The Fairfield herald. [volume] (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1849-1876, 1875-04-28
Important Ruling.

Daring tho present session Of the
court Of common plcasfor tho county
Of York Judge Maokey rendered the
following impcrtant decision as to
the competency of jurors who caunot
read in cases involving an examina-
ton by the jury Of documentary evil
dcoce. Tho decision certainly has
reason on it's side, and will prove of
great practical value in our courts
In the trial ofan issue Of fact, in
volvirg the examination Of written
or printed Instrument, it isa good
ground Of challenge to n juror that
he cannot read. Tho fact that citi.
zen duly drawn as juror cannot
read would not disqualify him to
serve as such, but would 60 to i'm
pair his competency in the special
case stated. ~ juror may bo unable
to read, and yet may be possessed of
~ sound judgement aud of groat men,
tai vigor. The only montal quail.
fcation prescribed by statnto for
jurors is that they shall be "pcrsons
of sound Judgment" but if the
judgment Is to bo exercised in the
examination of written instrume ent,
the only avenue through which it
can be certainly informed is closed
to him who cannot read its contents.
Thus the case presented for the con,
tideration of the jury may arise un-
der an Indictment for forgery, and
the defense may be that the party
whose name is alleged to have been
forged to the noto or draft in nuos
tion authorized the accused to sign
his name thereto, and the accused
may thereupon present in evidence
the written authority, alleged tc
have been executed by tho person
whose signature he is charged with
having forged, and may adduce let
tcrs admitted to be in tho own prop
or handwriting of such person, in
proof Of the authenticity of the al
legged authority to sign. Clearly, in
this case, tho verdict would turn upon
tho identity of writer of tho letters
and the writer of alleged authority
TO sign, and also upon the further
question, whether tho terms OF the
Litter did convey tho powor to sign.
The jury in such case must rost
thoir judgments upon the writing
themselves, the authority to sign
being denied. This class of evidence
VIII be to o Juror who cannot read as
If it did not exist. So in IL case Of
libel, where the jury arc tho judges
ofthc law as we'll as the facts the
tIionso consists in the writing and
publishing Of false, scandalous and
malicious statements, 10. The al
legged libel must be sot out in its
full tenor and terms. If tho juror
cannot read, and if ho is to repose
his Judgment upon tho alleged pub
licatlon as read in court, it follows
that his vordiot must rost upon the
crcdencc that he gives to him who
reads and not upon tho writing it.
self. Why. therefore, does the law
require that the libelons writing it.
self shall be produced before the iu.
ry, and that they shall Judge of The
facts, and whether, rs proved, thoy
constitute libel under tho law?
1T will be admitted that total
deafness would be good ground Of
challenge in case where the testi.
money is oral :; and yet written tcs.
,'mony is to, tho, man who cannot
hear. In tho case before tho court
therefore, involving tho oxamina-
t'on OF written Instruments in owl
dcnca, the jurors who cannot read
will be excused.
Under tue above ruling other
.lnrleS than tho original panel were
drawn and it is but proper to say
that during the present week Of the
term tho jurics who served arc more
comre;ent thac any known IN this