New-York tribune., 1873-03-12
JURY BOX AND BAR.
suGGEsTIoNs PROM LAwYERS-wHERE TIL
PRESENT SYSTEM Is DEFECTIVE.
PANELS OF THE FUTURE.


succrsrIoNs FROM LAwYERS-wHERE THE
PRESENT SYSTEM is DEFECTIVE.
The system of trial by jury, from the
prenaration of the Jury lists to the rendering Of YER
Diet has become topic OF general discussion, and law
vers are alive 10 the necessity OF reforming it, The legal
profeson generally is unprepared for positive express
sons OF opinion TO the best methods Of reform Some
lawyers favor radical changes but unwilling to com
init themselves by basty assertion of views. The
sreatest trouble In the selection OF ures in this State
in this city the First Judicial District
Many believe that the only reform demanded Is IN the
in which jurors selected. Very Few lawyers aS
Yet are willing to express opinion. TRIBUNE re
porter with several members OF the Oar Oh
the subject and their views viii appear below.
Henry Nieol called attention to the growth ana
changes in the system Of trial by jury. It's traces are
found rude and imperfect, in the earliest perious OF
scandinavian history, and are believed to nave Always
existed in varying forms among the nations OF leu'ono
origin As now established, IL has acquired co"p'oo
ness only with the slow growth OF successive "SoS'
Jurors in early English history we're men taken from
the neighborhood Of the cOntending persons ana SC
lcted from ther acquaintance with the ntgants ana
their familiarity with the facts OF the case Ihese qa
ifctions were then deemed most important IN ehaous
a Jury 10 arrive at proper verdict Az 1he Pesen'
xime the reverse what once the rule is the eso
lsbed law and jurors selected on account OF theH
indifference 20 the at stake and the blankness
of their minds IN regard 10 preoonoerted opinions 10
secure proper verdcts attempt should be made 10
reform the system without involving any Organic
changes II might he advisable TO take verdict reh
dered by majority OF the jury puV III
such case there would be properly 10 chahge'
for az seven Jurors would constitute majority and the
concurrent vote of the would be required IN rem
derine verdict the jury might be limited easily TO
that number the only benefit to be otherwise derived
existing in the interchange Of opinions and the direction
that might be gwen by the minority TO the force ana
character of the verdict Mr. Nicol does not think II
necessary change the jury system by providing Tor
less than a unanimous verdict. The radical reform re-
qured is in selection Of jurors and the determination
of their qualifications. The best men, taxpayers shond
lie placed on list. and the preparation OF the jury
list and the summonng Of jurors should be nrusted 10
capable and officers. Mr.. NcOll regards as mat
ter OF the greatest importance the necessity OF keeping
a Jury together and not permitting the members 10
separate particularly capital cases, until they have
reuoered a verdict As 10 general changes IN the sys
TEN Mr. Nco like other lawyers thinks the subject OF
too great importance for hasty action, or for the eA
preston OF random opinions.
Joshua Van COtt thought that the subject was TOO I'M
portant discussion at short notice He had no ma
tured opinion, but fully approved Of THE TRIBUNEs
yiews There are constitutional objections 10 be eonsid
cred as no essential changes can be made IN the jury
system without constitutional enactment. In support
of this view he referred 10 the Cancem case wherein
the Court OF Appeals decided that verdict by eleven
Jurors unaWful, NOTWITHSTANDING Nho va
the defendant accept such a verdict Whatever
changes are desirable must be carefully considered Dut
he thought II expedent to change the system by pro-
yiding for less than unanimty in the rendering OF a
verdict Ample provision for struck" Jurles III poth
OWL and criminal cases should also be made.
CITY Judge Sutherland sald that his experience OF
juror led him TO believe that jurors were pretty gen
orally honest and that the jury system was not so I'm
perfect need hasty changes. In regard to methOds
Of reform he was unwilling to express an opinion with
su reflection considering the subject too wide TO be DIS
posed OF without extended discussion Ii the jury sSs
tenn is 10 be touched it must be done with great caution
lacking at cases of homicide where the defense OF in-
sanity IS nterposed judge Sutherland thought that the
greatest difficulty III securing conviction Hes IN the
testimony sOcaled experts, and in the mode Of deal
ing with such evidence, which he thought should be
accepted greater hesitation and scrutiny than at
present.
DistrctAttOrney Phelps was unwilling to commit
himsef to any particular reform of the jury system with
out careful thought. That changes OF some KIND are
necessary he assumed patent 10 all VINO had gwen
the subject "a moments attention In his opinion. II is
difficult to get the best jurors and there is much
fault 70 be with class Of intelligent citizens VINO
evade Jury service and fail respond 20 those duties
which they in with the rest OF the community
insist should be discharged with intelligence and reet