Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-10-03
SPORTING ATTITUDE HELD
CAUSE OF LONG TRIALS
Canadian Jurist Declares Jud &c Serves
Only as Umpire in Game Of Wits.
Tells of Speed in Dominion.

cutor. OF course, all sensation in a trial |
is eliminated. 1t is not a duel between |
the lawyer for the accused and the
crown prosecutor with each one re |
sorting to all sorts of trickerv. All of
that would take intermina BILE time and |
in Canada we have no Use for II:
moreover. We are too poor 10 he viii |
ing to pay for such sport and too busy |
to be willing to waste weeks on an in |
vestigation for which days, or even |
hours, are ample.
Jmries Quickly Picked.
with more than 40 ears expert |
ence. I have never seen 1t take more
than half IN hour to get trial jury |
even In a murder case. ! have never |
but once heard Juror asked a qres-
, ton: and II is the rarest nf ca ses that !
any difficulty, however small arises
in the process Of swearing in the
twelve.
LAS to procuring a jury. this Is our
system. simple. speedy and decorous |
Every person inter rested may obtain a
copy of the jury panel for few cents !
at a convenient time before the court |
sits: a certain number Of peremptorv |
challenges is allowed. 4. II or 90. &C
cordinR 70 The seriousness OF I'll" |
crime. The number of challenges for |
cause Is unlimited: but in over 40 |
years experience I have known only |
one instance of challenge for cause. |
The usual course is for counsel for !
the accused. II there is real cause. to |
mention the fact to crown counsel and |
the juror is excused. ! have never |
known a refusal. Very occa sionally q |
juror himself asks to be excused and !
counsel agree. Of course, to excuse him |
have seen a criminal Jury obtained |
in Savannah, presided over by my |
friend. Judge Peter Medrim. In the |
trial itself there is seldom any rea
reason outside Of theatrical show for |
delay-exclude the movie motif and J
the trial moves along swiftly.
Trials Are Speedy.
II have been concerned In a great !
many cases both at the bar and on |
the bench and have never. except !
once. seen even murder case take a
day and half for trial"
Isn't there another cog in the |
wheel Of certain and speedy justice
that we have overlooked" | asked.
II have heard many American tIrists
say that our Judges should he given
more power in the conduct Of trial.
AS II is. they are hedged in so by
regulations that they are practically
nothing better than technical UNI
pires. Don't the judges OF Canada
have free play in trial? Are they
not allowed TO have a good deal OF
leeway in directing the trial?"
Under the theory of criminal
trial as game, contest between
smart intellects. it is only natural
that the usefulness Of the judge
should he subordinated to the activi
ties Of the contrasting lawyers. I'm
der this theory, a Judge Is nothing
hut an umpire. as you say, and II
would he an outrage for him to take
hand in the play. But in Canada
we believe he should take part in
the investigation. as 1t is not a mere
game of wits We want every one
who can assist to take a part in
bringing out the facts. the judge as
we'll as the lawyers. Our judges free
ly examine witnesses, cross-examine.
bringing out facts. overlooked or
slurred over: they comment on the
evidence to the jury. give the jury the
benefit of their trained minds. though,
Of course. the jury Is not bound to
give wekcht to the judges comments.
And in every case he must make 1t
perfectly plain to the jury that they
must on their oath determine the
fact. whatever his view may be-.
Power Rests In People.
Then you think that for speedy
and certain punishment the offenders
and the elimination of judicial red
tape, the law should first he simpH-
fed, then the trial should be sol
emu inquiry by the state. not a con-
test by two opposing lawyers. and.
finally. the judge should have a free
hand in eliciting the truth. But !
still don't see how you get that sys
tom.
II think our system the hest for
our people, but | express no opinion
as to the others-they must decide
for themselves. So far as the origin
Of our system is concerned, we al
WAYS have had 1t to a, certain degree
but we have from time to time got
rid of anomalies and teChnicalities.
1T has always been our custom to
have unsensational prosecutors. Gus
tom in Canada to have solemn trials
in which there is no unseemly dueling
between The smartest intellects, with
a Judge Just looking on. 1t is pos
sible for a Judge to prevent a delay,
prevent unseemly and protracted
sparrins between opposing counsel,
possihle 70 make his courtroom
place where solemn inquiries are held
But in the ultimate analysis II is
the peoDle who are to be satisfied
the people who pay for the courts.
They ran bring about any change
that they really desire. Every free
people have the courts they deserve