The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-21
BY !. CULPEPPER.


 It is some relief to be nearing the end of the Cooper trial. The judge has delivered the usual lucid" charge. and the prisoners of the box now have the matter to themselves. I can't walt for their verdict. anticipate. It will be either acquittal or conviction, though from the makeup of the jury 1t may |. be both or neither. And nobody can blame them. If they had any sense when they went into the box and have held on to 1t they are remarkable fel- lows. It Is true they didn't take much part. in the delectable "Jawing. bu' they had to listen. That was awful.
 The jury in a capital case occupies . unique place in the administration of the law. They seem to be the dis credited and disreputable part of the court. They are called "Gentlemen of the jury,"%which is a misnomer. From the time they are sworn they are pris- oners of the box. They are selected as "peers" of the defendant-his equals in liberty, which is untrue. They are said to be judges of facts. but are se- lected chiefly on account of ignorance of the very thing they are to investigate They are said to be good men and true" and yet the most strenuous eff forts are put forth to exclude men of that description, if they are unfortun- ately afflicted with information.
 Without any criminal charge against them they are restrained of liberty, are fin the custody of the Sheriff and under the surveillance of a bailin. Liberty of speech is denied them. They must keep each other company. eat and sleep together and talk of every other thing but the main one In their minds. They are denied the newspapers. They are under unfavorable suspicion all the time. They are a part of the court the important shabby part.
 The judge. solicitor, sheriff. bailin clerk and attorney have some priVi- ieges-the jury none. The poor jury man is 50 restrained. guarded. watched that he has no chance to turn an hon. est penny" by the inspection or a bribe. All the others have this privi lege.. In civil trial the juryman IS more on an equality with the other parts of the court.
 A long time ago 1t seems 1t was per missible for man with money to di' vide 1t with the jury-if he didn't neg. iect the other officers. It is thought that, in this way. the jury could better fudge of the fact and decide according 10 who paid them the most money. l, has the sanction Of all well regulated courts.
 Courts take judicial knowledge" of the virtues of humanity.
 His Own snare.
 It is related of a Lord Chief Justice of England that he once masqueradeo as a miller Can honest miller"C ana got on a jury. When they brought m a verdict and were 'polled" the miller "cut up a rusty' that shocked the judge The miller" was not satisfied with the verdict. and if I recollect alright, his first dissatisfaction was because ne had only received five pieces Of money while the others had got ten pieces. TO be sure that vas not meeting on the level nor acting on the plumb.
 From that time the fellow who dis tributes money to inspire verdict has to be careful and impartial.
 But the trial jury in the civil case has some freedom of trade and some privilege to recollect their families So have the other officers of the Court
 It is said it sometimes takes hun Hred years to change the sentiments oi a people. The courts never change ''Precedent" Is the chain that binds. I suppose everybody will admit thai once in a while a judge Is human. i A once very distinguished judge was