Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-03-19
The Jary Law.

The JdFy LAWs
The House Committee on the Judiciary con-
sists Of seven members. -Four of these, Messrs,
vose of Springfield, Russell of Boston, Bailey of
FitehburV. and Cone of West Stoekbr'dge, re-
nortea on Friday last that the Senate bill repeal
inc the law of 1855, giving juries power to judge
of the law as well as the fact in criminal cases,
ou0ht to PASS The three other members of the
Committee, Messrs. E. c. Baker Of Medford,
fchairman,) William H. Wood Of Middleboro''
and S. P. Adams of Lowell, submitted a minors
ty report, couched i'm just phase of argument,
that the Senate bill ought not to pass The two
reports were then placed in the orders of the day,
We trust the minority report will be endorsed by
the House.
1t is hoped that at time when the Supreme
Court of the Union is encroachng with such rap
id strides upon the rights OF the people, the ju-
ries as the representatives of the people, will be
allowed to retain in full, their long tedrights,
as a protection against judicial usurpatiOns.
In view of the recent decision of the Supreme
Court Of the United States, in the bred Scott
case, let us see what will be the necessary result,
in our inferior Courts, of construction Of thejury
law as laid down by Mr.. Hoar and his associates.
A proposition has been adopted in the lower
branch Of our State Legislature to have the Com
mittee on that decision consider the expediency
ofebtaining from the Supreme Court of the State
replies to the following queries =
L. Is the decision of the Supreme Court of the
United States in relation to the aforementioned
case in accordance with the national Constitu-
ton !
q How far does that decision have binding
force on the people of Massachusetts
Now, had we a Supreme Judiciary like that of
Wisconsin, rejecting the sentiments Of the PEo-
PIE. and responsible to them by being elective
for limited periods of time, we should have some
confidence in the utility or expediency of ref
srence of question of this kind to that quarter
for decision But-what can we expect of court
which has repeatedly ruled against the long-es-
tablished rights of the jury, affirmed the consti-
tutionalityi of the infamous Fugitive Slave Act'
sanctioned the atrocities committed under it, and
consented to walk under chains and letters to the
court house, at the beck of the federal judiciary
Were it possible for the State Court to give de-
cisien in accordance with popular right, by
spurning the decision of the federal judiciary, no
one could be more pleased than ourselves at the
idea of such reference. But there can be no
question that, whatever may be their private
opinions," our respected State justices would
bow, as they did in the Sims and Burns cases,
in humble acquescence to the "supreme author
ity" of the "higher tribunal . of the Union,
without whispering single declaration of dissent
in opposition thereto.
Such being the fact, what hope is there for
freedom, in slavery cases. likely at any time to
arise in our courts but in the reservation to the
people, represented in the jury, to- 70 iono
vested right to considsr,s ;ottin the law and the
l@e' N 'ne sssE-ssssacts Unless we wish to pros
aaFSurselves in abject submission at the feet Of
the slave power, let the people of Massachusetts
preserve on their statute book the salutary Law,
now there, guarding and protecting them in the
enjoyment of the inesiimable privilege which
has been their bWthright from time immemorial.
The Supreme Court of the Union humbles it.
self in the dust by STOPPING to sanction and sane
tify the edicts of the slave ogarchy; the Supreme
Court Of the State, whatever its private opinlons'
will not utter word of dissent, on the plea of
supreme Jurisdiction, and therefore virtually sane
tions those usurpations; and, to complete the hu-
initiation, the State court rules that the people
have no right to express a counter opinion of the
law, to what is laid down by the court, in their
jury decisions. Is not this the essence of des-
potisms
We sincerely hope, that, as a safeguard against
usurpatons of this kind, the Legislature of Mas
sachusetts will permit the Jury Law of 1866 to
remain upon the statute book, by adopting the
report of the minority of the committee on the
subject, in the House.
To those who hold to the despotic doctrine, so
dangerouste liberty, advanced by Mr.. Hoar, that
the juries, or the people, should not be entrusted
with the right to decide as to the constitutonalitY
of legislative enactments, but that the courts.
alone, are to be the final arbiters of the law in
criminal proceedings, we commend perusal of
the following extract from the speech of Hon.
Charles Allen, in the City Hall in Worcester,
Nov. 5, 1850:
'0ur fathers brought the institution of jury
trial with them, across the ocean. And there
never has been day, when the people of this
country, and especially the people of Massachu-
sets, did not most jealousy guard that right 1t
is a right too sacred to be given up to the keep
ing Of any man or body of men, but belongs to
THE PEOPLE themselves Its original de-
sign, its great design, was, to protect the people
against the government. And, therefore, it has
been regarded, both in England and America,
the palladium of Liberty. 1t must not be left in
the keeping uf statesmen. II must not be left an
the keeping of the COURTS OF JUDIcATURE, II is
one Of the fundamental principles WHICH THE
PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, and which they must take
care Of and guard for themselves.
ask you, my friends, not to believe that the
Constitution, which the people made for them
selves, is a sealed book, which you may not open,
oracle, sohtch the priests only interpret but
to regardit an instrument made By the people,
consequently understood By the people intended
for tie government ofthe people, and to be UNDER
STOOD By THE PEOPLE who are to be governed
by it.
This right, guaranteed by the Constitution, you
must guard for yourselves. You must not trust
tDsplicitiy eUen 10 courts Of justice. You must
not leave the question of the constitutionality Of
a law TO the final decision even Of that high tri-
bunal, the Supreme Court of the United States.
There questions, vttat to Liberty, 1ohtch
YOU MUST NOT ENTRusT TO ANY DEPOSITORY OF
DELEGATED POWER. They are safest with THE
PEOPLE"
ANOTHER SLAVE CAsE.-Boston was in a state
of considerable excitement, yesterday, in conse-