The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1850-11-13
DUBUQUE:
WEDNEsDAY:::::::: NIRER 10. 1850.
More Constitutional Reform Grand
Juries.

The Constitutional Convention of Indiana,
now in session, has taken up the question Of
DISPENSING WITH GRAND JURIES,
in all cases, and substituting therefor al intelli-
gent Court of Inquiry, with udtcial jurisdc
ton over minor trivial offences, and similar
power as is now vested in Grand Jurics over
more important questions and graver offences.
In abiding, few weeks ago, to some of the
propositions submitted to the Convention of
Michigan, we took occasion then to suggest the
proprety of abolshing the Grand Jury system,
and of substituting some other more in accord
ance with the enlightened, liberal and progress
sve spirit, which fills, moves, and mpels the
present age and generation towards what we
are pleased to call and taught to believe, the
goal of human perfection in arts, science, and
government.
We take up this subject again, the more
willingly, when we find it entertained by a
body of men specially elected by the people Of
one of the States, for the purpose Of making
alterations in the fundamental code by which
they are governed at present.
Can the present Grand Jury system be abol-
ished without detriment to the public interest !?
And can another system be substituted, having
the same objects to be attained, as an effect Ct
it's organization in cheaper, justcr and more
efficacious manner? We now proceed to an
swcr both these questions, and we do it in the
affirmative. We take the high ground that the
abolition of the present system without subst-
tuting ANY Court Of Inquiry would be Of i'm
mense advantage to the public interests. Of
course, our mere say is not sufficient to con-
vince any one of what we feel or believe upon
this subject, rather assertion is not sutfi-
ciant to make nthers believe that the Grand
Jury system should be abolished
| In reply to our first question, "Can the pres
ent Grand Jury system be abolished without de-
trimcnt to the public interests we will proceed
to show the object Of instituting the SYSTEM and
when that is done, we will be better able TO form
our conclusion.
! The principal object sought to be attained by
the system is the inquisition of crime, or, in 9th
er words. to ascertain and give information to q
sitting Court of competent jurisdiction, Of all
crimes and criminals. This being the object OF
the institution, we will now proceed to show
that the same object can be attained without it,
intervention, and that it can and ought to be alb
olishcd.
Under the present system, criminal can be
placed at the bar Of justice to answer for his
crimes without prescntmcnt by Grand Jury
Let us look at some of the absurdities consequent
upon this state of things.
Suppose murder is committed in the pres
cnce of multitude of witnesses, in the city o.
Dubuque, or any where else; does it not appear
both absurd and unnecessary, to bring lG or 9;
men from different parts Of the county to presen
the case to the Court in session? To us it ap
pears perfectly ridiculous. 1t reminds US of the
schoolboy play Of prison base only that the child
play is more innocent and humane, but not quite
so knightly and chivalric as the play of Crane
Jury. But TO be serious, as we ought to he wher
investigating so grave subject, we call attention
to the case already proposed, and ask of any can
did, unbiased person, whether an examination
of person charged with crime before n magis
trate, is not all sufficient to elicit facts enough
on which to base an indictment or charge, ans
whether the Prosecuting Attorney, whoever h'
may be, could not as well base his indictment up
on testimony given before magistrate as he cal
upon testimony before the Grand Jury? W.
say that he could do it better under the forme
system than he can or does under the latter, fo
this reason, that under the present system th'
practice of the Attorney is to make out his in
dictment or charge against the person first, ant
then let the Grand Jury examine witnesses a
gainst the accused person to sustain the charg'
made against him by the Prosecuting Attorney
while by the mode we suggest the accused per
sou would have a preliminary hearing before
Court, (and by the way, he has that already, il
many ipstances), and on the testimony then an'
there elected, the Prosecuting Attorney, unde
the instruction af the magistrate, could found hi
indictment or charge.
We have taken the ground that the abolish
ment of the present system, without substltu
ting ANY other, would be advantageous. Th'
truth is, that nothing more is necessary than
when crime is committed, let the criminal b'
brought before magistrate, as he would be now
and if the crime be Of such magnitude as tt
go beyond the jurisdiction of an inferior Court
let the magistrate bind over the criminal to an
swer the charge before Court of competent ju
risdiction. This easy, simple, cheap, and expe
ditious manner will be at least as effective TO
the end in view, as the present system; and j
will be far cheaper. 1t will do away with th'
whole paraphernalia of Grandure and Gran
dees which attach to the present system.
In serious earnest, we never can look at
Grand Jury retiring to their room, in charge o
bailiff, without thinking af flock of innocen
sheep in charge of butcher, preparing TO
slaughter. To person unaccustomed to ou
institutions, the Grand Jurors would ccrtainl,
be taken for the prisoners; and we think it higt
time that this farce should leave the stage, t
make way for one that will suit much better
with less expense and trouble. .@..
THANKSGIVING DAY.--The 2Sth Of Novem
Der is designated by several State Executives al
day of Thanksgiving and prayer to the All