Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1925-12-09
Robert B. Williamson Gives In
formative Address At Ses-
sion of Abnaki Council,
Knights of Columbus, Tues
day Evening-Says Jury Ser
vice Is Peace Time Patriot
ism

enjoyed the program at the regular
meeting Of the council, Tuesday eve
ming, which was the second IN the
series of winter meetings with spec
ial speakers. Robert B. Williamson:
Junior partner of the law Arm OF
Burleigh & Williamson: was tnS
speaker last evening and presented
an able and interesting address on
1.-THE American Jury System"
Mr.. Williamson traced the devel-
opment of jurisprudence with espec-
ial attention to the origin of the trial
by Jury. His remarks were most IN
formative and were revelation Oh
court room procedure to his hearers.
Mr.. Williamson's address was in part
as follows:
Everyone knows something about
the fury system: yet how few or US
have done more than to take It Tor
granted as we take so many or our
social institutions. I could XIII three
birds-one more than the we'll known
two-with one stone. could IN
struct myself in my profession.
amuse myself. and provide myself
with ammunition for this evenings
battle.
chunks of Gentlemen Of the Jury
way, you would enjoy, and ! am also
indebted to a small volume, I'M
pressions of a Juryman' by a MT.
Sutliffe.
Now this Kennebec jury OF ours
that will appear in the Court House
in January isn't a new idea OF Judge
Fisher and the Clerk OF Courts.
That jury traces it's ancestry from
six to eight centuries into the past.
We are told that the Greeks and
Romans had institutions performing
somewhat similar functions. but the
real story begins in England from
HOO to 1900. A respectable age, don't
YOU think, Since the Norman con-
quest of England the jury in one form
or another has been in use among
English speaking peoples.
The juries Of those primitive times
were not like the twelve men In a
box whom we have today. but the
germ of the idea was there. AT nrst
the Anglo Saxon. and Norman Courts
consisted of calling together a hum
bred heads of neighboring families
a number later reduced to twelve.
The only test OF the truth was the
oath. Examination of witnesses by
counsel as We know 1t now was un-
known.
The oath was the thing. If a man
was accused by persons testifying
under oath, he had to bring forward
what were called 'Compurgators' to
the number of eleven in addition to
himself to swear he was a person to
be believed.
The barbarous, In our eyes.
customs of the early courts hasten
ed the appearance of the jury as
we know it. Suppose poor John Doe
couldn't get enough compurgatorS or
it may have been his second Of
tense. He was in a jam, such as no
one Of US will ever know. and can
scarcely understand. Put him 10 the
ordeal! is the cry. and away he is
taken to suffer ordeal by fire or hot
iron or by water--no gentle punish
ment you will see.
If he plunges his arm into boiling
water, plucks out q stone, and Is un-
scalded or uninjured he is innocent;
otherwise guilty. Or he is tied with
his thumbs to his toes and tossed
into the stream. II he sinks, he is
found no mention Of any provision
for rescuing the poor devil who
should sink. Or again he may carry
in his naked hand a red hot iron
several PAGES. II the would is clean,
innocent; II impure, guilty. Yet an
other method was to blindfold the
accused, and then force him to select
one of two bits Of wood. II he chose
the one with a cross he was O freq
man; otherwise guilty.
1.-The Normans introduced a fairer
system-of Trial by Combat or
Duel. If Brown accused Smith,
Smith could call upon Brown to
make good his claim by fighting.
The ordeal remained however. and
was used when the accusation was
general--and no one individual dared
to be the accuser.
''Of course the futility of the cruel
ordeal was shown in time. Then the
present jury system, as a trier Of
facts, came into being. During all
of this early period the juries were
chosen for their knowledge Of the
case. They were generally near
neighbors Of the accused. This re-
quirement of knowledge by the jury
men was considered essential until
well into the fourteenth century.
How different this Is from our
present situation. Suppose a murder
trial next month in our Superior
Court. Richard Doe of China Is a
neighbor Of the prisoner, and saw the
shooting. He Is drawn for the Jury.
Will his knowledge make him q
valuable juryman? No-distinctly
not. The modern Jury consists Of
twelve persons whose minds have re-
ceived no impression of the case from
sources other than the evidence
presented to them In the Court room.
1.-THE early colonists brought the
jury system to America; and we
have adopted it as part Of our COM
mon law. Our national and state
constitutions alike guarantee trial
by jury in all but a few cases. We
could not discard the jury. If we
would, without changing the consti-
tuition itself. Easy, you say, think
ing of the Prohibition Amendment. I
doubt IL you would find 1t so. The
jury is so deeply burnt into our fibre
that we question it hardly more than
We ask what makes an apple fall to
the ground.
II have not attempted to tell you
all about juries, it's but a sketch.
The grand jury, which indicts for
crime but does not try the accused
has not been mentioned. The petit
jury Is the more exact term for
what we have been talking about.
Ny idea has been to point out few
interesting features of juries-and to
tell soma human stories that really
inform us more than pages of re-
search. For these I am largely in
debted to Mr. Wellmans book.
"The jury has been called the bull
wark of freedom. To serve as a Juror
In time of Peace Is like bearing the
musket in War Time--the same pat
riotic duty Is there-minus the bands
and the mud. Justice Is q
glorious word. To share in giving
Justice to the poor, the rich, the
humble and the mighty Is to share