The record-union., 1891-09-25
CRITICISM OF THE JURY SYSTEM.

CRITICISM OF THE JURY SYSTEM.
The American Bar Association recently
assem- bled at Boston. It was convoca-
ton of brilliant and learned men. The
thing they did that is of most importance,
and worthy most attention, was to
sharply criticise the jury system in civil
proceedings. These representative law
yers put upon the jury the blame for most
of the uncertainty and miscarriage of the
law. How far were they wrong?
1t is notorious that nowadays no jury
is impaneled, or at least very seldom,
upon which there is not majority of
stupid or stubborn men; men either care
less of their oath, or so inflated with brief
authority that they are led to defy the
courts and ride rough-shod over the law
and the facts; or they are so lacking in
mental attributes as to be unequal to the
task imposed upon them. OF course this
is strong statement, but we think it can
be justified. The trouble with the jury
system is not the system, but the evasion
of service by the very men who ought to
do duty when by good fortune they are
drawn for the panel.
One of the speakers in the lawyers
convocation, Mr.. Alfred Russell of De-
troit, did not hesitate to declare that trial
by jury in civil cases is so uncertain, is so
much the cause of delay, that it forces
settlement out of court to avoid the op-
preston incident to Ignorant and pitch
penny determinations" That is not,
then, an unmixed evil; whatever com
pels litigants to settle out of court is
commendable when the contestants are
fairly matched as to rights under the law.
The Committee on Remedial Proceed
ure reported strongly in favor of verdicts
by three-fourths of a jury in civil cases,
and Mr.. Lancaster made bold to say that
the business world is already demanding
the abolition of juries in civil cases. 1t is
agreeable to hear from these representative
lawyers that they are opposed to delays
and in favor of speedy adjudication of is
sues Joined. If all lawyers would concur
and act upon it, the vexatlous delays of
the law could be greatly reduced. That
they will presently agree that the best
interests of the first of the professions de-
mand lessening Of vexatious delays, is
evident from the present drift of ex-
preston.
If, with this advance, the juries can be
lifted to the level of capacity for duty, we
may hope for an era in which obstruction
of justice will disappear. The New York
Tribune recently said:
Judge Barrett long ago hinted that so-caIled
miscarrlages OF justice are not infrequently
trlumphs OF the law, ana he scrupled not to
add that weakness of judicial rule is the most
frequent source of abortYe litigation. Ifthis is
true and the position is concurred in by other
eminent authorities. then the brunt of the Bar
Associations attack might probably be di-
rectcd against the bench rather than against
the jury box. After all, there is one inevitable
and conclusive reIoinder 10 ali structures on
the conduct OF Juries in either civil or crimi-
nal suits. If the average of talesmen was
higher and exemptions were vigorously re-
stricted-in word, If the instrument itself
were properly and wisely employed the ''ig-
norant and pitch-penny determinations
complained of would diminish as RAPIDLY as
the number OF incompetent judicial decisions
would be lessened by a more adequate re-
enumeration of judges. So long as men of
brains, with the connivance OF advocates
themselves, are kept out Of the jury-box, so
long viii Verdicts depend on hazard and ca
price. and the hardship viii naturally be
greatest where the interest imposes the
weightiest intellectual exaction.
We are disposed to think that there is
not any general condemnation by the
people of the jury system; they under
stand that it is in the make up of the
panels where the greatest weakness re-
sides. The loud outcry that every now
and then is raised for abolition of the
jury system is due to sporadic cases of
iiagrant injustice of phenomenal slgnifi-
canoe. These are not so much evidences
of faulty system as of fallable human
nature, inattention to the make up of
juries, and the laxity of courts in excus-
ing from service those who of all others
are best qualified to serve.
These outcries come, says the New
York sun, in most part from men who
have had little practical experience in
jury trials, a fact that being now called to
our notice, we are satisfied is correctly
stated by the Sun. That there has been
growth of feeling that there should be
notifications of the jury system is true.
1t is illustrated in the action of States
that have introduced the three-fourths
verdict, and in the request by the Ameri-
can Bar Association that State Associa-
tions labor with their Legislatures to
have the three-fourths system generally
adopted. But there is no popular de-
mand, by which we mean general and
just demand, for the abolition of the jury
system. Improvement may be effected
by correcting the method of choosing the
tSlesmon, the number Of exemptions