Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1901-11-29
FRAILTIEs OF JURIEs.

GINA CITIZEN raised the question
that our jury system might be inn.
proved upon some "preservers of the
peoples rights" dubbed us icono-
clasts aud tried to make little
philadelphia out of the stand we
took. 1t did not cause us to change
our position, and as time has rolled
by we are more than ever convinced
that we were right and that some
improvements should be made in oul
present system of jury trial. The
Constitutional Convention, or, rather,
a great many of its members, seem to
be of like opinion today. We hope
that 1t may result in searching in
quiry ond beneficial changes.
While similar cases are transporting
almost daily throughout the coun-
try two instances happening close
home are lately recorded in the press
which cause our minds to recur to
the position which we have held. ard
which would argue that it is ten
able one. In King George county,
this State, damage suit is pending,
and because of hung jury the Judge
OF the court has decided that it
must be. tried in another county.
This was not because there was no
virtue In the case, or that there was
SO fine a distinction to be drawn that
hung jury was not to be marvelled
at, but because fractional feeling
would not admit of a just decision.
Like some other places fractional
lines are drawn in King George, and
IT perchance case in court finds
members of the several factions upon
the jury it is almost useless to en-
deavor TO get fair decision. This
Is a serious matter to contemplate,
but it is nevertheless true, and citi-
zens of our county have seen this
curse strikingly illustrated here, and
we know that such things are so.
The other instance is a recent
case in North Carolina. While IL
may not have been contaminated
from the same cause the jury never
tne!ess Showed itself unworthy to sit
in Judgment upon fellow crea-
lures life. Call it chance verdict
or what you may, the fact stands
out prominently that there is in the
jury system something vitality wrong
that will permit such Juggling with
human life as displayed in this
instance, and therefore needs cor
recting. A mans life was in jeopar-
dy, and his case was hung at the
jury's hands. Two pieces of paper,
with verdict each written thereon,
were as last resort placed in hat
to be drawn. The paper with "mur-
der In the first degree" written on it
was drawn, and verdict rendered
accordingly. A few days later, when
it got out how the verdict had been
reached, the judge very properly set
the verdict aside. In this case there
may not have been any personal or
fractional feeling, and again there may
have BEEN. No matter how inno-
cent a man may be, should personal
or political enemies get upon the
jury they could force just such re-
suit by holding out for extreme
punishment and jeopardize an inno-
cent life by gambling with chance.
It is not so much the fault of the
jury system as it is of the class of |
men usually chosen, we will admit;
and some will contend that we are
wrong in demanding change, and
hold that only change in human
nature will remedy the errors CON-
planned of. To this we have
always In q measure assented.
But we are not out cunning
for frailties in human nature
and seeking to remedy them. That
ia more of a task than we care to
undertake; we have our hands full
In attempting to do this right at
home, within ourselves. So, as long
as human nature continues to be
human nature we should bend our
efforts towards removing temptation
from humanity and in having passed
and executed laws for the good and
protection of humanity in general.
Ii, in the case of juries, we cannot
change human nature, and good
system is perverted, we should en-
leavor to change the system so as to
meet the requirements. We can
offer no suggestion further than to
'ay that the system Of impanelling
Venire is probably at the root of
.hese evils. 1t could and should be
,hanged so that a petty court officer
~. MO ohoIl NOT l.. |