The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1894-07-20

PAoFonioh" VI 6He jury system, Dut
has rejected them all, and left the sys-
tenn In precisely the same condition il
has been in for many years. This &C
ton OF the convention, made up as it is
OF the most capable men that New York
can furnish, is the strongest kind of
testimony to the value OF the system in
Us present form. It has become the
fashion. after every miscarriage of JUS
t1ce In a case that has attracted wi de
attention, to inveigh against thee jury
system. Some of the critics profess to
think that we should get more justice
II we should abolish the system alto.
gether, and submit to the judges ques-
tions of fact as well as of law. Others
think the requirement. of unanimity
should be abolished. and majority of
two thirds be empowered to render a yer.
dict. Criticism is generally along one
or the other Of these lines. OF course
the requirement of unanimity give $
great power to the individual. One
mans Judgment, or prejudice, or dis
honesty can defeat the Judgment and
fairness and honesty of eleven, and un.
doubleday there have been many cases
where the power that the individual en-
joys under this unanimity rule has been
used dishonesty to defeat justice. Yet
on the whole the unanimity rule has
worked well, and the fact that it has long
existed is of itself powerful argument
for its retention, A change would newt
ably shake confidence in the Justice of
Jury verdicts, because every verdict
rendered by less than than the full num-
Der OF jurymen would be weakened in
popular. estimation by the fact that a
minority who heard the same evidence
under precisely the same Circumstances,
and received the same instruction con
corning the law that should govern the
case, arrived at a different conclusion
from the m majority. 1t is as important
that people should think a iury's verdict
right as that it should, as matter OF
fact, be right, and hence any change in
the system that would tend to weaken
public confidence would be a bad
change.
As for the abolition of the system
altogether and the substitution of iud ges,
we don't believe any thoughtful person
ever suggested such a thing except in
a.moment OF anger at what he believed
was gross miscarriage of justice or of
pique at having lost case which he
thought he should have won. One of
the chief merits of the jury system is
that the arbiters it calls in are not
known far enough in advance of the
trial to surround them with influence,
SO that as rule they begin the examina-
tion of a cause free from prejudice and
free from obligation TO the plaintiff or
the defendant. Another merit is the
fact that they separate and retire from
the locality of the trial where excite
ment may have run high so that they
are little likely to be affected by the
fear that they may be pestered or per-
secuted for the result of their finding.
Furthermore when they have acted up
on case they..haye acted upon it finally,
and will have in the future directly or
indirectly no connection with it. If the
case is tried again it will be tried by
other mon. This fact makes it of no use
to pursue them if defeated Iitigant
should be disposed to- All these i'm
portant advantages would be absent in
the case of court made up of judges
Long before case was tried it would be
known what men were to try it, and
there would be plenty of time and op-
portunity to surround them with all
sorts of influence. They might be i'm
pervious to it, and they might not
Making man a judge doesn't relieve
him of all the frailties of human nature
They would be conspicuous target for
criticism from the defeated litieants
after they had rendered their decision,
and the continual fire they would be
exposed to would IN time weaken pub
lie confidence in the correctness Of their
judgment to say the least. There is
something perhaps in the argument
which is offered on behalf of the max
ing the justices judges of the fact, that
we should get the judgment of better
educated and more Intelligent class of
men than we get under the jury sys-
tenn. But it is easily possible to make
too much Of this argument judges
are generally specially educated along
one line, and about the great majority
of the matters that come before the
courts for decision their knowledge
amounts to no more than that of the
average citizen, and is far less than the
combined knowledge of twelve AVERAGE
citizens. The all round knowledge of
twelve average men is likely to form a
better basis for CORE ct Judgment than
the special knowledge of one or two
men, though the latter may be generally
regarded as better educated than the
former. Above all things, however. it
is necessary for the success of any tribu-
nal that the people have confidence in
its general fairness, believe that it is
impervious to improper infuences,5 and
that it is affected neither by fear nor ia