The Clarksburg telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1874-1926, 1895-08-30

N, ~; a IR H and thecapri.
cions. within.
~ steal charac.
IS ~ terof their
lSSsz yerdicis. are
accepte d as
ltitt,SSl Inevitable
IN SNAlI and explained
ls3NSlySllrs as part of the
llyyn SIS natural weak.
~ SSSS ness of tn 9
y ~ mind, Tits
assumedthat,
II the facts are clearly presented,
"a jury will give commoa sense
yerict which win approximate
the truth and human lustice.
Where they fall 1t is due to the
confusion Of testimony the mis-.
representation of COUNSEL and
the general perversion Of facts.
Many thoughtful men consider
the Judgment of twelve men. who
are disinterested, superior and.
on general matters of dispute OF
far more reliable character than
the judgment of one trainedman.
Yet, Literally, the verdicts Of
twelve men, based ON the same
set of facts, differ widely, and
can never be anticipated; and
whether wise or unwise. are
clearly due to other Influences
than the commonly snppo ed
conflict Of facts and motives a
truth and justice.
While it would be dificult 10
doubt the motive and intent Of
the average juror to be Just and
fair in his conclusions, il would
seem that certain conditions and
surroundings make it impossible
in most cases toeither understand
the case in question or the prin.
ciples OF equity involved, From
a medical and scientific point Of
view. the average twelve men
who appealed to by the counsel
and Judge to wisely determine
III
the issue Of q case are usually
incompetent naturally ard are
generally placed il the worst
possible conditions and surround
ings to even exercise average
common sense in any disputed
case.
In a noted trial at Hartford,
Conn. outoia panel OF 100 jurors
twelve men were finally selected
after long. searching inquiry.
Five of'them were farmers, who
worked hard every day in the
open air, men who were unaccus.
toned tothink or reason, except
in a narrow way, along their sur
roundings and line OF work.
For ten days this jury was con
fined from FIVE to six hours aday
listening to the testimony ofthe
mental capacity and motives OF
the maker Of a Will that was dis.
puted. ofcourse, they disagreed.
and had they reached a unani.
nous verdict, its wisdom and
justice would have been i mat
ter of accident.
In noted murder trial at Port
land, Me-, it was evident that the
jury had besn impressed favora.
bly, to the prisoner. The prose
cutting attorney suggested to the
sheriff that he invite the jury 10
church Sunday evening 10 hear
a noted preacher. Thetopic OF
the clergyman was God S Hat
red for Sin and divine Judgment.
The attorney knew the topic and
the intense dogmatism OF the
preacher, and calculated its effect
on the jury. A verdict Of con
viction followed, due almost en-
tirely to the sermon. The per
sonal characteristics Of the jury
are often the only doors through
which they can be influenced.
Religions, political and social or
personal prejudices are often
considered by counsel in the pre-
sentation of the evidence. ia
reality, the average iuryman be-
comes more incapaciated to rise
above his preiudices, OF to raa.
son impartially, every day he is
confined to the court room. At
the end of long trial he i ut
terly unable to form any new
views, and nothing remains but
his old prejudices, and these are
often morefxed than ever.
~ l. Il. -. -