The Pascagoula democrat-star. (Pascagoula, Miss.) 1878-1920, 1879-12-05
Reform In the Jury System

The Cincinnati Star has the fol-
lowing comments on the imperfec.
tions and abuses OF our present
jury system
Public faith in jury trials has
been gradually dying out in Ameri-
ca. OF old there was an ,inbOrn
reverence for the system that &C.
cured to a man whose life, liberty
or property was at, stake, fair
trial by twelve good, loyal, God
fearing men. But system of ad-
judication, which is, perhaps, as
good in itself as any system of hu.
man origin has come to be distrus-
ed and is odious. 1t is not neces-
sary to search with microscope
for the cause of this bad state Of
things. 1t has come to be thus
from an entire want of any stand
ard of character. intelligence or
sense of moral obligation that
should qualify a man to sit in
Judgment as a Juror. So much of
tho refuse of sOciety--the lOafer
and hummer element-has found
its way into the jury box that
"good men and true avoid the
duty they owe the public in all
possible cases. The evil is, there.
fore, .ntensifying itself, and if some
radical change is not made by the
courts, and some standard of char
acter aud intelligence insisted upon,
the whole system OF trial by jury
will go the dogs, as it ought to.
The New York Herald thinks,the
reform can be effected by doing
away with the unanimlty feature.
That journal says:
Very able men who have thought
deeply on this subject have regard
ed the unanimity of juries as pre-
posterous. AS conspicuous and
weighty example we cite Mr..
Hallan, who, after tracing the orig
in and progress of trial by jury,
expressed his"..appreciation OF the
system and his scorn of this par
ticular feature of it in emphatic
language: "The grand principle
of the Saxon polity, the trial OF
facts by the country is a principle
Except as TO that preposterOus relic
of barbarism, the requirement of
unanimity) from which may we
never swerve--may we never be
compelled to wish to swerve.p All
the nations on the continent Of Eu-
rope who have adopted the trial by
inry reject what Mr.. Hallan calls
"that preposterous relic of bar
barism, the requirement OF unanl-
mity." The absurdity of this re-
aurement was perceived by ell
ligbtened English thinkers long
previous to Hallau. Locke, for eX-
ample, in the constitution which he
drew up for Carolina, inserted this
provision: "Every jury shall con,
sist of twelve men; and it shall
not be necessary that they should
all agree, but the verdict shall be
according to the consent of the ma
| iority." The late DR.. Lieber, a
very learned publicist, who had
given great attention to this sub
iect, was of opinion that the very
continuance of the inestimable
right of trial by jury depends on
reform in this particular. In his
excellent work on "Civil Liberty
and Self.government" he says:
at is my firm conviction, after
long observation and study, that
the unanimity principle ought to
be given up. DR.. Lieber contribu-
ted a strong paper on this subject
TO the American Lac Magazine in
1869, but we have not space to re-
capitulate his arguments. Wepre.
fer to rest this reform on an appeal
to common sense, OIL the great fact
that all the Continental nations
who have borrowed the trial by
Jury from England reject this ab-
surd feature of it. 1t is even re-
brdiated in a part of Great Brit
ain itself, with the sanction of the
British parliament. In Scotland,
by the statute % and %, Victoria,
the verdict OF nine jurors suffice
for verdict.