Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1858-02-26
Jse aallp SPg,
FRIDAY. FEBRUARY 2e, 1888.


The JurY Law.
We had supposed that the present Legislature
was intending TO inaugurate, among other re
forms, short session, and for that reason was
going to avoid wasting time in useless discussion
lis apparent to any one but the most obtuse
bunker, that the time consumed in attempts to
repeal the wise and just statute Of 1855, concern
ing "The Duties and Rights of Jurors" Is worse
than wasted. Yet the Judiciary Committee of
the House, which, we regret to be obliged to
state, Speaker Rockwell made up Of rather con-
servative. though able material, have reported,
through Mr.. Pitnan of New Bedford, bill to
repeal that law, which is assigned for eonsidera-
ton this afternoon at O'Clock. It is hoped
that the House, after giving respectful hearing
to the advocates OF the bill will reject it, as two
preceding Legislatures have set excellent exam
Piles in doing to similar reports in 1856 and 1857,
in 5oth Of which years the bills for the repeal Of
the jury Law after passing the Senate in re-
spouse to the recommendations of the Judiciary
Committee Of that body, summsTy rejected
by the House.
Toe Jury Law of 1856, which it IS proposed to
repeal, aud which is but rescript Of proposition
No. Of the proposed new Constitution of 1858
nearly all the other propositions of which have
been incorporated, in one form or another, in the
Constitution OF the State since, is as follows;
"In all trials for eriminal offences, it shall be
the duty OF the ury TO try according to estab
lished forms and principles of law all causes
which shall be committed TO them, and after hay-
lug received the instructions OF the court, TO de-
eide at their discretion by general verdict, both
the fact and the law involved IN the issue, or y
find a special verdict at their election. but it
shall be the duty OF the court to superintend the
course Of the trials, to decide upon the admission
and rejection Of evidence, and upon all questions
of law raised during the trials, and upon all col
lateral and incidental proceedings, and also to
charge the jury and to allow bills Of exception,
and the court may grant new trial in Cases OF
conviction"
This iudicious statute, which is similar in its
provisions to the law which was passed by the
Legislature in 1903 and left out by accident from
the Revised Statutes in 1886, it is now proposed
the Judiciary Committee of the House to re-
peal, ut we trust it will result fruitlessly. Ger
tainly, the PIE ent Legislature cannot be brought
q sanction so suicidal an act, as asserting to
such repeal
We rejoice to perceive that it is the intention
of Mr.. Andrew of Boston. who is the acknowledge
ed Republican leader in the House, to moye this
afternoon, when the question comesup, the print
lug of one thousand copies of the able report of
Judge Huntington, chairman of the House Ju-
dietary Committee of 1856, who reported the law
in question. That report was a very elaborate
production, going over the whole ground in con-
troversy, according to historical precedent, and
showing conClusively that the law recommended
is but the loug established common law, not only
of this country, but of England, from time i'm
memorial, and only sought to be interfered with
or controverted in rare, exceptional instances,
which were soon obliged to be made to succumb
to the (till recently universally conceded con.
mon law.
II there are any Republicans in the Legislature
disposed to favor the recommendations of the
present judiciary Committee of the House, we
trust they may be induced, before voting to &C
cept their Recommendation, to ponder we'll the
following extract from the speech of Hon. Charles
Allen, in the Constitutional Convention of 1853,
in support of provision like the statute which it
is now proposed to speal;
'sr, it me, thst the pangs and fears which
haunt my lends at the very idea that jury should be
allowed pass upon the law criminal cases. after all
the opportunity they have had derived from the instruc
tions OF learned court results from unreasonable
dstrust Of that institution The fear is that that which
fathers regarded the palladium Of liberties
should prove be their destruction and hst there no
salty for freedom foun but on The bench. Now
Sir have such fear. Neither the experience Of the
past my reflection, have filed with any such
apprehension In the Of a somewhat long pro
fess0nal career from year TO year have learned
epect more and more the decisions of juFies have
ernsd to rest there the last resort and defence of my
liberties, my rights and my privileges. The Legislatures
may pass unreasonable and unconstitutional laws and
conservative courts may sustain them b the
jury, with the Constitution and Bill Of Rights in their
hands, TO protect against unconstitutional
reasonable dangers. Sir in ordinary the juries
will always take the law from the court which relieves
them from great responsibilities responsibility from
which they seek be relieved Inasmuch as they take
oath to act upon the law and the evidence to de-
eide rightly, they may consistently with the obligations
OF that oatn the Law the opinion OF the court
But dhere great which sometimes arise in the
history Of the nation, 10 which fundamental principles
assaiAd when you rely entirely upon the leg
islature upon the courtsi when your defence must
come from the people themselves from the jures who
Of the people Sir, the Bill of Rights declares cerain
great principles, and certain privileges among
which that all men Oorn free and equal
they have right 10 defend their lives and liberties Now
II law is passed which contravenes those rights, do
not believe should.be left entirely the to deter
mine what the law is. believe The people themselves
have the right to this security not only against the legis-
laure but against the courttoo believe the jury have
the right to say Whethers in their opinion, law violates
fundamental principle laid down in this Bill Of Rights
They will Bpurn the opinion OF the legislature and Of the
courts and all human authority that be combined
and, standing upon the charter Of all of Massachu
sets, Will oesre the law unconstitutional"