Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1889-08-03
The Jury system.

Nearly every time there occurs what the
public conceive to be gross miscarriage OF
Justice by reason of the verdict of jury 1t Is
followed by AN attack upon the jury sys-
TEN. This has been notably the case rs re-
CARDS the Mellow trial. Not only have the
jury system in general, and the Mellow
jury in particular, been savageiy assailed,
but many Of our northern Republican
contemporaries have made the verdict of
the latter the occasion for comment on the
low state of southern civilization. This
last-named result of the Mellow verdict is
of course hardly worth noticing seriously,
bnt an effort TO foment public antagonism
against the jury system as system Is a
crave matter. That the system IL far from
being perfect, and that it is subject to
abuses, none will deny. But what shall
he the substitute? The history of juries
is wrapped up in the Obscurity OF
the past, but we know that in some form
The system has kept open the road to
personal liberty for ages. 1t is one Of the
progenitors Of Magma Charter and hdbeds
corpus which have been termed respective
ly the keystone and the palladium of Eng
lish liberty. IL has stood the test of Anglo
Saxon experience from the time OF the
compurgators TO the present. In defence
of the principles it involves the
people have organized revolutions and
caused thrones to tremble. The wisdom Of
English-speaking people has weighed 1t
and not found anything 10 take its place
that would not prove retrogressive and
trendtowWds petty despotism. Those who
cite one case where a jury has perverted JUS
tice forget the countless cases where the
system has stood a. bnlwark between the
innocent and popular prejudice or politi-
cal tyranny. Its value as the citi-
gems safeguard against judge-maee law
and the influences of political bias
has been strikingly illustrated in this very
city. To abolish the jury system would be
20 undermine the temple of Justice and
precipitate TO its fall structure that was
centuries in building. whose cornerstone
Is the hope Of the innocent and whose
fOundation-walls are ceInented with the
blood OF freemen. No, there is no ade-
Quate substitute for the jury system. 1t
is not logical sequence, however,
that it cannot be- improved and reformed.
ltdid not evenwith the Anglo-Saxons spring
originally full-grown from the head of the
Goddess Of Justice II was imperfect of
form. its growth was slow, and but for the
vital principle that was in it would have
succumbed 10 the yicissitudes it encoun-
tered. Itmay therefore continue 10 grow and
finally become as perfect as il is possible for
human institution 10 beif IT shall be nur-
tured by popular sentiment that holds il
4 duty and an honor 20 serve on jury,
and by general recognition on the part of
the bar that intelligence and record for
good citizenship do not disqualify man
for protecting the rights Of their clients.
This would soon vindicate the theory and
the principles of trial by jury and abolish
the practice and the abuses that have
brought it into bad repute. Were all iuries
interchangeable as 10 intelligence and
honesty people would have more respect
for the law, and even such verdict as now |
prcyokes animadyersion could not be |
Turned against the system. II would be |
accepted no matter what public feeling !