Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1909-10-19
Misesllaaeous 8sadins.
OUR JURY SYSTEM.
Farces In Courts of Law Due to Lack
of Men.

of Men.
The late trials in the Richlan'
court Of sessions and the results o
them have caused a storm Of criticism
Of courts and juries. The public mine
ought now to be in the right temper t
receive any truth which may flint
lodgment there. The object Of thi
communication is to ascertain tn
truth.
It is true juries sometimes go wrong
but so do judges, and so do all human
agencies. The highest court in tn
land, or perhaps in the world, has NOR
than once aroused public protest b!
its judgments.
But as long as men violate law the!
must be tried for it; and the onl!
agency to try them is men, be the!
called jurors or judges.
The fundamental law Of the natior
and of the state lodges the power o.
trial in the jury, and that can not b'
changed unless the constitution shall
be changed.
The constitution of the state doe:
declare that jurors must be elector:
and men Of good moral character. Il
that qualification should always be
observed in the selection Of jurors
there would be no room to complain
But men often get in the box who are
not men of good moral character.
| The statute law prescribe5 how the
jury box shall be filled; the agency tc
| fill; the number Of names that shall
be put in; the time when and the place
where and the manner in which II
shall be done.
Here, then, Is room for the exer-
else Of wisdom and. Of care. If right
names are not put in the box they car
not be drawn out; and If wrong names
go in, they must come cut at the draw
ing.
The only remedy at this point, the
fountain head Of the stream, is fol
those upon whom is cast the duty to
select men Of good moral character to
see that only such are selected. No
new law on the subject is needed; the
only thing needed Is to see that the
law is fulfilled.
1t often happens, however, oftener
than otherwise, that good names GO
into the box and are drawn out in the
court room, but these men do not sit
for one reason or another.
They too often seek to be excused,
and some Of them assign the most
frivolous reasons in order to escape
service. For their conduct there is
some good ground, but only some.
The confinement Of twelve men IN
room pending the trial, and before
they retire to make up their verdict,
is an old practice 1t obtains in the
United States courts and in the courts
Of many Of the states.
1t is, nevertheless, bad practice,
and 1t causes good men, used to the
comforts Of life, to shun jury service.
And the impounding Of the jury in
a room, until they all shall have agreed
on the same thing, is as old as the
law. But it is a practice against which
good sense rebels and will rebel as
long as men are called to sit on juries.
Unanimity in the jury room has
long since been abandoned in conser-
vative Scotland, and it ought to be
abandoned here; until it has been,
sensible men will avoid so hard and
unreasonable a service. In the con-
vention Of 1895 an ordinance was pro-
posed to allow less than the entire
jury to return a verdict; it was intro
duced by distinguished lawyer, and
it was opposed by another, both of
whom had large practice in the court
Of sessions. The measure was defeat
ed. The bar alone can secure sucn a
reform.
These reasons stated above operate
to keep desirable men out Of the box,
but there Is yet another reason. When
good mems names get into the box
and when they are willing to serve,
y
torily challenged by the defense.
For the crimes of murder, man
slaughter, arson, rape, grand larceny,
burglary and forgery the statute law
allows the defendant to exercise ten
such challenges; and for other Of
fenses five such challenges. And II
there be two defendants, on trial for
the same offense, they may exercise
twenty such challenges!
The whole panel consists Of thirty
six men, but generally not more than
from thirty to thirty-four will be pres
ent to serve. By all the law Of chances
only twelve Of these men will be force
full characters; that is large propor-
ton. OF these II, the chance is that
only one-half or two-thirds will be
drawn out of the hat by the boy.
Against them, the peremptory chal-
lenge is promptly exercised, and the
weak men on the panel are sworn to
try the case.
The operation is perfect for its
work; it is almost automatic it may
be observed any day where a court
sits and men are on trial for grave Of
fenses.
The legislature alone can remedy
this defect in jury trials, for it is a
serious defect. Here a new law is
needed.
This summary rejection of good
men, without cause, is itself a subject
Of modification to them and leads
them to avoid its manifestation by
lodging jury service.
And all these causes lead good men
to avoid registration and to thereby
become disqualified for jury service
The names Of such disqualified citizens
never get into the jury box, Of course
But there Is yet another cause; the
legislature has exempted a large and
select class from compulsory jury SER
vice; they are named in the statute
and aggregate something like forty
classes.
These names are not put in the box
and if they happen to be. the privileges
of the statute are Immediately claim