Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-02-26
Gbs 1alIp SRg.
FEBRUARy &c 1857.


svS,Top RoA4fs SPEBcH.-The leader in the
r.,r,cr;pt ot Yesterday morning consisted Of the
-..h n,de bv Hon George F. Hoar in the
s., s.n,,s Feb l6 in favor Of his bill to repeal
~, Inv law Of 1855. After yielding the main
point in issue, by granting thstthe right and DUTY
Of Jurors to judge Of both law and TACT, IN cflm'
nd case, ghas always been the established law IN
Faeland and admitting that il would De soeno
and lust policy to pursue in large Tepeehe'
n. aoar objects to It's exercise IN our own Com
monw, sltt. among other reasnnsl because some
anr indoes. within the last dozen years, have
s;vsn certain decisions which are adverse to all
the previous Supreme Court decisions in the ju-
dieial history Of the Commonwealth! And yet
Mr.. Hosr makes, in the same speech. the state
ment.-a The judiciary is permanent body, and
is construction Of lao Is therefore consistent and
pevmanehs :" Ii this be so, how happens itthat
,nv members of the I" eminent Judiciary" of this
Commonwealth have recently gwen decis'ons IN
opposition to the decisions Of the 'ohofe supreme
Court Of the State, at various times, once in 1851,
As declared BY Chief Justice Shaw, as follows =
Gas the iury have the right, and, if required by
the prisoner, are bound to return genera ee si
aiet az guilty or not guilty, they 'as 1ece SuTaty
decfds such questions of iaO as aoett as o. Jget as
are iapoLUed IL thus general question: ana 1sefe 70
no mode bg sohtch their opinions upon questions
lao can be rsvised By this Court or any oter '-
bsnat 10 Pick, p 4So
1t strikes us that to he "Permanent," these re-
cent contradictory decisions which Mr.. Aoar SO
much extols, and which form the basis OF his ar
gument. should be made to conform to the pre-
vious universally established judcialsecisions, in
this State and elsewhere, like that embodied In
the above extract.
For the lie OF US, we cannot see why the size
Of a arepublc," whether it be of the dimensions
Of any one, or Of the whole combined, OF
the thirty-one confederated republics" or be
no larger than old Massachusetts,, should
make any difference as to the application Of the
established principles of jury trial in its Courts
The people have the same rights, whether living
in a "republic" with eight thousand or eight
million square miles. The principles OF justice
are the same in every community, aid RePubli
can principles should not vary with the number
Of square miles under its jurisdiction.
Mr. Hoar would nave us believe, that although
it may be necessary to give the jury the full right
to Judge Of both law and fact in a monarchicai
government, it would not be "expedient" or
"practical to grant it in a" Commonwealth Ike.
ours, at this present pe:od Of its history And
forgetting that Thomas Jefferson aud other radi-
cal Republicans of half century ago. were even
more ardent advocates of this right than were
John Adams and other conservatives of those
times. Mr.. Hoar would intimate that the early adj
vOcates OF jury rights were chiefly old fsderal-
ISIS aud one u them an ''avowed monarchist
Now, few quotations from Mr.. Jefferson and
others othis stamp, would satisfy every one that,
while conservatives might come up TO the scratch
on so PLAN point, the more radical men Of that
period were still stronger in their advocacy ofthis
great popular right.