Evening star., 1928-04-24
DEBATE OVER Jury
REFORM FORESEEN
Sinclair and Doheny Acquit-
tails May Open Discus
sion of System.
BY FREDERIC WILLIAM VILE,

Harry F. Sinclairs acquittal. follow
ing acouittal OF Edward l.. Doheny on
the same charge and of George Remus,
king of the bootleggers," on murder
charge In Cincinnati, is bound to lead,
WASHINGTON political and legal author
tiles feel. to Nationwide heart-Search-
ing about the jury system. The Ameri-
can Law Institute is holding its annual
session in the Capital this week. Its
principsl business Is to consider a
three-year survey of the defects In
American criminal procedure, The jury
system is not particularly under flre,
but with recent events in mind, the
country's eminent lawyers are certain TO
discuss 1t.
Proposals to abolish trial by jury are
heard of now and then. but never Seri-
ously advocated or considered. The
from colonial days. 1t was brought
from England, where II originated In
the Magma Charta But several of the
States have enacted material changes
in the original plan. Maryland for
many years has given accused persons,
In criminal cases, the right to waive
trial by jury and be Judged, instead, by
a Judge or a bench of judges. just
one year ago this week-April IS. 1927
Connecticut enacted statute enabling
the accused party. If he so elects when
called upon to plead. to be tried by
the court instead of by the jury. II
the accused iS charged with crime
punishable by death or imprisonment
for life. and shall elect TO be tried by
the court. the court shall be composed
of three Judges, consisting OF the pre-
siding Judge and two other judges
designated by the chief justice OF the
Supreme Court of Errors.
Majority Decides.
These judges have the right. by a
majority decision, TO decide all Ques-
tions of law and fact arising from the
trial and render Judgment accordingly.
Michigan several years ago adopted its
famous "one-man grand jury" system,
The New York Legislature is said to be
considering a law for waving trial by
Jury on demand Breakdown OF GRIM
inal justice in Chicago and Cook Coun-
ty has long been the ground for seek
ing sweeping revision Of the Illinois jury
system.
The Sinclair and Doheny trials in
volyed many intricate and technical
questions. Justice Jennings Bailey. trial
Judge in the recent Sinclair case, in
lIDQuCEu
trict of Columbia the practice of having
the court pick the Jury instead of hav-
ing IT selected. as usual. by opposing
counsel. Counsel did not surrender the
right of challenge. Observers thir2k the
Sinclair Jury was somewhat above the
average in citizenship intelligence.
Lawyers who disapprove any mate
rial tampering with the jury system
roun6ly declare that Mr.. Average Citi-
zen bears a full share of responsibility
for inefficient" iuries or juries that
otherwise fail habitually to satisfy pub
lie sentiment with their verdicts What
the lawyers mean is that lodging OF
Jury service Is notoriously rampant
among the So-calied better class OF
men and women all over the country
Often citizens plead legitimate business
exlGennies as an excuse for securing
their liberation when drafted to sit on
juries.
Oppose Intervention"
Some authorities think jury evils
might be effectively averted by revcrsioll
to the ancient right and duty of pre-
siding Judges TO comment on the evil
dence and the credibility of witnesses.
Such has been the custom since time
immemorial in British courts. and In
some OF the Federal courts of the United
States. But most Of the States have
rigid provisions against such "interter-
ence" from the bench
They proceed on the tory that the
Jury Is the chief safeguard Of Anierl-
can liberties. and insist that verdictS
be reached without guidance TO. or re-
straint upon. the II good men land
women1 and true who sit In judgment
upon such OF their peers" as face them
in civil or criminal cases.
Copyright 1881