Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1889-11-23
sElE.AssERTNE JURORS.
they Have Certain Recognized Rights
While In the BoX

~ hhAt III II IVA
"Why don't jurymen have more to say
in the box?n asked a well-known Grim
inal lawyer recently. Resting easy in
their seats and forced to give ear to a
tiresome length of argument and
counter-argument, the twelve godd men
and true naturally grow somnolent, nod
and snooze under the stern eye OF the
Judge.
1.-The iuryman has a perfect right to
talk and ask questions. lie can eX-
anime or cross-examine witnesses, he
can call on his honor for a bit of law, he
can enmesh the willy lawyer in his own
mesh, and if he does it all in good faith
no one will say nay. like to see a man
like juror No. 4, in the famous Ives case
that has been tried in New York. lie
was well aware of tho American citi-
zen's indefeasible right to wag his
tongue even in the jury-box, and piled
questions untiringly until a mild rebuke
came from the bench.
"rhe juryman can do almost any
thing but talk back to the judge. II he
tries that or uses offensive language to
the court, counsel or witnesses he is
guilty of contempt, and will be treated
accordingly. One of the present judges
In the common pleas court had a coarse
tongued reprobate to deal with on one
occasion. This occupant of the box in
sisted on i~nterrupting constantly and
asking useless questions, until the Judge
ordered him to be silent under pain of
arrest"
"As to the iuryman's right to inform
himself on points of the case under dis
cussion by asking questions there can
be no doubt" responded District Attor-
ney Graham to a reporters inquiry,
land | have sometimes heard very keen
queries from the jury box. | remember
a dignified old man, sworn in for Grim
inal case some years ago, who made
most effective use Of his right to talk.
Counsel, with quick, nervous delivery,
was enumerating various points in his
argument and swinging about eXcitodly
as he addressed in turn judge and jury,
when suddenly the old follow, with per-
feet gravity, remarked: will you be
good enough, sir, to come to the point
under discussion, and stop this tomfool-
cry" 1t is a question whether that was
not too savage a hint, but it, at least,
was effective in bracing up the argu-
ment. The unfortunate lawyer was
simply thunderstruck.
although tho right to ask questions
is undoubted, it is not often asserted by
jurymen. ! know of a number of oc-
casions when in homicide cases the box
was heard from, but such are rare. If
questioning is done in good faith it is
not at all to be discouraged, and |, for
my part, would be glad to enlightcn a
juryman who honestly interrupted"
81 don't know why iurymon don't
speak out more frequently" said Law
yer James H, Shakespeare, in speaking
IN the samo subject, ''but the fact is
they do little but listen. The court will
never interfere with the jury if any of
its dozen members are anxious to put in
a sober word to lawyers or witnesses.
]. it is plain that they seek e%nlighten-
ments they have full authority to go
ahead and question"
LET the jurymen talk and talk and
talk by all means" was the vigorous as
sertion of another lawyer. 'Let them
talk to the court and to any one else.
1t will help to put life into tircsome lit
igation and lift us out of our ruts. |
remember a certain keen juror who COM
pletely upset a learned argument by just
a few interrogations, An incident like
this in court is an oasis in the dreary
desert of examination and cross exam
nation, argument and jury-charging,"-
Philadelphia Record.