Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1913-10-23


naitor Georgian:
have read with great interest the
-pendid editorial IN. your issue of yes
.orday's date, entitled The jury Sys-
rcm of Georgia on Trial" To your
mastery presentation of the occasion
and reasons for your editorial utter
ance at this time l could not hope to
add. In the concluding sentence of
hat editorial you invite suggestions
from YOUR readers as to the proper
method of safeguarding jurors in the
future" such as will make "the jury
system of our State so strong that it
will not break down anywhere"
System Is Simple.
shall not presume to enter upon
he discussion of the jury system as it
relates to or its Integrity is called IN
question in the particular case TO
which you refer. 1t is presumed that
The courts will so deal with that mat
-er that no odium can attach to our
iurv system because of any revela-
ions which may have been made in
hat case.
However, such revelations may re-
feet upon the individual juror or
Jurors whose conduct is called in
question l will, however, as an
Interested reader Oh yOuI tuIlOi iohi,
claim your indulgence and ask the
privilege of submitting some obser-
yations upon the general subject con-
aerning which YOU invite discussion
and suggestion.
1t is submitted that the jury sys-
lem of this State, as system, is as
nearly perfect as human ingenuity
can devise. 1t possesses the merit of
extreme simplicity to start with. 1t
provides that none other save upright
and intelligent citizens shall sit upon
iuries. 1t requires and provides for
he impartial selection, by sworn jury
.ommissioners, of the persons whose
a8mes shall be entered upon the jury
nst.
Drawing Impartial.
II provides a strictly impartial
rethod for the drawing of jurors, and
..rec's that they should be sum-
a0ned by a sworn officer of the law.
After they are thus selected they
are chosen in the given case under
,,stem which is perfectly fair and
Impartial as between the parties, and
.aev are even then as individual jul
'ors subjected to such an examination
a $. but'for the intervention of the hui
man element. assures absolutely the
selection of only upright, intelligent
and impartial jurors TO pass upon the
ssues made
submit, therefore, that the sys-
en-, in and of ITSELF is sufficiently
strong. If this system, in its just
operation, fails to furnish such jury
as the law requires and such a jury
rs measures up to the highest stand
ard of human perfection, in my judg-
nent, we will have@to look deeper
han and beyond the system for the
gauses which produce the failure.
Assuming that in the process of Sc
ection those charged with the admin
istra ton of the system have failed OF
their duty, the responsibility is and
should be upon the individual officers
charged with The duty of selection.
Let us suppose, however, that there
has been no failure here, and that still
upon the jury there appears one who
because of bias or prejudice, enters
upon the trial with a fixed determine
ton, we will say, in criminal case,
either to convict or acquit the de-
lendant; the presence of such man
on a jury could result only from one
of two causes-either dense ignor-
Hnce, almost to the point of imbecil-
ity, or inexcusable and criminal cor
ruption.
Before being sworn in felony
Ease each individual juror is required
TO answer, on oath, these three ques-
ions In order to test his impartiality:
First. Have you, from having seen
The crime committed, or from having
heard any of the testimony delivered
on oath, formed and expressed an
opinion in regard to the guilt or in
nocence of the prisoner at the bar?
When Disqualified.
If he answers Yes, he is disquali-
fed
Second. Have you any bias or pref
udice in your mind, either for or
against the prisoner at the bar?
An affirmative answer to this ques-
lion disqualifies him,
Third. Are you perfectly impartial
between the State and the accused
If the answer is in the negative, he
disqualified.
| therefore submit to every candid
mind that no man can truthfully AND
honestly answer these questions and
permit himself to be chosen as a juror
IL he has upon his minG such bias
"a $ amounts to a fixed opinion in re-
gard to the guilt or innocence of the
person being tried.
Il will be observed, then, that the
.aut If any, arising from failure OF
Justice in a given case, in so far as
nat failure rests upon the finding oil
jury, it is not 20 be attributed tC
he jury system, nor ought the right
trial by jury be subjected to in
.a.ous criticism because Of the hap
''Nfng of such an event, but, on the
onirary, it should be attributed tc
.." man upon whom the system oper-
."s and who is engaged in the exc
N'oh of the duties enjoined upon him
'E that system.
il Is therefore that fear the defect
which you refer lies deeper thar
'"e system. 1t is imbedded in the
cart and conscience of the man Wh6
muses. his right to sit on a jury.
II trial by jury as an institution for
me administration of public justice
'dhd by the term public justice
means justice administered in ac-
.ordance with the law as opposed tc
nat species OF private justice eXem-
''lled in the so-called system known
as trial by mob) shall fail OF the pu--
N'Se Tor which it was originally de-
signed, such failure must be attrib-
Uled to the men by whom the law is
'Vlalnlstered, and not to other cause
II men deliberately swear in as
Jurors for the corrupt purpose OF
ringing about a particular result OF
S,yer being sworn in, if led by preju-
Nl'e thew haaA M t1o Of =