Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1905-09-18
WHICH WAS QUESTIONED BY Sec.
RETARY TAFT AT YALE.
The SeCre tary Had Eminent authority
for His Position on the Subject.
Right of Jury Trial in Philippines S
Denied, and Denial Affirmed by
Supreme Court.


cause Secretary of War Taft made bold
in his Yale address to question the
sacredness of "trial by jury" Mr.. Taft
has eminent repu blican authority for his
position.
Have we forgotten that when a repub.
| lcan president sent his instructions to
the Philippine commissioners he used
the language of the sixth amendment to
the constitution, barring a very impor-
tant clause? While in the language of
the sixth amendment he directed that
'in all criminal prosecutions the accused
shall enjoy the right of speedy and pub
lie trial' he omitted the balance of the
sentence, to-wit: "by an impartial jury
of the state and district wherein the
crime shall have been committed, which
district shall have been previously ascer
tained by law"
When Senator Lodge offered an amend >
ment to the Philippine bill extending to
the inhabitants OF the islands bill of
rights, it was noticeable that he except.
ed the clause granting jury tria! and the
right to bear arms.
That eminent republican newspaper,
the New York Tribune. referring to Sena'
tor Lodges proposition, asked "what
more can the Filipinos ask and what
more can anybody ask for them?' The
Tribune explained that trial br jury was
denied to the Filipinos because, as it
said: ut is obvious that jury trials
among people even the most advanced
of whom have not the slightest concep.
ton of Anglo Saxon jurisprudence would
be complete failure. Instead Of being
a guaranty Of justice it would amount to
denial of justice. We guarantee the
substance OF the Anglo Saxon liberty
freed from forms unsuited to Philippine
conditions"
On June l, 1904, the United States su-
preme court rendered an opinion in
which the right Of trial by jury figured.
The case under consideration was libel
suit in which the editors OF Manila
paper had been convicted after being re.
fused trial by jury. 1t was another
''five to four" opinion. The majority OF
the court, speaking through Justice Day,
said that the government Of the Philip.
pines has been expressly left by the
treaty of Paris in the hands of congress,
and that congress because of the incapa.
city of the people Of the islands. had
purposely withheld the right of trial by
jury, The court confirmed the convic.
ton OF the editors in the Manila court,
and held that the refusal of the Jury trial
was correct.
Justices Harlan, Peckham, Brewer and
Fuller dissented. In the dissenting
opinion Justice Harlan declared that the
decision Of the majority amounted to an
amendment of the constitution. He con.
sidered that a most dangerous step, de.
claring that the right Of trial by jury was
fundamental and necessarily extends to
any place controlled by the United States
and gives privilege which cannot be
taken away by any power Of congress.
If the right of trial by jury is so far
from being a sacred right that we can
safely deny it to the Filipinos, then why
need we be surprised when the right is
seriously assailed when applied among
the people in our own immediate land
According to the old fa-hiuned view it
was a sacred right. Mr.. Jefferson con.
sdered it "the only anchor ever yet i'm.
agined by man by which government
can be held to the principles Of it's con-
stitution;" and among the complaints
enumerated in the Declaration of Inde-
pendence is that King George was
guilty of depriving us in many cases OF
the benefits Of trial by jury"