The Montana post., 1868-12-18
CUR JU.Y SYSTEM.
NUatBER J.

'1-.u,f;L consideration than tho revis-
IS, tfr jury system ia ijs application
riyfI cases As "A citizen deeply inter.
-.5 i'm the welfare of the Territory.
,3 having had enlarged opportunities
- forming correct Judgment upon the
-.r.'aF operation OF the old common
t.,y confinement of "A unanimous verdict
- .l5 -s.-,,s, / have noted with pleasure
b.. rouf~,. uf tie press ot the Territory
s, calling public attention I'D this subs
80 ,vith the view Of securing a reiOr-
,r.rfaa ut existing abuses. There are
-1sry intelligent and estimable citizens
,-L. viii doubtless decry any attempt to
t.,.-.. What they consider fundamental
3lsI- approved by the wisdom OF ages,
mi will regard u proposition To change
,b,. common law practice ia this parIic-
'-T-- aS "A revolution. rather than re.
t,ru ID perhaps will not be unsene-
-,r-r1 classify sucn persons, as among
.Er-.. whose tsvorite idea of statesman-
-If, Il. 10 form "A theory in advance, and
.fgu twist aud distort facts so make them
.1p,.rm 10 this previously conceived
.aagrv. nor will IL be out of place TO
.--.-.-.,~- psuch. that true statesmanship.
srra- urT Dt governing State well, IL
r.rf.fur more than the exercise of a vast
,m.ru, ut common sense as applied to
admitted facts.
VTg- uructicr of summOning Jurors a 5
a,.v:-s,-l bv the customs of our Saxon
s.--.,tlers. gvLs 10 draw the jury from
,l. LIST Dt Witnesses or those whom
f-a,1 Nae. utuInrss OF their residence To
rEr place where the difficulty occurred
h was reasonable tU suppose had some
rsrSbuaj knowledge of the facts of The
case and IL seems that the Theory upon
which tGc whole jury was required To
.-r.r. WAS that there must be somgrlIing
-sIfraIIy wrong, VI those who saw or
knew uf the difficulty could not unani-
mou-lv decide as To- what did actually
rr.Ur We have 10 This day preserved
rEp form Oi the old custom by pro-
..I.u- IN our laws ior the sum-
moaning and empaunriing Ot jurors
thar tar jury shall be- drawn from the
syjriua.c" Ur ueiShbcrhU1d. bat instead
at aGuyrin- to that portion ot the Gus
ram uuf oi which the requirement of
IN unanimous verdict grew. VIZ: CONS
.rY-Iusr rut Jury ot tue witnesses them
selves. we throw around the jury box
.y.sg sli-EUarI which ingenuity can
l.gle.. ia order Ia obtain those "a lu~
ra-s who know nothing wha ever ot the
..rr- ut the case. Or who have formed
rr expressed no opinion upon the mer-
It's rl Eue controversy 1t Will thuS ue
--- that the requirement ot au uuani-
urgs verdict haas uutliyed the cause 81
srs origin aud should be abolished. un-
less urArr causes have ia the mean
rimr sup-rvrn-d. rendering TIE retCn-
lion u- Il.u practice STA. advisable
Dc L. matter OF common history.
-lat wish 'h- dreaty nee oi the Saxon
ffrf
-r.-s vnp were -oguizant oi the
#r-s and tadiuaugur1liun ot the pres
sa. system ol obtaining IL from those
.-aurau5 0i them. that IL was found
rrrrl cIu-.ss too numerous Ia mcntiOn)
aLum-- impossible ro obtain Il verdict 90
a.. u sr4ahuFu.y contested cases; and
E-ur. grew rhe cruel English practice
1s -Hrr-IuE q. verdict uut of unwilling
-LI1T~ los drpTiyinE them ot fire and
-n.u until they should agree; thus treat
.as the iuror ae criminal. instead of n
iguEr, and hy compelling him to surren
Irr his honest convictions. leaving him
Hu option between starvation on the
uus hand and PERJURY on tile other We
uuT surak 90 the English custom above
referred % and which was prevalent in
England less than a century ago, as
Frlc ut baUbarisui, and Yet il was no
more than the logical result of adhe~
fiHE 10 the rule of requiring an unanI-
nous verdict when the reason of the
fuIr had ceased To exist There was a
necessity that there should be a speedy
end Co Iitg tion in order that the set
element ot rights OF persons and proper
y SuuUld prevent the endangering of
tile public peace; and since an honest
and unanimous verdict could not 6oth be
obtained, English Judges bent their ems
eTEirs To- the obtaining of the verdict by
r1rrcing the conscience Of the juror.
The enlightened sense OF justice of the
Present age Tevolts at the idea of placing
The juror in such a cruel dilemma, and
hence the present humane practice OF
allowing jurors the ordinary comforts
% life pending their deliberations, aud
iiseharEiDE them in case OF disagree~
menr, aiIer allowing them a reasonable
time TO agree but by adheriug 10 the
rule of requiring an unanimous verdict,
when the reason Tor il is gone, we in
vulre ourselves in the same difficulty
that formerly hedged the English courts,
except that there. by coercing verdict,
Tie burden tell apOn the jurors, while
here, by failing to arrive at verdicts in
contested cases. the burden falls upon
tAe parties liIigant and the tax>paying
portion Of the community. In England
Ihey have found way out of their diff
hculties, in consequence OF the fact that
Ia civil cases trial by jury has almost
become obsolete, while here we can only
Fd ourselves OF them by allowing the
Eertiet Of two~thirds OF three tOurths
OF tiIv jury 10 stand as the verdict of
ihe whole. thus rendering the system
more republican in lis character by tax
ins from one juror tue absolute veto
Power which he now holds over the
other eleven, and thus giving an impe>
ius 70 the development OF our resources
oy att0rding the assurance that disputes
VIII bee speedily settled, instead of. as at
Present, having the subject matter OF
hNsaJion eaten mp by tue expenses OF
fepvated trials, growing out of the fall
ate of Juries 10 unanimously sgree-
The Proposition here suggested is not