Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1890-07-09
THE JURY SYSTEM.
Conditions Under Which It Becomes . |
Gratifying Success.

Gratifying success.
Having at last served as jurynIan l
should like to be allowed to say word
in regard to the much discussed qnes-
ton: sis tho Jury System Failufe?'
Under certain condit ons, / believe
1t is an unqualified success.
I was the seventh man ON the jury
which decided the case of Pepper against
Jones in Supreme Court Chamb ers, Part
TX, week before last
Peppers family had had the scarlet
fever, and he wanted to collect twenty
thousand dollars from the landlord,
claiming that it was improper plumbing
which had caused tho fever and the con-
seouent loss of oneslittle boys hearing
and the others hair.
After we were seated in what they
are pleased to call the 'box," | took
look at the other eleven good men and
true. There were five very intelligent
look ng men among the eleven; the
others were $3.50. Four of these five
were excused shortly afterward, because
they knew the plaintiff or defendant, or
had had business relations with some
body who knew something about the
case I may not have this exact, but
they were excused because they knew
something, anyhow; and their places
were filled with men better qualified.
The lawyers were men of great ability,
the witnesses were plumbers, physicians
and scientific men. We listened to
their testimony very much as we would
listen to Wagner's music-impressed
with the Importance of hearing every
particle of it; understanding none of it
The taking of testimony occupied a
day and half, and when it was conclud
ed, the jury was probably the worst
ratified lot of men ever assembled to-
gether in one place; but their faces
never lost that solemn, judicia. express
sion proper to men who are called upon
to decide a momentous question without
fear or favor and with absolute Justice
to all.
When the last witness left the chair
the foreman and several others took up
their hats; but after the defendants
lawyer had been summing up for an
hour or two, they rut them down again.
This summing up helped the jury i'm
mensely. 1t showed them that whole
mass of test mony, which they supposed
must be NJ inutely considered, really had
no reference to the case at all. Then,
when the lawyers were through, the
judge further explained and elucidated
matters, so that when we filed out we
really did have some notion of what we
were going to do. When we got to the
jury-room the foreman thought we had
better take vote, and as we had moth
ing else to do we adopted his suggest on.
The result was eight for plaintiff, four
for defendant.
The fifth juror wanted to know if we
could find verdict for the pla ntiff
without having the landlord of the house
arrested for perjury. He was informed
that we could, and the next vote showed
nine for plaintiff.
The eleventh man said the defendant
was poor man. AMI had had good
deal of SICKNESS and bay doctors bills.
and he ought to have verdict Some
body to number eleven that it was the
pla who was the poor man, not the
defendant; and the next vote showed
ten for the plaintiff. So we stood for
some time: ten to two. Then one of the
stubborn two addressed the ury, and
said that every bit of evidence showed
that the land ord had built his house in
the best possible way, and that if there
was sickness in the house, he wasn't
responsible for it. He sa d that an all
wise Provid nee, and not plum bers, sent
scarlet fever into the community; he
said that the whole thing was specu-
lation on the part of Pepper to make
Jones pay for his (Pepper's) misfortunes.
It was a partnership scheme between
Pepper and his lawyers, and they relied
upon their ability to work upon the
Jurors sympathies to carry it through.
That was his opinion.
We took another vote, then, and stood
nine for defendant, three for plaintiff.
Another vote brought over the other
three, and we rendered what / believe
was just verdict.
This experience convinced me that
the jury system is a success when there
is one man among the twelve who has
eloquence enough to induce the others
to render the same verdict that the
Judge would have rendered without any
jury at all.-Morris Waite in Puck.