The Hartford herald., 1885-12-09

The grand jury il an old institution,
the device of rude age. In the change
of Government and mutation oI laws u
Stiu survives substantially ~ lis prlml-
five form. Long observation has con
vipcpd me that no substitute can ate
quatcly supply its place. IL Is now as
If ever has been, the strong right arm
of the criminal law. In its thorough
efficiency is the hest guaranty that
criminal offenders viii I've brought To
tr al
Since have made thl- alluSinn io the
form of criminal procedure, ! will ven
turr some further -uggc-tionS in which
Nou nrr interested as laN-rtSpcctiug
citizens. rather fhan rs Grand Juror.
The criminal laws and the mode ol
their enforcement are fat from perfect
They air hut the production oi minds
iuiirn a. oar own. liul their lahnrs
were an advance on what had preceded
aud shall we in turn attempt no i'm
pruvrmeut? Shall we fold nur arms
aud say thus did uui fathers ? There Is
grcri virtue IN the conservatism that
holds fast to all g0od that refuses To
accept mere innovation ~ improve
mrnt. Net conservatism has it, frail-
'lf'~- II ilfN lit'l'h'uiiN fii'NN lAN'ii
Ia be- frttcred to tn" dead past, instead
of keeping step with the cXigencic- aud
revelations of the living present II
h"comes us as II people, in whom L.
vested all sovereignty, to inquire how
the laws may he 81 amcrdcd aS more
,ilpctua!lV to secure society from it,
enemies -aS more perfectly to protect
all in life, Liberty ani the pursuit oi
happinc.~, and | know ot no occasion
more fitting than the present, To refer
to some defects that need remedy.
Courts have been devised as part of tce
machinery for suppressing crime. The
criminal cannot be punished IN the
larger number of eases except 10y "a
verdict of jury oi his peers. This was
intended as Il safeguard against the
tyranny and injustice of Judges, when
judges were created 10y king and sup
posed to he subservieut To the throne.
{ will not say that in eases involving
infamous punishment the safeguards oi
the jury system may not >till he proper
But this cumbrous mode 81 trial Is pre-
served tor lesser otltnses without reason
or necessity, and greatly to the public
cost aud injury. While one otirnse in
volving fine of fifty dollars l. being
tried in Kentucky, "A half dozen will he
disposed of 10y the more enlightend pro-
cedure of our sister States. One man
can decide - well as IA dozen on any
violation of the liquor laws, of the
gaming laws, on the laws against car
rying deadly weapons, &c., vet "a dozen
men at two dollars IA day a. things 90
must try all these cases. When the
Jury il summoned it is often composed
of such material that the trial i farce.
| have beard Of an authentic case
where "A party was arraigned for selling
liquor on the sabbath, and an accom-
modating official summoned a jury
composed largely of those addicted TO
the same Otiense Ia the face of proof
OF positive guilt, the defendant was ac-
quilted. \ judge could have been i'm
pelched for such manifest corruption,
bat the jury were practically irresp0nsl-
ble. When, however, AN honest jury
comes, absurdties do not end. The
question asked of them is not will you
give the defendant "A fair trial, but have
you heard of the ease ? You have read
something in the newspapers perhaps ?
You have formed some opinion? Stand
10y, and let the man that does not read
AlAf newspapers anu 4iiN nv Nliith'h
come To the front. The sole object
should he To obtain Il fair and just man
not an ignorant one. When an .p-
parentN meXceptionable jury is Oh
tanned, Nthe defendant in felony may
without cause object to twenty jurors
tO the Commonwealth five The de-
tendant thus is given four chances to
one for the Commonwealth, in selecting
the jury. These challenges il is need
less To say are directed not unfrequently
against those OF whom the defendant
suspects of any special zeal for the en-
forcement of the law. This great mum
ber of perenptury challenges Is unneC-
essary for any good purpose. Instead
of securing the rights of the innocent
il but too often increases the chances of
the guilty.
The ease is tried, the proof Is clear,
the guilt of the defendant il ascertained
10y eleven of the jury, but one man has
n supposed reasonable doubt " 80
the trial fails. All the forms of admin
istering the laws have been observed
yet ottentimes by the ignorance, Obsti-
nancy Of single man, Justice j. Knocked
in her own temple. The mode 10y which
the jury is Informed of the law appli-
cable To the facts is ahsurdly inadequate.
The court presents the law tO the jury
in "A series of written propositions that
must relate To the facts proven, or
which the evidence tends To pr, We.
While the court cannot be trusted to
say what is proven il may say what is
not proven, and must at its peril de
eide what the evidence tends To prove.
ktnT haur.r.. hAur
inence 10 any fact, and last of all must
il GROUP the facts. An instruction in
regard to fact hardly more than
hinted at in the evidence must be given
with the same emphasis as instructions
in regard TO indi>putable facts, thus
often misleading the jury. In the veT-
biage of the instructions care must be
taken To employ those long used tech
nical terms, whose Specification has
caused as much diversity in the legal
profession as the root of blplise has
produced among theolngians. F6iOnjOUs.
malice, and mdiicc dfOrethOUgM are
words that no jury in Kentucky has
ever or ever will actually or fully COM
prehend. These difficulties are avoided
in other States and in those courts
where the judge "sums up the law aud
evidence. In those tribunals,
language suited to the unprofe
sionai understanding, the court
literally helps the jury to think about
the case, explains the questions pre-
senied in evidence, furnishes them
rules for judging of facts and gives
item AN intelligent idea of the law that
should guide them. In such courts yhe
chance for a disaereeing jury is largely
less than in our own, the course of
justice is less numbered, and the innC-
cen protected just as completely.
the present laws regulating cOntinu-
alcts in criminal cases in mot in
stances obstruct public justice instead
of protecting innocence. \ ease il
re:.c. ed where the defendant does not
want to try. He has, | will suppose,
twenty witnesses summoned TO prove
his GOOD character. All are present
save one. Because that one Is absent
tho prosecution must not only admit
What tie defendant says he will testify
as evidence (as IN civil eases bu also
admit il as an absolute fact. fact