The daily intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Territory [i.e. Wash.]) 1876-1881, 1879-11-11
JUDGES, JCRIES AND GRIN.
INALS.


is one of the sources Of their power, i:
also often perpetuatcs considerable
evils. To this Inherent trait of mind
England owes her game laws. primo
geniture and establi.hed church. Hap
PLY we are free from these ancestral
legacies, but we retain the ole Anglo
Saxon institution Of trial by jury. the
efficacy Of which has been long Ques-
toned by many sound thinkers, who
Judge Oakley. that, as the garments Of
the boy are no. calculated TO fit the
man without Considerable alteration, so
an institution that Was adapted f,r q
state OF society . thousand years ago.
fails to answer the purpose row.
Chancellor Kent said that LA. WAS q
/ greater lottery tLan marriage. aud ,hs:
between judge and jury no man could
be sure OF justice, even when the evi.
| dence seemed clearas.." for when to the
ignorance, prejudice and possible cor
ruption Of twelve men. constituting the
/ jury, you add the disturbing. bewilder-
ing and often erroneous influence OF the
| judges sum ming up. the public stand a
very remote chance of q just verdict.
/ Herein lies the cause of SD much delay
J in legal proceeding. since the victims.
| IT they possess the means, will not
tame'y submit to be wronge4 il thi-
fashion. and demand new trials, which.
by postponiug the result. weaken the
force Of example upon which the efficacy
OF justice is founded
Years ago. Lord Brougham brought
this subject before the House Of Com
| mons, and moved for II committee to
revise the old system, but thu, slavery
to traditional ways which forms so
strong an element in the British chay-
acter was too powerful TO be over
thrown In the course of his argu-
mert he related numerous INSTANCES Of
the stupidity and corruption Of juries,
and of the one. sided charges Of tho
presiding judges. Ono will suffice as "A
sample. In q certain county. famous
for its fox hunting proclivities, far
mer. much given to that sport. hung II
pair of newly pipe-claycd breeches in
bis garden to dry. During the night
they were stolen. Provoked at the
loss. he resolved to risk another pair to
catch the thief Doing s.. he watched.
gun in hand. ready to shoot the Of
fender when hs made his appearance.
About midnight he saw man s'ealthily
approach the bush on which the gar
ment WAS hanging. and. jus, As he had
secured the prize. the farmer fred and
the thief fell dead with the ill.gotten
spoils in his possession. When, on his
own confession. the farmer was tried
for manslaughter. the verdict Of the
jury was: We find the deceased
guilty of stealing pair Of leather
breeches" Lord Brougham did not
say whether tie judges charge had
confused the jury or not. or whether it
was the natural stupidity Of twelve
men chosen at random. with q strong
leaning in favor Of the man on trial.
Prcposterous as this may seem. YER
diets equally strange AID unjust are
given every day in our courts Of law.
and it is plainly the duty cf the legis-
lature to devise some means to simplify
and amend our present system Of jury
trials, which enables men Of o litigious
or scheming nature to hara's honest
men with unjust and vexatious law
suits
As we write, We observe case in
Eng land which illustrates the present
system. In the trial of one Mayne-
waring, in Derby. for the murder of a
policeman, the jury was unable to
agree. six being tor wilful murder and
six for msnslaughter. After nearly
days discussion without any result, it
was agreed TO draw lots. the holder of
blauk card to decide. The drawer.
however. lacked moral courage to give
a decision. and it was finally decided to
toss up, which was dorc. aud the mans
life was. 50 to speak. tossed away. SO
much for this ancient mode Of justice.
which, as administered at present. is
the terror Of the good and the safe
guard Of the criminal.