Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1870-09-27
The Grand Jury System.

The Constitution Of the State pro-
vides that no person shall be con-
victed of a crime unless previously
indicted by Grand Jury; however,
minor offenses, such as the stealing
Of property under the value of $40,
is punishable by mere complaint
before Justice of the Peace and no
indictment is required. 1t becomes
the duty Of the electors Of the State
at the coming general election to de-
termine whether the Grand Jury
system shall be retained or abolished.
AT common law we understand
that the ordinary number of Grand
Jurors was twenty-three. The num-
Der could not be less than fifteen, be-
cause that number was necessary to
constitute a quorum. 1t also requir
ed that twelve of the number should
agree as to the finding of an indict-
ment, otherwise the accused party
was discharged. The statute
law in this State has reduced the
number of Grand Jurors in each
county to seventeen. The proceed
ings Of Grand Juries have generally
been secret, with closed doors, the
jury being sworn not to divulge any
Of its deliberations, unless one of
such jurors was called upon to testi-
fly in court of justice. The action
of the Grand Jury has usually been
er-pdrte, that body only hearing the
testimony on the part Of the prosecu-
ton. 1t seems the determination Of
the editors Of this State to tear up
this old system-root and branch,
and none seem to be frank and just
enough to suggest that all the OBJ
jections urged against the system
might be altered by legislation or
by the rule Of courts themselves.
The practice in this circuit, so far as
we have noticed in tho charges to
Grand Juries, has been to instruct
that body TO examine and hear the
evidence upon both sides, and even
of the.accused party if willing to tes-
tify. The only reason that the Sc
creey could not be controlled by the
court is that legislative acts impose
that secrecy, which legislative acts
could easily be repealed if necessary.
A secret examination ought to be
forbidden in all cases unless the Of
fender be at large, and where
knowledge of the examination migM
cause him to escape beyond Ehe
reach of justice.
In those States whore Gr9Ad Ju-
ries have been abolished, Gh exam
nation of their statutes ESill show
that after difterent expedients have
been tried, some tribHnal or other
has been established invested with
the power of dcternining what per-
sons ought to be/tried for criminal
acts and what accusations are too
trivial in themselves or too feebly
supported By evidence to require an
examination before Petit Jury. Ii
IS obvlo1s to every one that this es-
sentlaIaud important matter should
not re within the breast of the Dis
trNI Attorney, nor would there be
&ny end or limit to criminal trials if
/our circuit courts were compelled to
try every person who might be
bound over by Justice of the Peace
to appear before them.
The abolition of the Grand jury
however, we regard as foregone
conclusion. Its restoration with
some alterations which the legisla-
ture might now make, we regard as
equally certain. The reduction of
the number of Grand Jurors to
number less than twelve, which can
not be effected without q change in
the constitution, may result in the
saving of expense but it would have
been q measure of far greater i'm
portance in respect to expense to the
people OF the State il the number of
Petit Jurors in the circuit court
were reduced, say to six men, in all
eaSes where the matter in dispute is
Vi limited Importance, or where in
criminal cases the defendant is not
iaoie 10 Imprisonment in the State
The clause OF the Constitution re-
fered to (Seo. s, Art. reads as fol.
lows:
mo person shall be held to an.