St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-11-25

ia uCCOIudilCc ulcE6WitHs uO lHuttcI
what may be the extenuating circum-
stances of the case. liz they fail to do
so. 1t Is claimed. they do a wrong; but a
wrong which Is remediless. Asan0ther
has very aptly expressed 1t: lit cannot
be denied tina I the jury In criminal cases
have the power, which Is often freely
exercised, to decide upon the law in
criminal cases; and IL improperly exer-
cised will, in some instances, be ire
mediable. But If the question be as to
their right to decide the law, it is en-
tirely different matter. 1t may be
safely asserted that in large majority
of our states this right is denied"
This reasoning Is unsatisfactory. 1t
will not do To assume or admit that 1t Is
possible for a jury, under the law OF the
hand, TO infiict a remedilesS wrong. LII
juries have the power to disregard the
instructions of courts, as to matters OF
mere law, it must be because they have
the Gear right to do so. Have they that
right? Probably not. But they have
the ,ndoubted right not to make the
stern rules of law, In their decision OF a
criminal case, the leading factor. Ihey
have the right to decide case upon Its
equities. instead of the law.
Many years ago it was found that the
enforcement of the strict rules of COM
mon law in civil cases would. in many
cases work the most fragrant injustice.
= THAT the strictest law is oft the
greatest wrong"
This state of things gave birth to the
court of chancery. 1t led to the eStab
lishment of equity jurisdiction in civil
cases in order to prevent those wrongs
and to enforce those rights where, by
the rigid rules Of the common law, there
was no remedy. The jurisdiction thus
evoked exists on an enlarged scale to-
day as necessary part of our juris-
prudence.
1t is also the acknowledged truth that
the strict enforcement of the rules OF
law, in numerous cases of alleged
crime, would produce injustice and
wrong. Cases will often arise where
there has been violation of the letter
of the law. but where the moral sense
of mankind regards the accused as
guiltleSs of wrOngdOng. In such cases,
where the accused has an equitable de-
Tense, so to speak, to a criminal charge,
the jury, Instead of court of equity,
has been the tribunal to which the pub
lie has looked to apply and enforce that
equity in behalf of the accused. This
equitable Jurisdiction of juries in crmi-
nal cases has not been created by any
statute or by any distinctive act of
sovereign power, but has long been
exercised by Juries, with the apprOba-
ton and by the common consent OF the
people.
Admitting this equitable power of
juries in criminal cases. and the anOm-
ally above referred to disappears; and
there is no ground left for the asStr-
ton that the juries have the power to
do wrong. The jury in criminal case
is in duty bound to listen 10 all of the
testimony. and carefully note all of the
circumstances surrounding the alleged
crime: they should take as the law of
the case, the instructions of the court;
and from these data they should render
su CHI a verdict as, in their Judgment.
is just and proper in view of all the cir
cumstanceS OF the case. ShOuld the
jury believe tina justice requires the
nOn-enfOrcement of the infieXibleS rules
of law in the particular case, it will be
their duty to acquit the accused. And
it the case should present no miti-
eating circumstances, favorable to the
accused, they will enforce, as against
him. the stern mandates of the law.
I An able American writer On the law
has recognized this equitable jurisdic
ton Ut lurleS, of which mention is above
made. He says: "A very obvious effect
Of the jury system is that of bringing
the public and moral sentiment of
community to bear upon the admins
tration of the laws, modifying their
stringent rules and adapting them more
Justly to certain cases. This is particu-
larry to be observed when law is
sought TO be enforced which is not in
harmony with public or moral feeling
of the class from whom the jury are Sc
lected. For instance, the law has a Sc
we're penalty for killing the seducer of
a wife or child; but with all of the i'll
structions of the court as to the charac-
ter Of the crime and its legal conse-
quenees, the jury will never find the ac-
cuSed guilty, so as to bring upon him
the full penalty of the law. So the law
is clear as to the penalty attached to
fighting duel; but would it be eX-
pected that a jury would find one guilty
where tie code of honor is in estima-
tiOn?'
That jurieS some times make mistakes
is but evidence of their humanity. That
they make fewer mistakes in tile met
ing out of substantial justice than the
courts of the country is capable of
ample demonstration. JUSTICE.