The New York herald., 1850-01-06

Of suit against the magistrate And as the Who'll.
and as the number Of summary convictions is incrsss
Ing win us not only BY an augmentation OF the mum
legislative increase Of the offences prousSs within sSs
operation; 1t would seem that the time had arrived
with US when We also should attempt to perfect on
A statute, carefully prepared. and under a full
knowledge Of all the a~ upon the subject, would Il
both as protection to personal liberty as mea
Of enforcing proper police.
tute, ought not overlook diculty which would
be found to exist here, that, namely, of want of
business Already 10 that court burdened by increase
criminal business its physical capacity to
Ser and the addition Of from six to ten cases d,y
appeals from summary convictions, would put 1t o.
Che question for that court to Its business
A reorganization Of that court, which is demand
ed BY the magnitude Of its business, would then be
rendered still more necessary.
resume Of my views would be this. The present
law be enforced by proper action the part
Governors of the AIm,hou.e, and no legislation is ne
cesary to that result But additional legislation would
be sdvs able to perfect the system that would properly
assume the power Of an appeal under proper reguls-
tone, rom summary convictions to the Court Of Ses
! court
The second topic to which you cali nv attention ia
the Of jurors in criminal cases the right
epAunse by the taveser, and the mode Of conduct
! Ing the trial and defence.
The evil to which you refer has not escaped my at
tention. have witnessed with much regret, the i'm
pediments to the due administration Of public Justice
which have sprung out of these and have not
been without suspicion, that have myself been in
some measure to blame because have believed that
more ttern and enior by the courts Of
the rules Of law would In great degree obviste the
The difficulty arises from two causes one Is the rule
disquaifyipg juror on account OF opinions formed
ana the other is the allowance ofa bill Of exceptions in
1st. As to the challenges to jurors
In the case OF Mary Bodne held at the trial that in
things are pseessrya belief in the truth the facts
upon which the opinion is founded, and conelusion
founded on such belief that there were two questions
frst had the juror opinion to the truth Of the
facts he had read or heard! and second, had he an
that mere faint preston. founded on ether per-
sonsl knowledge Of the circumstances q relation
Of them by there who have such knowledge.
fumor report Is not such opinion disquali
and that IL must be fixed aud decided opinion such
as IL will require evidence to Upon this basis
such questions as these-wLst he thought. what was
his belief and what impression had been made upon
his mind' and the like In all this, the Supre ne
Court overruled and held that any every fact
and circumstance from which bias par TALLY or pre-
judce may justly be inferred, although very weak in
Under thi- decision the difficulty Of which you
complain was impraocsbe for the court to hx any
limit TO the inquiry the prisoners counsel On the
second attempt to try Bodine in this city three weeks
OF time were consumed and four thousand Jurors
were examined and the attempt was abandoned On
the tiisi OF Boughton at Hudson two weeks time
consumed in sDpsn,lipg jury; and every trial ths.
nov occurs attended with any notoriety either to
the nature Of the oencs the position Of the accused
necessarily involves great consumption Of time in the
presiding judge so long this rule exists entirely
avoid the difficulty in a community where many
n.wspsPeIs are published and 80 many Of our people
iue Is to be found in the facility which 1t affords TO
Jurors to avoid an unpleasant duty. have known
them after geing through the whole round Of
In vain to swear themselves cut Of the box by
pressing an opinion; and have beard from
titled TO credit Of jurors having purchased and read
newspapers so to qualify themselves 60 say they had
an opinion and even Of some who have gone 60 an at
torney ard given him fee, to get him to state the
Op
The difficulty however, Is not now so great as II was
beesuse the Supreme Court has since the Of
do. s~oais-d ..d Ga ereet dsgrs~ reversed their
former opinion. Still, IL IL serious eyii-dificut
though imprs ccable for the judges entirely T. ro
move. In my attempts to do 80 ihsve frequently told
Jurors, when under examination on challenge that
they were at liberty to refuse To snswr that II was,
dsgrtoe 70 them TO prsjudgea case of life and deah
ard that they had the zane right to decline answering
that they would have II asked .hether they had been
convicted q felony, but have found one who
would avail himself OF the privilege; and have doubted
whether the privilege vas not go far personal to the
tor to avail himself Of IT, As an objection, on his part
TO the examination
One forbdding the juror himself TO be examined which
would leave the challenging party 20 prove 1t by other
he must do n the juror refuses answer aud the
other removing the formation expression Of opi-
Lion as ground Of challenge at all.
In Kentucky, growing II recoest Alright, out OF the
ease Of Desha law was passed by the Legislature in
January 1871 eDaeting that the trial OF criminal
case IL sha not be held or considered good Of
challenge to ysnre man. that he has formed or ex.
pressed an opinion from mere rumor;" aud providing
that shsres any tuch yenire Is under the
Of prejudice or will not make impartial tryer, IL
sha be judged Of by the court for that he shall
be he held an incompetent venire NAM
And 10 Ia not little remarkable that Ia the early
contribution Of uri.s under the vthey
iesesd from the ycnage for the very ma, they
tions on which they we're % be called to pass.
rhars alec this evil might be obvistsd By conhning
pal challenge, and not for challenge to the favor
Though II the case of The People va Ms,her Wen
dell hepofts 20 continues 10 Be Law, this would
move the csu,s u complaint very inperfscy At an;
for there u ~aa h,ld hat challenge for principal
sccu,sd guilty, but had no hxed opinion upon the /
qusttion; only entertaining Impressions derived from
eonf.ss the suhj,ctis not without ~. diaeuitie.
viesed In any aspect for shine, on the one hand, 1t
would be wong 20 compel the accused to be tried BY
jury Who had pr'judeed his and entered upon it
with spy bias against him the other hand ~ seems
70 be the height of sbsurdty 20 hold that man Ia
disquslitsd from sitting Juror by having rs.is
newspaper Of the trsbssctop for you'd ne
cesssrily throv the duty Of juror mosty upon the
The People rs Hopsyman q penios II. port. iss have
wisely ssid that intelligent aud right minded men
when they enter the jury box kno- hos to lay aside
vi they have heard aud resd out OF doors pro-
their verdict upon the evidence and upOa that
alone y and am inclined TO think that n this prin-
that court, BE- fully carried out legislaton whs
ever ~il BE- nscsssry aud the evil will, In great
70 appreciate the injury they the admBitrst,on
q justice By thus rrjudgins the eases which they
liable % try. 1he bar begin 70 see that " h no i
triamph 90 ct aide juror and that they injure the
cause of their clients ~ excluding from the panel the
intelligent and rpht minded and composipgt Of the
ignoIant aud uninfnrmed sone, and that courts i
the necessity. even at the hazard Of being deemed
hsnh q redy enforcing the rules Of lss pre'crbsd
for tuch cssse aud cannot psrSuade myself that time
and patience v net afford all the remedy which the \
case 10 susoeptibe Of
pass TO the second % the evils compsiaed Of
rsu.y the alo ~sbce o bils q exceptions In criminal
This was never IN. prsotce 10 thi, state until, 1880,
when the rstissd into effect Before that
time, tie mod. 81 REVERSING criminal trials uas By the
courts rsserying the point IN dispute for the consider
alien ~ the supreme Court Gaze made, when. II Il
tbs point dids not affect the merits, the court vas at
liberty 10 disregard ~ Upon bills OF eptions the
rule o this practice " otherwise The whole s not
ssntu and nothing more than just enough 20 pro.
ubatrtsDdipg 81 the point raised and N the ruling
below that point be erroneous new trial must be
srsnisd however ministerial " may be TO the main i
question ~ guilt ipbocebce The effect fs that the
Judge the trial unwilling TO embarrsss the cas-. By
exceptions and 20 give the sccused chance TO svoit
the copfsgu.rces Of . verdict Of guilty by exceptions
points really immatsrisl, IL tempted 20 relax the