The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-03-19

stitute the word 'be" for remain" so as to read "the right of trial by jury shall be inviolate."
 MT. Northrop of Middlet own advo- cated the resolution at length and pointed out that the practice of Con- necticut as to damages is peculiar and is criticised by jurists of other states.
 He cited instances of great injustices occurring under the Connecticut sys- tenn. The constitution should be so changed that the defendant shall al- ways have the right to come before a jury of his peers and not be driven to other states to seek justice.
 MT. Perry of Fairfield said that the jury trial did not begin with Magma Charta, but Magma Charta simply pre- served it. When our constitution was formed there existed no such right as is now sought to be introduced into our constitution. In a criminal case the jury ceases to act when the defendant pleads guilty. The court determines the punishment, and when defendant in a damage case defaults he takes the same position as a criminal pleading guilty and the court fixes the punishment. It has never been an inherent right or juries to assess damages. Judges nave often referred the question of damages to a sheriff's jury, but he finally decid- ed on the amount. There has been no common law provision giving any right for jury to assess damages after de- fault
 Mr. Waller who had in the mean time appeared, asked MT. Perry wheth- CT he could cite single case outside of Connecticut where a judge had ever as- sessed unlicuidated damages,
 MT. Perry replied that he could not cite a case because he had not looked up the matter, but he knew what he stated was the undcubted law that judges had a right to assess damages on default. In New York judges are prohibited from this They must send the ques- tion of damages to a jury of inquest. The fact that New York passed stat ute shows that the judges previously had q right to assess damages and had done so. In 1921 Connecticut took away by statute the right to send questions of damages to sheriff's jury. The two states. therefore differ entirely, and Connecticut since 1921 has held to the system now existing. Because New York laws differ from those of Connec- ticut, does it follow that the New York law is more just He asserted that there was but one law for the rich and the poor in Connecticut and that corpora lions could not get what the poor man could rot get
 MT. Sperry of South Windsor spoke forcibly against the amendment extend- ing jury trials to questions of damages, and MT Redf1eld of Pennington and MT. Waller of New London argued strongly in Its favor.
 At o'clock MT. Waller suspended fls argument with the understanding that he should have the floor this morning for half an hours further discussion of the question, and the committee arose. The convention adjourned until II o'clock this forenoon.
 Delegate osborn of New Haven yes terday introduced a petition signed by some New Haven lawyers which op- poses the Waller amendment, jury trial in hearing in damage and asks that no change he made in the present law. The petition is signed by the following: Henry Stoddard, Henry c. White, E. H. Rogers. A. Heaton Robertson, Louis H. Bristol. John W. Bristol, John G. Beach, George n. Watrous, James T. Moran, Edmund Zacher, Benjamin l. Spock, c. T. Driscoll, Arnon R. filling. s. c, More house, Henry E, Day, James E. Wheel CT, Leonard M Daggett Henry F. Par melee, John Q 1'illson, John Hillard. Talcotl H. Russell. James Kingsley Blake, Albert F. Wells A. Mcclellan Mathewson John W. Edgerton, Henry IT. Townsend, Charles K. Bush Henry C. Newton. and Samuel H. Fisher.