The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-07

I to that of the majority when lawfully | expressed- For these reasons we think | that the provisions authorizing three fourths of a jury to ren1er verdict in | a civil case should become part of | our Constitution as 1t Is of several oth- CT important States of the Union. | We therefore recommend as supstf- | tute for Section 12, Article I. as re- l ported by the committee. the following: | Art. l, Sec. 12: The right or trial os | fury as heretofore enjoyed, shall re- I main inyiolate; but in civil actions | three four.hs of the jury may render | a verdict.
 Respectfully submitted. Samuel Blackwell, E. P. Wilson, T. J. Cornwell. MT, Lomax-I move that the minor l ity report be laid on the table. Mr. Blackwell-I hope that no sucn gag law will be adopted.
 MT. Beddow-I ask the gentleman to withdraw that. .. MT. Lomax-Dpn't cali 1t "gag. law" sat in my seat nearly half min ute waiting for someone to do some thing and nothing was done. and then I made the motion to table, withdraw the motion. however.
 MT. 6fdCkWei-As OhS ot thC hh'V. | ity that made this report, I desire to be heard in regard to the matter. Mir. President, and gentlemen of the Convention, 1t is a fact that is known without the stating of it to this body that in a great many cases that are constantly being tried in our courts, cases of great importance that con- sume considerable amount of time, the tendency is growing to have mistrials, and those mistrials frequently result from one man refusing to agree with eleven others. And it Is charged in
 many localities that influences are brought to bear to fix" juries in or der that mistrials may be had. There are cases being tried and constantly, where one party has no hope of yer dict, and yet as the law requires a unanimous jury, if that party can suc- ceed in fixing one member of the jury he can secure q mistrial and a delay which makes 1t harder to have the wit; nesses there at a succeeding trial. AS l say frequently those trials are of important cases and there are a great many witnesses and a considerable amount of time consumed and great expense incurred by the county. And | yet under our present system, if you can fix 1t so that one man on the jury will not agree. the whole expense has to be gone oyer, the whole matter re- tried and frequently the delay of the | retrial renders 1t impossible to get as
 many witnesses present as were at the | first trial.
 Every gentleman here has seen the | growing tendency to have mistrials Every man knows the expense incurred I While as I say these mistrials are I frequently in the larger cases, cases | of great importance, any case involv- | ing S20 may be tried by jury and a mistrial result and in these cases more 1 time and money, multiplying the money many times the amount in- volved by this requirement of a unan- imous verdict.
 Now the argument as presented in this
 minority statement prepared by Mir. Wilson from Clarke, sets forth the case very clearly. In every relation of life in Alabama as 1t is there stated. where the result Is dependent upon the decision of a number. the principal of a majority rules. Then why should we have a unanimous verdict in civil cases?
 Afr. Wilson (Clarke)-You are cred
 iting my brothers minority report to me.
 Mr. Blackwell-I beg pardon for the
 mistake. Why should a unanimous verdict on the question of fact be re- quired and enforced from a trial jury ? There will be no answer to that ex- cept the statement that we have had
 this for a long time, that the present system Is time honored. and. therefore, it ought not to be abandoned. If ! that principle were to govern none of the Improvements of the nineteenth | century that aarnando he s velopment ought to have been recoE- nized and accepted. If everything of antiquity must be preserved and re- tained, we should have never had the
 splendid system of electric lighting we
 have today, but we ought to have re-
 tained and should now go back to the
 old tallow candle. We should go back
 to the stage coach or the OK team as
 means of transportation rather than
 the splendid system of railways we
 have today. We should go back tozAhe
 dug-out and the tom tom rather than
 the ocean steamers of today if an-
 tiquity aioEe is what shall recommend
 a thing to us.
 1t is good?
 MT. Blackwell-Some evideSsce that
 1t is good. but no evidence that there
 Is not something better, no evidence
 that there cannot be an imprpyement
 Men are constantly progressing, mind
 Is constantly developing, surroundinss
 are constantly changing and the result
 IS we adapt our methods to the con-
 dittons surrounding us and thus creafA
 improvement.
 This system made its appearance in
 England soon after the Norman con.
 quest.
 Remember We are not proposing to
 abolish this system or to apply this
 amendment to criminal cases. We ap-
 ply 1t only to civil cases. 'S.4.
 AS I say the system of a jury ap-
 peared in England soon after the Nor@
 man conquest in the Seventh Century
 but at that time the jury was not
 required to be unanimous. Prior to
 the time of Edward ". majority yer- diets had been suffieient. We are not
 here dealing with the jury system. but
 simply with a unanimous verdict as to a matter of fact.
 Now the jury was originally called to give evidence, and one of the reasons for having a jury of twelve was. as history shows, that
 that was considered the amount of ev- idence necessary to establish the guilt or innocence of parties to a very large extent. The juroSs were taken from the Immediate community in which the .0ffens93W committed and were sup posed to be entirely familiar with all the facts and issues involved in the trial of the case. As civilization pro- Rressed and communities enlarged 1t be- came apparent that you got men on