New national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1870-1874, 1871-06-01

The counsel for the defense in the Foster
murder trial in New York city moved the
arrest Of the editor of the New York Tribune
for contempt of court, because of the follow
ing editorial in that paper. The motion was
denied
Absuraities In Our Criminal COurts.
After several hours deliberaton, which we
are compelled to suppose was serious and ma
ture, but which we are disposed TO suspect from
the character of the jury was not profound, the
Jurors sitting in the Foster case were unable
TO reach any conclusion as To his guilt or limo
cence, or the degree of his offending, and were
| locked up for the night. This hesitation In
framing "a verdict in a case where the facts OF
the murder were 80 clearly established and un-
disputed, and the malice and generalization OF
the murderer so clearly apparent, would APP
pear very remarkable but for two or three cir
cumstances developed on the trial Besides
affecting this present Issue, in which all New
York is 80 deeply interested, these develop
ments serve TO illustrate some Of the many
absurdities of that jury system which was
once the pride of the law aud the palladium Of
liberty, but which corrupt practice in the
courts has made disgrace to the law and
dangerous to the safety, if not the liberty, OF
the people. We may be pardoned for refer
ence to these points at this time, when the
verdict in Fosters case is unknown, because
the remarks though based on it, are applicable
to dozens of other trials lately held in this
community, and, indeed, to the common and
corrupt practice now generally in vogue in
! this State.
! In the first place, the court has gone delber-
/ atey to work to secure the most ignorant and
negative characters possible as jurymen to
decide between this man and the people. Some
have said that it does not follow that because
a man happens, as these jurors profess, to be
ignorant Of the circumstances OF this partlcu-
lar homicide, that they are lacking in general
intelligence. But it does follow, as a natural
conclusion. The case was one of great afro
city; it was the talk of the city for days; it
was detailed at length in all the daily papers,
and commented on for several days after its
occurrence. TO confess ignorance of the facts
as told in the papers is to admit virtually that
one does not read the daily journals habitu-
ally; and how many men of average lntell
gence, fit to sift facts from opinions and con-
lectures, able to decide upon right and wrong
in matters of fact and law, neglect their daily
journal? If We are to consider the Foster
jurors men Of average intelligence, the answer
is about one in hundred, for We believe some
what more than one thousand citizens were
summoned before the present jury was Sc
lected. The proportion is not hatterlng, GER
talnly. If their order of intelligence was not
shown to be low by the examination which
they underwent, their indecision Of character
was clearly proven. Not one of them answered
the questions put to them with clearness and
positiyeness. They were certain only of their
ignorance and impartiality. 1t is usually sup
posed that men of intelligence are less open to
prejudlces than ignorant ones but the law,
under present practices, CONSTITUTES knowledge
to-
to the most incapable whom it is possible to
drum up. The prejudces of positive men are
much TO be dreaded, but who would not rather
trust them, If honest and intelligent than men
OF such negative dispositions that they side
with the last artful lawyer who addresses
them? The law which requires that jurors
should be Ignorant of the facts of the case to
he brought before them does not demand that
they should never have heard or read OF it.
They could not, perhaps, legally be Jurors if
personally cogniZant of the facts, but the hear.
ing or reading OF them need not disqualify any
man, for 1t is folly to suppose that an intelli-
gent Juror cannot separate in his mind the
legal aud valid testimony he hears on trial and
the narrative which he may have read in the
papers Certainly AN unintelligent one could
not; and, therefore, the greater reason for
e!eVatlng the standard of jurymen, instead Of
lowering It, as the present legal practices
tend.
Having selected the most ignorant Jurors at
tainable, the next proceeding OF the Court is to
mystify and contound them az much posi-
bic. They are chosen at random they are
generally as ignorant of law as of fact, and
have TO depend for the former on the court AS
completely on the witnesses for The latter.
long course Of legal study is deemed neces-
sary to qualify n Judge To administer the law
IN matters OF property merely but twelve men
without special legal training, and sometimes
without good common school education, are
supposed To be competent, after once hearing
the law stated, to dispense justice in matters
of life and death. This seems the height Of
absordity and so, it would seem, skillful law
yers consider it. for they never fail to compli
cate their weakest causes by obtaining multi
pliclty OF charges 10y the court For instance,
the facts were plainly put before the jury in
the Foster case. There was no chance to dis
tort them and few men with common sense
and that intultive knowledge of justice pos
sessed by all persons however ignorant OF law
would have long hesitated over them. But the
skillful counsel Of the prisoner submitted to the
Judge, and through him the jury were charged
upon not less than twenty-three points of law.
In many of these the nice distinctions between
what is law and what is not were stated after
style which would have puzzled the best read
evitably have confused any man of average in
telligenCe unread in criminal law. We have
nothing TO say ut this time of the character Of
these charges. 1t i'd sufficiently TO our pur-
pose that their number alone would have con-
fused, as they seem TO have done this jury, any
dozen men compelled to consider them only
from recollection after one hearing.
1t cannot be concealed from those who have
watched this Foster trial closely that these
practices of selecting and then confusing Jurors
which have gradually grown up in the New
York courts have been employed to save this
assassin from the doom which the law fixes for
murder. They may have been employed to no
purpose, and We do not mean by these remarks
To IMPLY any improperly upon the part Of the
counsel, who have used means which past prac-
tees have warranted but cannot justify. 1t is the
practices themselves, not those who employ
them, that We condemn. 1t has become serious
question. in view Of the possible and probable
escape OF this murderer upon what we cannot
consider as better than legal bubbles, as 20
where these practices are to lead US in the ad-
ministration of law and justice and the sooner
1t is answered the better for justice and society
GOVERNOR boutwell, is taking all unfair ad
vantage over the Democratic party. He sends
out several thousand electioneering documents
every month, which keep the Democratic press
forever the defensive These mnpthIy Dab,