New-York tribune., 1912-02-27
MAJoRITIEs AND JURIEs.
tor OF The Tribune.

To the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir: One is startled by the statement in a
recent Tribune editorial. entitled Majority
Verdlcts" that much might be said in
favor OF permitting the vote OF less than
twelve men to convict. at least Of the lesser
crimes" And the editor cites certain argI-
ments in favor OF the change, among them
the avoidance OF retrials. the saving Of de-
lay In choosing juries, the lessening OF the
danger OF jury corruption and the preven-
ton OF waste OF time I'm tho conduct OF
trials. These improvements are much TO be
desired, but II is n question whether the
remedy Is not worse than the disease. II
the proposition were to enable eleven men
TO convict. Il might possibly still be sue
cessfully contended that the essence Of the
jury system idea had been preserved. But
the editors endeavor does not seem TO be
directed so conserYatively, but, rather. he
argues for 'verdicts by a two-thirds or
three-fourths vote OF the jury" TO use his
own words, or. in his own words again.
eight or nine OF the jurymen." Again,
note hts statement as follows: "a verdict
by hree-fourths or two-thirds OF a jury
would be likely TO be common sense; ac-
cordingly, common sense would be upper
most in the trial.
This Is a very serious question. II Is GUS
tomary to look upon the Jury system as the
palladium OF our liberties. The supreme
value OF a jury system Is that It furnishes
a check upon the foolish governor. The
governed need protection from the gov
ernor whether the latter be king or ma
jority. IL Is q question whether the citizen
does not need more protection against the
majority than against the king; for there
are some good kings, while there can be no
such thing as a good majority. The ma
jority in this country have made a hun
dred thousand foolish laws Any lawyer
will tell you so. The jury stands be-
tween the law and the victim. This propo-
sition TO emasculate the jury seems to
strike at the vitals OF safe government
Only on account of the Inconvenience Of
a convention OF thousands OF people we
draw jurymen at random TO represent the
whole community. When one-third OF a
jury votes TO acquit 1t means perhaps
probable ten thousand In the community
opposed TO conviction. When the editor
advocates disregarding these ten thousand
people he becomes sponsor for despotlsm
OF the blackest sort, Majority government
would lack common sense. as the very
words import. The common sense OF the
majority is only majority sense. When the
majority disagrees with the minority there
is no sense in common between the two.
The editors eight jurymen have sense that
is common 20 the eight but they have not
sense that is common to the twelve.
In every community are found cranks,
the stupid. the biassed, the dishonest, as
the editor calls them. The question arises
whether the proportion of people OF this
stripe approaches anywhere near to the
one-twefth mark. II so. some such might
often get on jury. Granting all this, the
position might with some reason be taken
that one dissenting voice on a jury could
justly be disregarded. This would be very
different thing from advocating the annul-
ling of the political rights Of one-third or
one-fourth OF the community. or. In other
words. empowering two-thirds of the jury
men 10 represent more than eleven
twelfths OF the people.
E. d. BRINKERHoFF.
New York. Feb. IL, 1912.