, 1881-11-20
INTELLIGENT JURIES.

INTELLIGENT JUR1Es. -
! There is no question in the administration
! OF justice, and especially in the adnlnIstra-
| ton of the criminal law, on which there Is
| greater diversity Of opinion than that CON
cerning the selection and qualification OF
! jurors. It is matter which has been dis
j cusseu in every State of the Union. and one
!! which there have been repeated efforts to
/ regulate by. statute, but the diversity Of
| opinion prevails, to the great scandal and de-
feat Of justice. Judicial decisions have not
| succeeded in fixing any rule, and i1r the same
States the statutes on the subject are vari-
! ously construed By the courts. The laws Of
| the States have certain general provisions
which are substantially the same in all; thus
a person to be a. juror must be a
! citizen OF the United States, must be
a citizen Of the county OF district
III which he is called on to serve; must be i
male adult; must be of an age not exceeding
to see and hear, and generally OF a reputable
character, and Of ordinary intelligence. In
most Of the States there are regulations gov
crnins the selection OF jurors, both for the
regular panel and under a special venire-
III some States the jurors must be drawn in
certain prescribed forms, at certain dates.
aud by certain officers. from the poll-lists, or
otherwise, these regulations not being uni
form. but generally intended for the same
end. On all these matters there does not
seem to be much difficulty. The real trouble
is in the selection of the twelve jurors to try
particular case The trouble does not oc-
cur so much in determining the legal Qua1ifi-
cations Of juror as in determining his dis
qualifications.
This difficulty is, of course greatly in
creased by the strong objection of the great
mass of citizens to serve on juries if they can
possibly avoid doing so. At the opening of
a term of any Criminal Court it Is not an un-
usual thing for at least one-half the jurors
who have been summoned to apply to the
Court to be excused, and the most ingenious
pretexts are made to induce the Court to re-
lease them. Pleas Of business occupations to
be greatly injured by absence from stores,
offices, countiug-rooms. and factories are
strongly urged, and this, too, by the very
class Of men who make the best and most in
telligent jurors. When jurors are thus ex-
cused their places are filed by others, and it
is too often the case. by bystanders seeking
employment, and glad and willing to serve
for the per diem allowed By law. These diff
ticulties mostly prevail among jurors select
ed in large cities.
We desire particularly, however, to call
attention to the difficulty Of selecting jury
iii the case Of murder or other serious case
of felony where the 0tfense has been COM
nitted under peculiarly aggravated or SEN
satlonal circumstances, leading to a general
discussion OF the facts by tie public and
through the newspapers, and when every
Intelligent or reading member Of the COM
munity has heard and read something Of the
case. In this State it has been determined
that every man accused Of murder is en-
titled to be tried by a fair and Impartial
jury, ana that no man can be fair or i'm
partial juror who has conyersed with others
or who has read the statements and the evil
dence on the preliminary investigations, and
on what he has heard or read has formed
an opinion as to the guilt Or Innocence OF
the accused. Under such an iuterpreta-
ton Of the law there are but few in
telligent persons in a community where
reading the newspapers is universal who
have not, and that, too, with wholly unpreju-
diced mind, formed an opinion on What
they have heard or read. The result has
been that where such construction Of law
prevails it is almost an ilnpossibility to select
Il jury who are not disqualified to serve in
any case which has become in any way noto
rious. This ruling OF the Illinois Court pre-
walls more or less in half the States Of the |
country, hence the frequency with which the
public are startled by verdicts rendered by !
juries where persons will falsely bring them
selves within this qualification, or who from
lack of intelligence or Indifference to current |
events do really come within the limitations, I
and thus ignorantly, though honestly, give |
felony a wider scope of tolerance than is
consistent with law, justice, or public safety. |
Under this decision Of the Illinois Court it !
would have been an utter impossibility to |
have obtained a jury in Chicago to try the /
Guiteau case, and yet, under the ruling of a. /
very able and accomplished Judge, holding |
court at the very seat Of the crime, fair |
and impartial jury was selected without diff |
ficulty. Judge Walter S. Cox, at the very t
opening OF the case, stated to the counsel on
both sides that in the examination of jurors |
no man should be rejected because Of any |
feeble impression on his mind, because If
that rule was correct the result would follow I
that the most lIliterate and unintormed per-
sons would be deemed the best jurors. On |
the important point of jurors having read
versions and comments. the Court
said:
1t Is now generally. II not universally. agreed
thai such opinions or Impressions rs are merely
Ea lhered fTDtu newspapers or public report. ano
are mere Hypothetical or conditional opinions, !
upon the truth OF the reports. and not !
50 nxed as to prevent one from giving fair ana |
ilupartiul hearing to the accused and rendering
a verdict according to the evidence. do not dis
qualify.
We think that all Intelligent people,
whether of the legal profession OF not, will
heartily and cordially accept this ruling Of
Judge Cox US clear and enlinently wise
rule governing this all-important question,
and Oh which there has been such 4 wide dif-
ference Of judicial opinion. It secures to
the accused everything that he can Justly
deuland-a "trial by a fair and impartial
Jury" The law, while it accords this to the |
nriaonar as = n,attar nf r1rht asanmae also i