New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-01-04
FROM BOSTON.

time when the statute-boOk OF MASSACHUSETTS Gun
tanned penal enactments against the Observance Vi
Christmas Then, later, much later, Is recoroeo
the repeal of those statutes. And hnaiiy ias'
wear. Christmas was made legal holiday by that
Know-Nothing Legislature which, with all It's
faults. did so many liberal things-wheh enacted
the Personal Liberty law, voted to remove Judge.
Lorinp. and sent Henry Wilson to the Senate OF
tbe nited States The leading State OF New
England has thus at last officially recognized that
great festival of the Universal Church when
everywhere else throughout Christendom mas been
constantly kept through immemorial ages ana
haowed by the highest the hohest the sweetest
recOectiOns OF successive generations
The observance of Christmas this year was very
general in Boston. 1t was the great gift-day,
instead of New-Yesrs, ss heretofore. New Years
il neglected. compared with its universal ana
hearty observance 10 New-York. But the custom
of making calls is steadily growing, and before
n,ary years will probably become general as win
YOU, We have now four general holidays ID Mas
Observation-Disclosures, Fourth of July, Thanks
Giving and Fsst-for the Annual Fast has degen-
Grated or advanced into holiday in spite OF the
Governors proclamation. 1t has become day
for fast men and fast horses. Everybody goes 10
ride who has any notion of the meaning OF 2:4U
And bows did 90 g cunning until the Legislature
put check on that pastime by prohibiting the
shooting of birds.
But in more important matters than the keeping
of Christmas we are making progress, namely
the rights of Jurors. Last week, IN the United
states District Court, on the trial of seacaptaln
before Judge Ware, b. +. Hallett, the United
States District Attorney, asked the Court to In
ouire of one of the Jurors whether he had not
expressed an opinion unfavorable to the evidence
of seamen in cases of conflict with masters and
officers and whether he was conscious Oh Dlas
in favor Of masters and officers in such cases
r. II. Dana, jr., for the defendant, objected 10
the question and insisted the right OF all par
ties In contests with the Government to have the
iury which the lot gave them. There were few
established causes for which the Court may refuse
Juror in case OF pecunlary interest," or certain
conscientious scruples; but he insisted that no IN
ouiries could be made into general opinions, predi
lections, or even prejudices The inquiry pro-
posed opened the question of class opinions or
class bases or prejudices, to which all the com
munity were more or less subject, and of which
the Government, as well as the defendant, must
take the chance. An attempt to pursue such in
quiries would put the Jury in the power OF the
Court. This would be especially dangerous 10 Po-
litica trials.
Mr. Hallett insisted on the right of the Govern
ment to have ali impartial jury, and the only way
to secure that end was by inquiries to the jurors
under the direction of the Court. If the Jurors
answers disclosed a bias or prejudice, whether
general OF special lift applicable to the on
tiiai he unfit 70 act He prassed tha anestnn in
this case, because he had learned Che declined to
say how that this juror, on one OF the previous
trials of similar case, had expressed such an
opinion.
Mr.. Dana said the reason assigned for pressing
the question by the United States Attorney made
the danger more apparent. The Court House and
its purlieus are in possession of one side in this
suit-the Government. The Government officers
fill the house, watch over, converse with and at.
tend upon the jury. All these officers, from the
highest TO the lowest are the mere servants OF the
Government hsldng office at the will of the Exec
utive. If the deliberations of the jury-rOOm, the
opinions and conversations of jurors in the rooms
and entries are to be overheard and repeated, and
become matter of inquisitiOn, and the Court House
turned into Ia Dionysus's Ear, the equal right of
the citizen against the Government was gone.
Judge Ware said that if the motion of the Dis.
trctAttorney was pressed, he should take time to
examine the question. But he would submit
few remarks, giving his present opinion, after
which perhaps the motion would be allowed to
drop.
The right of single citizen, in a contest with
the Government, to Jury drawn by lot and I'M
controlled in lite selection by the Government or
the Court lie the last hope of the minority against
the tyranny of the majority. II a course shall be
adopted which results in giving the Court the
power to control, in any degree, this selection,
founded on general opinions and prejudces Of
classes, political parties or religious sects, we are
near the last stages of free Government. Amy
extension, therefore, Of the right OF inquisitiOn
into opinions, even bias or prejudice, is step
in the wrong direction, and on delicate ground.
The Legislature has established certain disqualif
cations Of Jurors, and these must be inquired
into. The Court should be extremely cautious in
going beyond these. No authority, he believed,
could be found for such questions as were now
proposed. All men in the community are subject
more or less to bias or prejudice, arising from po-
litical, religious, social, class and business con-
nections and opinions. These vary, from scarcely
perceptible degree TO gross cases. In the ab.
stract, it might be desirable to get Juries in all
cases absolutely free from any such bias. But the
remedy would be worse than the disease. Each
side must take its chance Of these opinions and
biases and Of their degree. 1t is one of the CON-
penations We pay for the inestimabe privileges Of
free institutions.
The foreman OF the Jury and also one of the
Jurors behaved with commendabe spirit on this
occasion, and the result was that Dir. Hallett was
forced TO draw in his horns and eat humble pie
He withdrew his motion and apologized to the
Jury.
Ny reason for noticing the matter 10 this: Be
tween four and five years ago, on the 18th Of
June, 1851, happened to be present in the same
Court at the trial Of Robert Morris, a colored
member of the Boston Bar, for the rescue of
shadrack, the fugitive slave. Judge Spragus pre-
sided. Under his rulings there was considerable
difficulty in impanneling q Jury. Among other
Jurors who were called WAS Mr.. Joseph +. Ober
OF Beverley. The following question was put TO
him do you hold such an opinion Of the con-
sttutioDality or unconstitutonality Of the Fugi.
tive Slave Law as to prevent you from finding
verdict IN the case now pending, upon the evil