The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-06-24
FOR THE ENQUIRER.

GA celebrated writer, who fIppofes thai becaufe
Rome, Sparta and Carthage have lot their liberties
therefore thoe OF England will in time perth, feems
to have forgotten that Rome, Sparta and Carthage
the time that their liberties were loft frangers
to the Trial BY Jnry.' BaeEeone, Conn.,
SUCH is the euIogium, and perhaps not ex-
travagant eulogium, which Mr.. Backbone pro-
nounces on that mode of trial which we have
borrowed from England. have been always
taught TO believe that the trial by Jury, in it's ma
tive hnplicitv, is our beft flleld aganft oppref-
ton and ininitice, and the main pillar which
fupoorts our free government. The language
of our laws and the fpirit of our inititutions,
have irnprefed me with this opinou. This in
ftitutiou is valued ar high rate in England, be-
caufe it is a barrier TO judicial tyranny, and
iafsgu1rd tn iifice. None | prefume at this
day vii! deny, that the mott foeedy and fatis-
factory mode IF deciding all conteits, both civil
and criminal, is oy referring them to the intelli-
gent, upwrght and impartial minds of we'll
elected jurors. Any thing, then, which may
have the moR remote tendency to abridge the
utility ofthis excellent mode oftrial, ihouId de-
iervedly awaken the iealoufy Of every friend of
treedom--even the ilighteft appearance of abufe
'hould excite the mot watchful fufpicion-- -
With thefe impreffions on nv mind refpecting
the importance of preferving the trial by Jury
IN its utmof purity, feel in fou1e meafure at
a lofs in forming a fatisfa aory opinion of fome
late proceedings in the Ditrist Court of
during its laft fciian in April
The opinion which have formed OF thefe pro-
ceeding., may he incorrect fuch AZ IL is, how
ever, feel my(elf bound TO make II KNOWN
NV impreffions may have been haiv and erro-
neous, as am but little verified in the forms and
proceedings of courts, and an wholly unaware
of thofe invifble nets Of iazv in WHICH juf;ee
rs fometimcs entangiea. MY opinion will fate
with freedom, becauie conceive II my duty TO
do TO- and becaufe, if it is incorrect, with to De
convinced of my error. Thefe are che only rea-
ions which induce me to offer thefe few re-
marks TO the public.
at the laft Dftriet Court, held for the DIFF
trcf OF there was a prifoner
arraigned for having perpetrated the blacket
deed of which human nature is capable the
crime with which he was charged was no lefs
than that Of numbering his own wife, TO whom
he had been but a hort time united The evil
dence agant the prfoner was wholly circum-
itantial; circumstances, however, were 70 ftrong
that the magistrates 1.-TWO in number) before
whom he was tried and by whom he was COM
mtted, did not hefitate moment to pronounce
him guilty, and TO commit him to Jail the ex-
4 mining court concurred in believing him gull
ty, and awarded further trial in the DitriSt
Court. The grand jury found true bill. Sucn
was the unverfal belief of the guilt of the pri-
ioner, produced by the evidence given in on his
examination, that even his council made no at
tempt TO bail him. Such was the horror and
deteftation excited sgaint him by the flrong
fuipicion of having committed this Outrage a.
gain't nature, that fuppofed no Jury could be
procured who would pronounce him innocent
Under thefe circumstances was he bro't to trial
From the reluctance which mott of US feel to
deprive a felIow-being Of life, except on the
mott certain and concluGvc evidence of his
guilt, few fuppoied that the prifoner on this DC
Gallon would meet that ,puniihment which it
was the opinion of all that he merited fill
fewer fuppofed that the trial would terminate
as it did. The evidence on behalf of the COM
monwealth was heard, and the diftrict attorney
sead the law which was applicable to the cafe,
and commented on the evidence one OF the
council for the prifoner roie in his defence, and
before getting into the merits of the cafe was in
terrupted Ivy the court and addref1ed as well
as can recoleGt nearly in the following words
by the Preiiding judge " 1t is unnecefIary to
trouble the court or the jury, or take up their
time by making any defence of the prifoner.
There is no evidence on which ne can pofIibly
be convicted The fufpicion Of guilt (addreG-
ing himfelf 70 the jury which attaches to the
prlioner, is 70 flight, that had been a Jingle ma
Citrate, and he been brought before me, I
III.
court recommend it to you, gentlemen f the
jury, TO bring in verdict of not guilty. You
may find what verdict YOU pleafc, but if you
bring in verdict Of guilty, we Riall grant new
trial, AS you will find contrary to evidence"
Il certainly is not my intention to intimate
that this interruption of the council and this adj
vice to the jury proceeded from finifer motives I;
but can fay with truth that they biaifed the
minds Of the jury and influenced their deciiion.
Venire's cannot be fuppofed to confiff Of men
whole understandings are Of the hrft order, and
particularly in the country thisis but feldom the
cafe.
They may be men who can very well form
correct opinions of their own, but no one can
fuppofe that they will be wholly unnGuenced
by the opinions cf others, who they well know
are better acquainted with the nature Of law,
and the principles of evidence than themfeves.
In ihis cafe an opinion was prematureIy deli
yered from the bench, and fupported by the
authority OF judges learned in the law, which
could not fail to have its fall operation on the
minds OF the Jury. 1t was declared by the
court, that there was no evidence which ought
TO weigh witb the jury, and that Jingle ma
Citrate ought to have hailed the prifoner. The
court even went farther in their opinion, and
fad, 1t the priioner was found guilty they llould
grant new trial. Was not this fomething like
threat TO the jury to induce them TO bring in
a yerdiG OF acquittal WasnSi fuch conduit
tthe judgea we'll calculated to bias the minds
OF the Jury? The improper influence which
IT had was exemp'ifieh in the verdict. The writer