, 1879-05-28

"'e'' i"taf'eu 10 1tlo net of tho Legislature
answered that " juror was compotcnt only
When hls nlind was froo from bias, md liz
ti'tt not caro how many timoa tho Legislature
haa said to tho contrary" Tho StatoA-At
tofnoy cited tho case Of BAwEN M one In
which tho Supreme Court Ind affirmed The
net Of tito Legislature, mud Jndgo AtoA111a,
TER rerl'ol II don't caro- what tl,e Supreme
Cont Inns decided. 4 man who hna formed
and expressed an opinion which it wonl,l
tako testimony to overcome IL not cotnpc-
tent,"- e., le is not competent ever,
though tl1a testimony would Immediately
overcome 1t.
Whilo lie expelled these men from tho
jury-box ms unfit to DO Jurors in violation OF
MI express statute mud Of decisions Of tho
supreme Court declaring them to DO compc-
tent, thus displaying tho inost muscular con-
tempt for tho Inv which 1t is In tho power Of
Circuit Judge 10 exhibit, he did not think
II essential that tho Judge trying tho cause
should DO impartial. Upon the application
Tor ball he had said, II lavo nude mp my
mind that this man ought not to bo COLI
vlcted of murder, undor tic circumstances Of
this homicide, md having mado up my mind
I would DO q t,astartl and n contomn,jh,o
wretch II did not dare announce It OH anv
occasion when was called upon officially to
10 It," It seems quito likely that the an.
nonncement thus made In advance by Judge
AoA1I1s7En caused tho prisoner to ,noko t1o
afiaayit tl4at 10 could not l,ays nh ,mnartio1
trial boforo either Of the other eight ,Judcca
{excopting, NO believe. Roarns,. an5 tI,,,a Ia
select rs tho only Judge before whom l,o coul,
have an "impartinl" " trial tho judge who had
publicly and officially announced Tint
ho l1al !" "a,ado up his mjndn If !, N,A,
LISTERS honest opinion, tho faot tbot n
juror hal merely formed nm ;,unraaa;ot,
which evidence wonld easily rcncvo e,,,,,d
justly expel tho pcrsou from thu hov. IN tbo
face Of MI act Of tho Legislature anti ,,o.
cision of thu Supren,o Court declaring him
entitled to sit, how was it TINT tho faut Tint
lle himself had ~ mado up his mimi. /" n,,psr.
emily unaltorably, was permitted bv him to |
10 the very commission under whicl Ia
walked into his sent? For in tin ear1;cr
periods Of our Jurisprudence tho commission
to try n prisoner was sienod hv tho crour
or tho Executive but under o,,r atnt,,.oa n
is signed by tho criuiuat. Ju,1oe srcAr1,a.
TER, in downing tho atat,,tes. cbaracter;vo1 Il
rs II o suitable loyico whicl, bn, , " tomao..,s ~
to get on juries mon who had tho worst kind
of fixed opinions question which euroly
ia one for tho Legislature only, in relation to
whose action Judge McA11.1srEn's position
was one Of bold offrontcry aud clear law. def.
nnco. But why did it not occur to Mo-
when he saw that Lis open oxpros-
sion Of opinion was causing tho prisoner to
select lin, as his Judge, to say that tho
statute providing for change Of yonuo IN
criminal casos on the affidavit Of tho prisoner
WIS " a subtle deyico which had tondencv
to got on tho Bench ia each criminal cas, n
nau who had the worst kind of axed
opinions It certainly was not from nnv
:evcrence for ac.s Of tho Legislature or flc.
'iHions of the Supreme Court, for both these
10 holds in open dcrision. Nor yas n fron,
III acute perception Of tho reauirumonts of
,qu;ty and Of tho sp;rit of tho inv T..