San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-04-11
WHEN JURORS REJECT A LAW

An apparently growing condition is
indicated, and the final fate of national
''prohibition" forecast. by the frank
Statements of talcsmen in the federal
court at San Antonio concerning their
attitude toward the Nolstead law One
of them asserted fatty that his mind was
so inhospitablc to the sumptuary idea
that he could not reach verdict in
accordance with the law and the evil
dence' In short. he believed that the
"orohib;tion' law was no good. and that
no good could come of it: therefore he
preferred TO have nothing to do with its
en- 'orcement
Whether that is the proper attitSde
for any citizen may be an Improbable
question. But if conditions rather than
theories are to be faced. then the gov
eminent will have to do something about
the condition which the Directing tales
mans avowed attitude represents. There
arc only two possible courses open to it.
The prohibition farce may be pro-
longed until the disrcspect which it has
cngendered is practiced against. every
law to which anybody objects. The al
Tentative is to eliminate the particular
law which has created the condition
which is moving toward the logical con-
clusion of utter legal chaos.
During the examination OF the pros
pcctive jurors the district attorney sought
to ascertain their attitude toward the
prohibition question in general. Defense
counsel objected, of course. and doubt
less it was cminentlv proper, from the
legal and Judicial standpoint, to sustain
the objection, and that the court did.
But one who put himself into the gov
ernments shoes would have little diff
Guilty in perceivng wherein failure On
the courts part to sustain such an OBJ
lection might entail no end OF difficulty
in filing jury boxes for the trial of
prohibition" cases. Thus. il there had
been no orthodox legal and Judicial rca-
sons for forbiddihg the prosecuting at
torney to ask prospective juror whether
he believed in prohibition, the considera-
ton of strategy might easily have ccm-
mended itself to persons bent upon cen
tinuing the enforcement" process as
long as possible.
However, what a man does or doesn't
believe in, may easily, and many times
does, play an important even though
unrecognized part in the ideas he forms
and the decisions he reaches. Excep-
tional is the man who analyses his men
tai processes, or even identifies them as
peculiarly his own without trying to
analyze them. And even the exceptional
man does not and cannot know what is
IN his sub-conscious mind 1t is there
that ones tendencies originate. Why is
one person intensely liberty-loving, and
another submissive TO dictation: To an
swer the question in either case, factors
that run back hundreds of years, ante
cedents with like unseen influences,
would have to be reviewed. But such
comprehensive review is out OF the
question.
No man of integrity would consciously
undertake to return a verdict IN viola
ton of his oath to make his decision
conform to "the law and the evidence
But person may be absolutely honest
with himself and nevertheless reach a
decision based largely upon his own
pre-conceived ideas of right and wrong
the while thinking that he was Subject,
ing the issue in hand to the test of ''thc
Law and the evidence alone. And if a