, 1875-09-07

THE Jury 6Ya1Eu

1MH-TcIOIHt lB ono nI mo most Uittiqll{t
sorts of reforms. Our court-prao.ico is
modelled on forms centurica old. Tho whole
system is incr1lstcd with rust md antiquity.
Loo 1na'1y reorle nro pccuniarily Interested
III Keeping mp these forms. eacl, ono of whicl,
II eh,!se OF fecs, to mako the destruction OF
tho bad ones at nil an casy matter. The ngo
Of tho SYSTEM il proof Of lis goodness, rs n
whole, but this proof by no meaus extends to
every rartlcnlar part. II thoro il anything
In tho system which waa introduced on nc
count OF reasons which no longer exist, =
reasons born Of a political and social systom
long since extinct,-thls something is an o.
crescence, retained simply for it's ago and not
for its utility, md therefore thing to be
Topped of. This, ngo in in somo cases
presumption againsl tho goodness Of an idea,
instead Of for it. Tho ago Of tho jury systcul
ia case in point.
Ihe jury 'n its present form is tho product
OF bRrbnrot,s civilization. 1ts ccntrpl iten
is that man should bo tried by his "reers.
This term, mouthcd by lawycrs and stump
speakers, Is but catchpenny phrase and
fraud. When England was divided into
classes much moro completely than it is oven
now, when class and cnsto were synonyms,
tho right of mnn to be tried By his eaunls
was granted, in order to protect m alleged
culprit from the arbitrary violence of KIM.
or MOBILES, or clergy. Yet, oven from tho be.
ginning this right has never been conploto
Women are never tried by their peers, 4
jury Of matrons is impanelcd only for ono
recnlinr purpose. Minors aro never tried by
their peers. Aliens aro never tried by their
peers Nine out Of ten defendants nro not
tried By their peers. No man in so tried un.
less tho twelve jurors aro his equals in intel
Igenco md character. However often tia
latter proyiso is carried out, tue former rarely
is. Ought mnn to 5o tried By lis interiors?
Ought he not rather to be Judged by his s,,pe.
riofH, MS long M no class feeling interyoncs to
cause injustice? Tho historical analysis Of
tho origin of tho present inry system shows
that it il duo to the existence of strongly.
marlfcd castes in tho community. Thia aris-
tocratic reason does not apply to democratic
America. Wo need not be afraid of the
influence Of King, Church, or mobiles. The
Jury system, requiring united verdict. In
saving It's from this wholly imaginary danger,
exposes us to anothor and real danger.
Packing jury to cnuse disagreement is
'ne of the easiest things in tho world for q !
Sheriff or Dcputy-Sheria to do. It is unfor- |
unatcly often done. Thus tho plan devised
o protect defendants from tho injustice Of
he higher classes too often exposes them to
he brihcd injustice Of tho lower.
1t is A fact pertinent to this discussion TINT
'nr chancery courts, although tho cases sub
nittcd to them Aro far moro intricate, as q
1le, than common-1aw suits, exceed the
ommon-law courts in tho thoroughness
nd rapidity with which they doal out JUS
ice. Their justice, too, has much mora of
he genuine articlo in it. The main reason
i this is to be found in the fact that thoy
avo no jtlries. That Btu1nbling.blook is cot
id Of. 4 Judge or d Master in Chancery de-
iaes both law and fact
Tho reasons for trying man by twelve Of
is peora no longer exist. The system should
isappear with the disappearance Of tho
muses. that gavo it birth. Let Us hayo less
ilatory and dubious Inv and more Justice.