The record-union., 1893-03-04
A Minority Report Against Assembly,
man johnson.
SEVERE REPORT AGAINST HART,
But the Committee Makes No Recommend
atian-The Irrigation Bll-The
GOdchaux Amendment

The major portion of yesterday morn
ing's session of the Senate was consumed
in discussing Senate Constitutional
Amendments Nos. and ). The amend
ments in question relate to trials by jury,
the former of which, by GesfOrd, declares
that three-fourths, or nine, of the mem
bers of jury in criminal cases may rem
der verdict, while the latter stipulates
that five-siXths, or ten, be required in
the decision as TO the guilt or innocence
of parties charged with criminal of1ense.
1t was determined to discuss the two
proposed amendments at the same time
in order to determine which, if either, be
placed before the people for their verdict
at the next general election.
Senator Gesford took the floor to ex-
plain his amendment. He saw no reason
why criminal cases should not be placed
upon the same basis as civil, and he
thought that every lawyer on the floor
would agree with him. He knew, he
said. that the proposed amendment would
be an innovation, but as long as 1t was a
good one and the people wished it, why
not allow California to establish a prece-
dent which sooner or later
WOULD BECOME PREVALENT
Throughout the civilized world. He
argued that the expenses throughout the
State would be materially lessened, and
that the established custom that the ma
iority rule should be extended to iuries
as well as to other political organizations.
81 am satisfied" concluded the Senator,
THAT every lawyer views this matter as
l do, and we all know that an honest
lawyer is the 'noblest work of God.' l
am not a stickler, however, and if the
Senate so desires am willing to accept
the amendment introduced by the Sem
ator from Amador"
Senator VOORHEES, spoke in favor of his
sfve-sixths amendment. He only wished
to have the matter submitted to the peo-
pie, and allow them to determine whether
the measure was a wise one or not, he
said. He believed that the people We're
ripe for such change and were tired OF
seeing justice perverted, as they saw it
daily, by some man sanding out for con-
viction or acquittal, with nothing to back
his opinion but selfish prejudice or ex-
treme obstinacy.
Senator Seawel being recognized, said
that either amendment would, if adopted,
cause a revolution in Jurisprudence, and
that the people of the State would never
consent to calmly overthrow and dash to
pieces the law which had been crystalliZed
by centuries in the minds of the greatest
law-givers in the world. This trial by
jury, he said, was one of the systems
which the people had come to look upon
as one of their inalienable rights, and on
these grounds he opposed the adoption of
the amendment.
Senator Carpenter opposed both amend
ments, and made the speech of the day.
In part he said:
1.-The principle which has been recog-
nized as Just one by all civilized ma
tions in the world is good enough tor me.
have yet to learn where justice has ever
miscarried in a trial by jury, but have
known and heard of many cases where it
has miscarried by the application of mob
law. L recall one instance with which we
are all familiar. 1t was when the Savior
of mankind stood before Pontius PLATE
and the Jewish people clamored for His
throng protested that He was innocent.
and that one, poor woman, was hooted
and jeered at. Christ was crucified, but
we all Know that Mary Magdalene was
right and that assembly was wrong.
RIGHTS OF AMERICANS.
'It is one of the foundations of our
Government that man shall be tried by
a jury of his fellow-countrymen, and
every Senator here will surely admit
that it is better that ninety-nine guilty
men go free than that one innocent man
suffer. To adopt either of these amend
ments means that the jury, the people,
are no longer supreme, and 1 ask the
Senate to vote it down."
Senator Gesford, in reply, compli-
mented Senator Carpenter very highly
upon his effort, in which he said senti-
ment and facts were closely intermingled,
He thought, however, that sentiment
should be cast aside and the matter &C
before the people, for their approval OF
condemnation. He cited France as 8
country in which the three-fourths jury
rule was in successful operation. and
then turned TO the Scriptural fact cited by
Senator Carpenter.
ssIt was" he said, 1.-The intention Of
God that the Savior should be thus con-
demned and executed, for by that pro-
cess, and that only, could universal re-
demption and salvation be offered to the
world. 1t was the intention that the out
cast should kneel at His feet and declare
his innocence as an incentive to the rest
of the sinful world to go and do like
wise" The measure, he said, should &C
before the people and stand upon its
merits. The people were seldom at fault
and if the measure was bad one ii
would not become q law.
REJECTED THE AMENDMENT.
At this point in the discussion vote
was taken on Amendment No. l, and il
was reiected-ayes I3, noes p.
The on Amendment No.5 was called
for, but Senator Ford of Sierra secured
the floor and thedebate went on. BE de-
clared that there was danger in the pres