Milford chronicle., 1928-12-14
SUGGESTS BAR ACT TO
REVISE JURY SYSTEM
rContinued from first paael

Continued from FTT PdgeI
including Mr.. Richards, be appoint
ed to consider the jury system OF
this state. Mr.. Richards said he has
not vet appointed that committee.
Among the questions discussed
were the adVisability of reducing the
number of men on jury; the aban-
donment of the practice of requir-
ing a Jury to return an unanimous
vote and the elimination of special
juries or changing the method of Sc
lecting such juries.
The concensus of opinion among
the members of the bar was that the
Jury system should not be abolished
but rather "doctored" to meet the
needs of modern Jurisprudence.
There was a plea made by Attorney
General Clarence A. Switzerland for
more intelligent jurors and a consti-
tutional amendment, making it pos
sible for the judges, in making
charges to juries, to refer to the
case in question, and to use illustra-
tions, instead of discussing the law
abstractly.
Mr.. Richards, in referring to the
number of men on a jury, asked the
significant question.
What magic is there in the num-
ber 12. If there were half as many
on the jury, wouldn't it be possible
to secure a more intelligent jury
and wouldn't the result, be as just?"
Attorney General Switzerland re-
marked that every week his office
receives questionnaires from persons
and organizations inquiring about
the jury system of Delaware. He re-
garded it as incumbent upon the
Bar to consider the operation of the
state jury system at once.
He suggested two remedies for
the jury system, First, more intel
ligent class of jurors; second,
Constitutional amendment releasing
judges from fetters in charging jur-
les.
Regarding special juries, he
thought something was wrong with
the theory under which a man could |
secure a special jury to try civil
suit when he is financially able to
pay the necessary $400 and at the
same time, under which a man with /
out $400 has to submit his case to a
general jury.
Charles F. Curley made the sug-
gestion that a bill be presented to
the General Assembly, either abol-
ishing special juries or changing the
method of selection of such juries.
At present, under the State jury
system, veniremen for the general
juries are selected by a jury COM
mission, while the prothonotary's Of
flee selects the men for the special
juries.
Continuing his thoughts on the
jury system, Attorney General
said the trial jury
works under a tremendous handi-
cap. The jury is absolutely deprived
of any real assistance or guidance
he added, from the trial
judge, the one person in the court
room able and qualified to give it
real assistance and guidance. In
nearly all States, he added, the i
Judge is prevented, either by stat
ute or the State Constitution itself |
rs in Delaware, from commenting
Upon the facts of a case as distinct
from law, except to state the con- I
.ents of each Of the parties.
"The consequences" he said, "Of
his system, 1 believe, have been :
serious. The jury has been left to I
ind out for itself, the real issues of y
he case. The judge has been con- =
Terted into an umpire, without au- =
hority to take any part in the trial
lnless one Of the lawyers violates =,
he rules. The result has been to :,
cave the guidance of the case large o.
y within the control of the lawyers +.
nd to permit the introduction into q
he case, by various means Of irrev- II
liant issues, the necessary effect of q
which, is to mislead and confuse the b
ury il
"The obvious remedy is the res
Oration to the court of its proper D.
the power to function as W
ldge and not as a mere umpire; the g,
over to guide and assist the jury fC
l finding what are the real issues CT
etween parties and the power to m
revent either of the litigante from cC
the issues" al
The only time the State Bar AS W
ociation did anything in connection W
ith the jury system of the State &C
as when it sponsored law, giving lii
lie accused the right to stand trial st
Y court instead of jury.