The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-09-08

 our platform on that subject? IT mo- body opposes our position, We ought to have no difficulty in securing the passage of a law in harmony with this plank
 Upon the jury question MT. Taft clear ly takes issue with us. He is thorough ly aroused by what he regards as menace to the courts Here is his lament;
 Never in the history of the country has there been such an insidious attack upon the judicial system as the proposal to nterjeet a jury trial between all or ders of the court made after full hear ing and the enforcement of such or ders."
 Not All True.
 This would come under the head of Important, if true" But the fact is, our platform specifically declares that we favor a measure which passed the United States Senate in 1S96 and which a republican Congress has ever since refused to enact" etc, providing for trial by jury in cases of indirect contempt. Are not the proceedings of the United States Senate a part of the history of the country? This measure passed the United States Senate more than 12 years ago, and the vote upon it was so nearly unanimous that no roll call was demand ed. The bill was not smuggled through without discussion. It was amended in open Senate and the members of the Sen ate had ample opportunity to understand it. It would have passed Congress and become law long ago but for the fact that few large corporate employers Of labor have kept a lobby in Washington ever since and have been able to coerce Congress into ignoring the laboring mems plea.
 MT. Taft Is not an unbiased judge where the jury system is under consld- s.l. Tr n father of government by injunction, but he is preiudiced against the jury sys- tenn. Every man is unconsciously in- fueneed by his environment and MT. Tafts long service upon the bench has led him to underrate the importance of the jury system In his address to the students of Yale, entitled, "A Judge on the Bench" he shows decided leaning toward an increase of the authority of the judge, and praises the procedure in the federal court at the expense of the western courts, even though he admits that "the Jury system popularizes the court and gives the people to understand that they have, not only. an interest, but also a part in the administration of justice" He has fallen into the error of assuming that any improvement in the method of court pro cedure is an att tack upon the authority of the court.
  reforms. Lord Macaulay had to encoun- ter similar objection when he favored the reform of the rotten borough sys- tenn of England. Those who were op- posed to the reform construed 1t as an attack upon the throne and as a men ace to the stability of government, but the reform was secured and the govern ment of England was improved rather than impaired. So the reform attempted by the Senate 12 years ago. and indorsed by three democratic national conventions Is in the interest of justice and has for it's subject the strengthening of the court in public estimation.
 Criminal Courts.
 It is not reflection upon the judge of a criminal court to say that he shall not decide upon the guilt of the accused. Our criminal courts are the better, not the worse, for the substitution of trial by jury. No common law judge feels that it is a reflection upon him when a party to a suit asks for a trial before a jury. It is the special function of a jury to decide upon the credibility of witnesses, and the manner of a witness upon the stand is often as important as his words in determining the weight to be attached to his testimony A judge Is apt to be hampered by precedent. He wants this decision to harmonize with former decisions rendered by him, al- though the facts are never the same In two cases. The jury Is better able to decide each case upon it's merits.
 It must be remembered, too, that in cases of indirect contempt, the charge is a criminal one ana that tbe punish ment is by fine or Imprisonment. All the reasons that apply to criminal cases apply to these cases of indirect con tempt, and the abuses to be removed by the proposed law are those that have grown up because of the increased tend ency of the great corporations to use the writ of injunction to avoid the jury trial.
 The democratic platform proposes no interference with the right of the judge to decide the cases of direct contempt contempt committed in the presence of the court; neither is 1t proposed to in- terfere with the right of the judge to de- termine the punishment for indirect con- tempt All that is sought is the substi- tuition of trial by jury for trial by judge when the violation of the courts de- cree must be established by evidence.
 Province of Jury.
 Not only is the prosecution for con- tempt a criminal prosecution, but there is even more reason for jury than in the ordinary criminal case. In the criminal court the judge acts In a judi
 
 ble for the law which Is being en- forced in his court, and therefore he has no personal grievance against the defendant, and not being the prosecutor in the case, he does not feel a personal interest in the result of the trial; but in a contempt proceeding the judge is the lawmaker and public prosecutor as well as the judge. It is the judges order which the accused Is charged with violating, and 1t is the judge who appears to prosecute the case, upon which he is to render a decision. h our federal and state constitutions we have carefully separated the three de- partments of government, and each de- partment is jealous of any encroach- ment upon its sphere of activity. Tine judge resents any attempt of the leg islator or of the executive to usurp the functions of the court; the execu- tive resents any attempt of the court or of the lawmaker to enter his do- main, and the lawmaker is equally in sistent upon the preservation of his independence. If there is any time or place where a jury Is needed, it is in a case of indirect contempt. It is no strange that abuses have crept in, for a man would have to be more than hu- man to unite in himself the delibera- tion of the legislator, the zeal of the public prosecutor and the impartiality of the judge.
 While the laboring men have been the first to complain of this denial of the right of trial by jury in cases of indirect contempt, it ought not to be considered labor question. The jury system is so essential to the ad- of justice that the subject