The sun., 1894-03-04
and sienalfaiiurs any sttemptto remodel ours
ne q whole after the Roman systsm. or any OF
It's modern European adaptations"

| hH hANNVNh hhAVVNhu huhtNNNhNh''
Judge Dillon Is not one Of those lawyers who
privately or openly. ridieple ana denounce out
system Of trial By jury He. on the contrary
considers the trial BY jury an essential part ol
our judicial system. In his view. 1t is more
than n cherished tradition; its roots strike
down deep into the experience, the life. and
nature Of the people who have developed and
perpetuated It. 1t gives an individuality to
| our legal system. 1t Is a vital part OF 1t. Its
shortcomings are not inherent II Judges will
do their full duty jurors will do theirs.
have tried. literally. thousands Of cases with
| jurors. and the Instances are few where
had reason to I've dissatisfied with
their verdicts." On another page we read:
| In criminal cases there is no substitute for
the Jury that would be acceptable to the pro-
fesslon. or endured by the people In the
| solemn act OF passing upon the guilt OF those
charged with offences against the public. the
| Jury represent the majesty OF. the people as u
whole; and. when acting under the guidance
OF a capable Judge. their verdlcts are almost
always right In the occasional cases where
| the offender has been almost more sinned
! against than SHINING. but which cannot be
| anticipated or excepted from the criminal
code. and where the offenders are consequent
ly technically guilty. and Judge would feel
bound so to decide. tho jury administer al
irregular equity. not capable of being defined
| and formulated. nor OF nature to be ex-
pressly sanctioned by the lawgiver. but
which satisfies the judgment and conscience
OF the community without overturning the
criminal statute. which still stands intact"
In connection with this subject Judge Dill
Ion cites the weightT testimony OF the late Mr..
justice Miller of the United States Supreme
Court whose opinions regarding the Jury sys-
TEN underwent n change In the course OF his
life He said. it seems. 1T one timo to the au-
thor. that his notion OF an ideal trial court was
one composed OF three Judges. to try all civil
issues OF law or fact Not long before his
death. however. he wrote n paper which ex-
pressed his deliberate and final appreciation
OF the worth OF trial By Jury. " I must confess"
he says In this paper. that my practice in the
courts before | came to the bench had left
upon my mind the impression that as regards
contests in the courts in civil cases. the Jury
system was one of doubtful utility: ana II
had then been called upon as a legislator
to provide for system OF trial in that class
OF actions. l should have preferred court
constituted OF three or more Judges. so select
ed from different parts OF the district or cir
cult in which they presided as to prevent. so
far as possible. any preconcerted action or
agreement OF interest or opinion. to decide all
rather than the present jury system" After
defining the prip cples which in his judgment
ought to govern the relations OF a Judge to IL
jury. Justice Miller goes on to say: An eK-
perience Of TWENTY-FIVE years on the bench
and an observation during that time OF cases
which come from all the courts OF the United
States to the Supreme Court for review. as well
as OF cases tried before me at nisi prius. have
satisfied me that. when the principles above
stated are faithfully applied by the court in q
jury trial and tho jury is q fair one. then. as a
method Of ascertaininG the truth in regard to
disputed questions Of fact. a Jury is In the
main as valuable as an equal number OF
Judges would be. or any less number. And
must say that in my experience in the confer
ence room OF the Supreme Court OF the United
States which consists OF nine Judges have
been surprised to find how readily those
Judges come to an agreement upon questions
OF law. and how often they disagree In rsg ard
to questions OF fact which apparently are as
clear as the law have noticed this so often that
am willing to give the benefit OF my observa-
tion on this subject to the public. that Judges
are not prominently fitted ovor other men OF
good judgment in business affairs to decide
upon mere questions OF disputed fact"
1t is. Of course. acknowledged by Judge Dill
on that civil controversies are much more
com plicated than criminal trials. and that the
verdicts OF juries in civil cases are much less
satisfactory. He attributes this shortcoming.
however. to two obvious and rsmediable
causes: FIRST iuries, though they always oug ht
to be. too frequently are not COMPOSED OF tho
better class OF citizens in respect OF intelii-
Gence moral character. and business expert
ence: secondly. Judges have been de-
prived in many OF the States OF some
OF the powers necessary to secure q
true verdict. and not only there. but elsewhere.
they fail TO use the power OF correcting the
mistakes OF Juries by an adequate exercise
OF tho right to grant new trials In some
Of the States-by way OF example the au-
thor cites Missouri. Wisconsin. Illinois. Iowa.
Arkansas. Mississippi. and North Carolina
statutes have been passed which degrade the
Judge from being the presiding and guiding
intelligence at the trial into an oflcer whose
functions rather resemble those OF q mere
Moderator. For instance, he is forbidden to
charge upon the facts. forbidden to sum up
the case upon the evidence. forbidden to eI-
press any opinion upon the value OF the testi- |
mony. and is expressly required to condns his
charge or instructions to q barren. and to the
jury often unintelligible. statement OF tho law
OF the case" sometimes. moreover. he is COM
pelled by statute to give or refuse instructions
In the precise form in which they are framed |
by counsel. The author OF these lectures re-
peats that. II the Judges are permitted to do |
their full duty and will do 1t, the Jurors will do
theirs. II We are to expect satisfactory ver-
diets. the presiding Judge must in his charge. |
make the way Of the Jury plain and clear. and |
he must have the legal power as well the |
ability to do this" The legislation above re- |
ferred to. being intended to circumscribe or |
cripple a Judges Ipowers, implies distrust |
either OF tho capacity or Of the integrity OF |
Judges. and oyerlooks the need on the part OF |
the jury for intelligent judicial instru elton and
guidance. For the shortcomings OF the jury |
system. Judge Dillon would seek . remedy.
not in tho line Of these statutes, which |
are based on the assumed continuance OF |
their cause. but by a removal OF the cause.
through securing Judges competent to the full |
OF the high and delicate duties OF |
their offiee. To cripple the Judge increases
rather than diminishss the evils com planned |
of Under the practice required by the stat |
utes OF those States which have narrowed tho |
powers OF Judges In jury trials. mistaken Ver-