Year: 1872

~ Ill IL; lCl ~. LII ~
The Question - Trial ~ jerry.


The not unlooked-for result Of the jury trial
in the case of Stokes furnishes strong evidence
of the little reliance that can be plaosd ON the
proper administration Of justice under the pre-
sent system. So many experiments of the same
nature have been tried with like result that
the public conscience is not 80 much affected
as might be expected or even desired. Still
there is abroad general dissatisfaction that
some conclusion has not been reached by the
twelve men who were obtained with so much
trouble to try this case. The main facts of
the charge against Stokes were admitted by the
defence, and it only remained for the jury to
decide what was the nature Of the act which
Stokes committed when he shot and killed
Fisk. To the ordinary mind the issue seemed
plain one; but, as the evidence Of motive in
such cases is always of most conflicting ma
ture, 1t is natural to expect that different men
would take different views of the responsibility
incurred by one man in shooting down
another. Where important evidence of q con-
ficting nature is certain to be presented
and requires to be carefully weighed and ana
lyzed, it is of the first importance that the
men to decide on its relative value should be
of superior intelligence. It is not enough that
they should be honest and unprejudiced; they
ought to represent the highest intelligence of
the community. The interest of the prisoner,
no less than that of the public, demands this;
yet the law as at present interpreted tends to
exclude from the jury box the only class whose
presence could give weight and authority to
that ancient but much overrated institution.


There can be no question that the present
ruling in relation to the selection of jurors is
made rather after the letter than the spirit of
the law. It is evident that the trainers Of the
law never intended that the intelligent portion
of the community should be driven from all
practical share in the administration of JUS
tice. The intent was to protect the citizen
from the malevolence Of personal enemies, and
the challenge was meant to meet the case of
personal prejudice which might endanger the
life of the accused. No reasonable
man will attempt to maintain that
intelligent legislators deliberately passed a law
with the intention of making the life of the
citizen dependent on the stolid stupidity of
men who, from their sheer want Of intelli-
gence, form no opinions on events that agitate
the whole community. This position is too
absurd to be maintained and yet the judges
in our Courts constantly ignore the evident
Interpretation, without word Of comment or
protest. But the vast mass of the people are
becoming tired of the judicial farces which
are constantly being enacted in our midst, and
the desire for the adoption Of some more logi-
Cal mode of procedure has grown to be uni
versal, at least among the classes who do not
care to indulge in the amusement of shooting
down their fellow beings No doubt the rowdy
element will look with disfavor on any change
in the present system, which practically places
at their mercy the lives Of the peaceable inhab-
itants.


1t is scarcely just that oil the protection Of
the law should be afforded to those who, set
ting all law at defiance, make their own wills
the only guide, while the victims of their vio-
lence are deprived of all protection. If this
state of things continues it will be
the interest Of every one to defy
the law, and we may look forward
to the execution Of summary vengeance for
real or fancied wrong as a regular item of
daily intelligence. If judges and juries are
to be assembled, at some expense to the gene
raj purse, simply to tell us that they do not
know whether or not killing is a crime, the
sooner we dispense with the farce of holding
courts of justice the better. Two ways sug-
gest themselves Of curing the present evil and
we think the moment has come when the
remedy should be applied. The adoption of
rule which would make two-thirds majority
sufficient to secure the conviction of criminal
would undoubtedly give real guarantee for
the administration Of justice. In addition, the
present Interpretation of the Jury law, which
excludes the intelligent classes from the jury
box, ought to be modified so as to apply only
to such cases of prejudice as might be held to
interfere with a jurors returning true ver-
dict according to the evidence. This was GER
tainly the intent of the trainers of the law,
which legal sophistry has so distorted as to
convert what was meant to be q safeguard for
the innocent into powerful shield for the
guilty. With the introduction of these reason
able changes into our code we might hope to
murderous ruffianism which is blot on our
city and on our civilization.


Gnmbctta and President Thiers.
In his speech at La Ferte-sous-Jouarre on