The age-herald., 1901-05-17

To the Editor of The Age-Herald:
 Will the coming constitutional conven- tion tone up our present jury system? fe ought to, and, I believe, 1t will. I sug gest the remedy to be the majority sys- tenn for the reason 1t is the best fusion of law, and equity, with trial by judge and jury with the majority system where there are any facts to be passed on.
 All cases should be tried by all courts without a. jury except felonies, unless demanded by the litigants. One-man rule or an oligarchy of dry judicial minds that have never been refreshed with the dew of tears or leavened with kindness is too arbitrary a tribunal to handle the cor tentions of citizens in all cases, especially of the lowly, as they have not got as a rule as much faith in the judges as those in the higher walks of life. So 1t is all ways the best wisdom to give both sides an opportunity to say whether or not they want a jury to sit in the trial of their causes, and if they fail to make the demand for a jury and lose out then they can't blame any one but their own sweet lives, and 1t Is forcgonc conclusion that one side or the other is bound to lose out.
 The majority system will practically put an end to so many mlstrials, which are increasing all over the State, and which are costing the counties and State thousands uron thousands of dollars, to say nothing of the extra costs to the litigants; and the counties and States share of this cos. must always be paid in cold cash. Tho solvent lltigants get time and the iusolvent litIgants pay nothing unless they want to, and of course they never want to-
 This is an error that should not con- tinue to exist. The majority system would practically remove the tempta- tion to bribery. Under OUT law now one juror can dictate terms to oil of the eleven others or make Il mistr,nl All litigant now has to do is to iiX one juror. Then he can have one of those rnistrials. but with the majority system he would have to bribe six jurors instead of one to even get mistrial. which would al- ways most surely leak out, and to get a verdict he would have to bribe seven jurors, and to keep his bribe a secret would be practically impossible.
 I will cite some other reasons why it should be remedied (by Judge A. B. Grace), which are eminently sound and correct:
 Tn every relation on life in America, where the result is made to depend on the opinions and decision of number of persons the principal of majority rule has been adopted, with the sole exception of the verdict of jury.
 "A majority of one vote in each house of general assembly or congress suf- fees to create, repeal or change a posi- tive law, regardless of the magnitude of the interests involved. as in the case of a currency bill. tariff bill or declara- tion of war.
 "A majority in the national Senate rati- fies or refuses to consent to treaty with a foreign power.
 "A majority of a single vote in half a million in a pivotal state may elect President of the United States, change the entire policy of the government and bring prosperity or ruin to seventy mill lion of people"
 Yet lawyers, good lawyers. honest and patriotic lawyers, will roll their eyes in horror at the very suggestion that 1t would be sensible to apply the same prin- cipal in deciding replevin suit of .'tickey" calf or a 'pestle-tailed" pony, and yet again this calf or pony case. when it has ascended by appeal from the justice of peace court to the Circuit or City Court. and thence to the Su- preme Court of the State, Is decided by bare majority of the judges, if they should happen to differ.
 In a capital case, If three Supreme judges vote to break the appellants neck and two decide that he ought to go scot free, the accused gentleman must suffer