sent thein back
to rc-con,ider their verdict : a power which has frequently
been employed in ca:,:es of very little importance. ]tut the
Judge him‘elf has not, on the plawnt occaidon, escaped his
share of censure ; mid it has been alleged, that iu summing up
the evidence, it was not necessary to have teen so particular In
pointing out the on which the pri,oner might he ac-
quitted. This objection is stilln,ore onreazobable than what
has been urged aoinst the r•!1'..1 t Of I tit r 7.. jt i$ the r

business of the Judge to sum up the evidence with perfect im-
partiality, and to omit no circumstance which c.til weigh
either for or against the prisoner. But the English
common law goes still farther : it requires that the judge,
should consider himself as counsel for the priste..-r, awl
consequently bound to be most particular is recounting
every circumstance that may weigh on the side of mer-
cy. This singnlar trait of humanity has suisen from a very
cruel practice in our criminal procedure, one of the barbarous
remains of the feudal system. According to that system, both
the land: and the people were considered as the property of toe
Kin :4; ; and hence• the fiction ago c, that all offences done atrai,Nt
the subjects were against the Kioe. But it was t lumght unpar-
donable in those days, that a snhject should lie :11101% ed to plead
against the King its hi, own courts ; and therefore the priso: er
was denica e% t.ry aid on his trial. In cases of high treason,
whe:v the K ite; was personally interested, not only was the pri-
smier refused the assistance of counsel, but it was even account, d
a special favour if he were allowed to suniaion yviteesses in hi,
fa% our, to cross-question those of the Kin;,, sir to make any
concluding comments in his own behalf. S.,ch was the state of
things when Sir Walter Italeigh prayed tar deli% ernure from the
tnul lines of England. An alteration, w hiels does honour to
the humanity of modern times, has taken place in these affairs ;-
and State Trials are now conducted, as they so much require to
be, w ith every indulgence to the prisoner. In the ordinary
criminal prosecutions at common law, however, the accused is
still left at a cruel disadvantage : he is allowed the assistance of
Counsel merely in suggesting que.aions to he put to the wit-
ne‘ses, and in giving hiin hints for his own procedure. lie is
allowed no assistance 111 summing up the evidence, or in stating
his casein the most forcible manner to the Jury. From his ig-
norance and want of ability, he is usually obliged to consign
himself silently into the hands of his Judges.
The humanity of the English character, revolting at the
cruelty of these institutions, and yet nut% Ming to depart front
ancient forms, has endeavoured Us wake up she defect by the
singular fiction, that the judge is to be considered as counsel
for the prisoner, and as hound to sum up the evidence in Isis
behalf. It is certain that time cot eiouseess of this circumstance,
operating upon the mind of the has frequently intlue•teed
the nature of the charge, awl it is not possible that frequent
complaints should not be raised both against jitil:es and juries,
-until this very unjustifiable defect in our forums of criminal pso-
cedure be remedied.

FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE.

FROM THE Pith

PA nig, ,T AN. '2:3.-- The .lion Thar of the 'Ash contains a De-
cree of the Conversative Senate for calling out the conscription
of the sear ISO 9. It is to consist of 80,0,P) to be drawn frusn
the youths of eighteen and nineteen years of age.
By another Decree of the Conservatory Senate in the came
paper, the towns of Kehl, Cassel, Weier, and Flushing, are
united to the French Linpire :—Kehl, to the department of the
Lower Rhine ; Cassel, to the department of Mount Twirvie ;
Wesel, to the department of the Ruer ; and Flushing, to the
department of the Scheldt.

DENMARK.
(MPENTIAGEN, JAN. 9.—TLe following Corr spondence is
of the greatest impor;ance ; it commences after the taking of
Copenhagen, and sliews to what menus the English Goverment
has recourse to obtain their ends.

So. T.—EJ tract of a Report.fram M. RIST, Charge d'Affaires
from Deamarl: to tire English Court, to the Minister of Sta.e,
Curia, 13r:t ST 0:I F doted London, Sept. 11, 1807.
It was probably to give more weight to these considcraticns,
which Mr. Canning proposed to me, by reading to me yesterday
his first initiate of the propositions of the Coutt of London, that
he thought it riekt to add to it a brief exposition of the consr-
quenc; which the refusal ch our part to treat would he attended
with, He Into' read to me the following five menaces which it
contained.—l. The confiscation of all the vessels already de-
tained, and set to be ile:ained. y. The capture of Our colonies.
J. The destruction of our trade. 4. The possibility of being
oblized to introduce Swedish troops into Copenhagen. 5. The
necessity which might at ise, of rewarding and indemnifying his
Swetikh Majesty with the posse•.sion of Norway.—Mr. Canning
j idg.,sa it fit to leave out these menaces in the cox of the verbal
.thvk sent me.