The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-03-24

wsseozssz $50 : seu ozhkr ssa*zs powes is
eunfezrss u,oa sAe Isxixszszse - ahesish
TIE Erzna surT xyxsszr- The wisdon q
SIGH Vr0rsxien n perhaps questionable.
re systern Il alder than tAe Jury system
Itself a1d has heeczze 90 arnsT zsn5ed1ed
"a fhe Euxsixh and Araeyscsn sxws taas &
wunIa seem IS fhcsgh Il caHId hardly BE
ssoszshe3 w5sbsur dnzrx vEoIsnee 10 tie
whole structure AS 80 eusHenf writer
rrsfs i. lin rzenors4i antiquity Eaky Be
claimed t0r the custom Of presssntusent 10y
q baty OF rnsn akin - one gxzaa 5Eryl
with II Iexzs . sszeEg probability. FrCm
TIE rear fifx sae Assfory * the c-1Dla9s
Jury f. cfszr. By sns asssze Of Clarendon
enacted In that rear s'isqEest II to DC fzasse
fhruagh each eCarty and tA-pHgh each
hEncrsd tsownshfp] By txeive igzs1i raeE
Of the hundred and b. soar Lawful lasa Of
eaeh tow nsssip. by Their oath they vii speak
the truth By these all parspas Of evil
fame are 20 te presented 70 the justices.
and thea 70 pressed . tse cr3sssI: IL they
fail IN tie ordeal they us1&ersss fsae legal
punish seent: IL they sustasn the ordeal. jet
as the prssentnzeHf against them Ia based
on The esidence of the neighb0rAooi. On
the score o. had character, they are - alb
lure tie Kingdom The sary % present
naens was reduced 20 = Still r1cre defnSe
fora b. the assfze Of yorshars pson eraefs1
IA sles The change IN the character of
The Jurors By which tkey became iniges 0f
fact instead Oh witnesses Il common 20 the
civil and criminal tary alike. As IL be-
cane dsatcalf 70 and iElrieS personally
well Informed as TO the point at issue, the
jurors summoned were allowed nrsE TO
add 70 theirnnmber persons who possessed
the requisite knowledge Afser this pro-
esedIng had been sometime in use the
jurors summoned were separated from the
uniformed jurors and relieved them alto
gefher FROM their character as witnesses.
The verdict Of the jury no longer repre-
scented their previous knowledge OF the
case but the result OF the evidence afforded
bY the witnesses OF the fact. and
they became accordingly judges Of
the fact. the law being de-
clared b. the presiding oaiee. acting III
the kings name. Such IN brief Is the his
tory of>the origin OF the grand jury. The
fact that IL has endured 50
many years would Of Itself afford q strong
presumption Of is inherent usefulness.
The antiquity of On institution however Is
by no means an iufailible test OF It's 6eslr-
ability. although we are as rule non e
the hess influenced by IL. The fifth amend
uent to the constitution Of the United
States provides that 10 person shall be held
TO answer fer capital or otherwise imam
ous crime, unless on preseaiuaent or
indictment OF q grand iary, except in cases
arising in the land or naval forces, or In
the militia VIXEN In actual service, in time
OF war or pablo danger. Essentially SINH
lar provisions have been Incorporated in
the constitutions OF majority OF the states,
although as has been stated several states
have given to the legislature the power OF
abolishing the system entirely In those
states where II has bf en- abolished persons
may be held 70 answer criminal charge
by Information of the prosecuting attorney
after a trial before magistrate. The diff
ference is simply this. In the one case a
man Is entitled to have jury of his peers
decide after an ex-parte hearing OF the
evidence against him that there Ia or is not
sufficient evidence upon which TO hold
him for trial. In the other case he Is
entitled to full hearing before commit
ting magistrate or prosecuting attorney
who decides whether or not he shall be
held for trial. The latter system 1t must
be confessed has mach to commend il both
on account OF the opportunity il gives q
person accused OF crime OF producing
evidence on his own behalf before being
rendered liable to trial and the stigma OF
an indictment, and on account of the saw
Ing in expense that il secures. Ii is gener-
ally conceded, however. that the court
should have the power of summoning a
grand jury in cases of emergency, even
| though the system as regular institution
be abolished. But whether 1t should be
abolished at all is question that is emit
tied TO and should receive careful consid.
Grafton. GEORGE II. HEILBRON.