The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-31 00:00:00

where "innovation" is a word of such fearful import, ti.w.
many noblemen would start with horror, if it were proposed
to remove the Woolsack the eighth part of an inch from its
usual situation.

The enquirylnto the condact of the High Sheriff of Dub-
lin is likely to have out effect, which was not eontemplate:i
on its commencement. We mean, a revival of the Spec::
Jury system in England, where packing is equally the orck
of the'day ; and w here the practice has received the solemn
sanction of the Court of King's Bench, as most undoubtee;
law ! The attention of the public has neater Veen sufffcienity
drawn to this point. The system pursued is so monstrous.
so opposed to the fetter of the law, and to the Spirit of any
rational Trial by Jury, that. like any other hideous; it •-;

" To ha hated, needs but to be seen.'
Some accidental circumstances have pat ws completely
possession of the " secrets" of this part of the process or
oar Courts of Law ; and, those who have affected suet an
amazing degree of astonishment, at the detection of one in-
stance of packing juries in the Courts of Dublin, will pro-
bably elect to start with horror from the declaration, that
every Special Jury struck in England for the last fifty }'ears',
and probably for many years before, has been directly and
absolutely packed, with as little regard to the intention or
letter of the law, and with as much contempt for justice. as
any Orange partisan, In any Court in trebled could ever hate
evinced.

The petitions of Mr.& Hunt and Mr.3.14%11%W. presented
to the House of Commons during the present week, by no
means expose the most hi,leons features of the Englidt
practice; and Mr. John Hunt has been advised to a com
plimentariconduct towards the Master of the Crown Office.
which the state servant of the administration by no means
deserves. When a man commits himself by a bad action.
reason and law alike infer a had motive, and it is for the
offender to sbew that such bed Motive did not exist. Front
a few of the actions of the Master of the Crown Office, let
our readers determine whether the proof of good moti►es
are likely to be afforded.

In the autunm of the yeti. 1917, the Master was detested
in the use of en improper list of special jurors. The list.
for the most part, eonsitaing of ;persons who made a rega.
tar trade of serving upon special jusies—of men who, on
the failure of their outt Crain, had made:special interest
with some Sheriff to dub them merchant's; Mellott:lt they
had lone ceased to deal in any thing but jury oaths, and
profitable verdicts. Tie parties who should have been spe-
cial jurymen were excluded to make room for this chosen
corps of legal Janissaries ; and so Meet was this body, that
it was by no means unusual for the .Ikeekwat upon the special
jury list of London. to be an Esquire upon the special 3ury
list of Middlesex ; and the corps kept mounting and
relieving guard in Westminster and Guildhall. Many
were not even citizens of London, at all ; although
resident ckizenship was by the law an essential qua-
lification. But what cares practice for lam? Thia
list was taken out of the blaster's hands, by the inter.
ference of the Corporation of London. It had their been
fur years inn du; Office ; although the law directs that, on
ever!, nomination of a Jury, the Sheriff shall attend with
the list of the parties eligible to serve. It Was, however.
found mnre'eonvenient to have an olive list, a snug as-
sortment of parties who were known, and could he de-
pended upon for their attendance.'—Now, out of this list
of favourites the present Master of the Crown Office, and
every previous Master had been accustomed to nominate
fairly. Mr. Horne Tooke, a been observer, but who did
not see deep enough into this mutter, admitted the Mol-
ter acted very tairly in his mode of nominating; but that he
presented him with a box of rotten oranges, out of
which choose where he would, he could not find a sonnd
one. Bot, no sooner was the bad list struck out of 11;c
hands, than he refused any linger to nominate impartial-
ly; and for the FIRST TIME be set np the RIGHT or
lIELECTtON; and the POWER or P.t cum& JPRIES. There
is now upon the files of the Court of King's Bench, an
affidavit by the Master of the Crown Office, tiled by hint
on the argument fur a new tria;, in the rase of the king
re. Edmonds, in the spring of 1531, in which the blaster
swears that from his entrance into office, until the year

1817, he was accustomed to take the names at random by
inserting his pen between the leaves of a closed book,
and taking the name on which his pen accidentally
lighted ; bat that he had then changed his m.o.'r,
and commenced the practice of selecting, or pick.
ing and packing; and that the Court bad decided
he had such power, an.'e he 'lad therefore continued it.
And yet, in the face of this sweating of the Matter of
the Crown Office, the Conrt of King's Bench, on deli-
vering its opinion said the practice was of long stand-
ing, and ought not to be interfered with.
The London Special Jury list now consists of some
thous-Inds of individuals, equally eligible to serve the
the office of special jurymen ; but the Master of thi,
office disqualifies more than nineteen tscentieths of them
by his own arbitrary and usurped authori4, ; refusing
to take any one who has not the word merchant alliNed
to his name : alledging that it has always hem
the custom to take merchants only ; although in the
old list, the tens merchant was merely • delusire
epithet, not meaning a mere chant, but a retail dealer is
armlet verdicts. What rational man can entertain a dosbt

that the new power usurped by the Master, waS le enable
Mine° pick his old fr:ends out of the new lists Why Id
fairly in one instance, and unfairly in another ? The thing
explains itself.

In the argument on this MP, the Court of King's Reach
held that the Master was authorised to use a sound diver-
lion in the selection. But the Mager himself puts this pies
out of Court ; for he swears that lie has no atquaintanee
with any of the parties, except a few of their names; and
perhaps the persons of some half-dozen individuals. Bail
were the case, he can exercise no discretion, either sound or
unsound. Where all are equally eligible, and equally gaoled
to him, what objection should he have tot& old'inede of im•
partial selection. Discretion can only be foundedepon Mime-
ledge which he swears he does not possess. ET he hare
sworn that be was personally acquainted with all the
parties whom lie setected,anti that from his knowledge of
them, he believed them the best qualified, we might had
disputed his right, but we should have understood hir
plea. Rut can ice believe he would contend for a power
of selecting certain individuals alone, if hedid not know
,them 3

• A story is told of Lori Bilenborough, that, on one oc-
casion, when some delay occurred on account of the ah•
sauce of a Special Jur)man, his Lordship, after looking
round, and not perceiving the face of one which was av fa
utilise to him as the arch of Temple-bar, exelaime,, "(hi)
bless my soul ! where Is Mr. Ilankey ?"