An Essay On The Trial By Jury, Lysander Spooner [chrysanthemum read aloud .TXT] 📗

Should Have

His Name In The Jury Box,  Or Be Eligible As A Juror. Yet This Is

The Case In Hardly A Single State.

 

In New Jersey,  Maryland,  North Carolina,  Tennessee,  And

Mississippi,  The Jurors Are Required To Be Freeholders. But This

Requirement Is Illegal,  For The Reason That The Term Freeholder,

In This Country,  Has No Meaning Analogous To The Meaning It Had In

The Ancient Common Law.

 

In Arkansas,  Missouri,  Indiana,  And Alabama,  Jurors Are Required

To Be "Freeholders Or Householders." Each Of These Requirements Is

Illegal.

 

In Florida,  They Are Required To Be "Householders."

 

In Connecticut,  Maine,  Ohio,  And Georgia,  Jurors Are Required To

Have The Qualifications Of "Electors."

 

In Virginia,  They Are Required To Have A Property Qualification Of

One Hundred Dollars.

 

In Maine,  Massachusetts,  Vermont,  Connecticut,  New York,  Ohio,

Indiana,  Michigan,  And Wisconsin,  Certain Civil Authorities Of The

Towns,  Cities,  And Counties Are Authorized To Select,  Once In One,

Two,  Or Three Years,  A Certain Number Of The People   A Small

Number Compared With The Whole   From Whom Jurors Are To Be

Taken

When Wanted; Thus Disfranchising All Except,  The Few Thus

Selected.

 

In Maine And Vermont,  The Inhabitants,  By Vote In Town Meeting,

Have A Veto Upon The Jurors Selected By The Authorities Of The

Town.

 

In Massachusetts,  The Inhabitants,  By Vote In Town Meeting,  Can

Strike Out Any Names Inserted By The Authorities,  And Insert

Chapter 6 (Juries Of The Present Day Illegal) Pg 125

Others; Thus Making Jurors Elective By The People,  And,  Of Course,

Representatives Only Of A Majority Of The People.

 

In Illinois,  The Jurors Are Selected,  For Each Term Of Court,  By

The County Commissioners.

 

In North Carolina,  "The Courts Of Pleas And Quarter Sessions Shall

Select The Names Of Such Persons Only As Are Freeholders,  And As

Are Well Qualified To Act As Jurors,  &C;.; Thus Giving The Courts

Power To Pack The Juries."   (Revised Statutes,  147.)

 

In Arkansas,  Too,  "It Shall Be The Duty Of The County Court Of

Each County * To Make Out And Cause To Be Delivered To The Sheriff

A List Of Not Less Than Sixteen,  Nor More Than Twenty-Three

Persons,  Qualified To Serve As Grand Jurors;" And The Sheriff Is

To Summon Such Persons To Serve As Grand Jurors.

 

In Tennessee,  Also,  The Jurors Are To Be Selected By The County

Courts.

 

In Georgia,  The Jurors Are To Be Selected By "The Justices Of The

Inferior Courts Of Each County,  Together With The Sheriff And

Clerk,  Or A Majority Of Them."

 

In Alabama,  "The Sheriff; Judge Of The County Court,  And Clerks Of

The Circuit And County Courts," Or "A Majority Of" Them,  Select

The Jurors.

 

In Virginia,  The Jurors Are Selected By The Sheriffs; But The

Sheriff's Are Appointed By The Governor Of The State,  And That Is

Enough To Make The Juries Illegal. Probably The Same Objection

Lies Against The Legality Of The Juries In Some Other States.

 

How Jurors Are Appointed,  And What Are Their Qualifications,  In

New Hampshire,  Rhode Island,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  South

Carolina,  Kentucky,  Iowa,  Texas,  And California,  I Know Not.

There

Is Little Doubt That There Is Some Valid Objection To Them,  Of The

Kinds Already Suggested,  In All These States.

 

In Regard To Jurors In The Courts Of The United States,  It Is

Enacted,  By Act Of Congress:

 

"That Jurors To Serve In The Courts Of The United States,  In Each

State Respectively,  Shall Have The Like Qualifications And Be

Entitled To The Like Exemptions,  As Jurors Of The Highest Court Of

Law Of Such State Now Have And Are Entitled To,  And Shall

Hereafter,  From Time To Time,  Have And Be Entitled To,  And Shall

Be Designated By Ballot,  Lot,  Or Otherwise,  According To The Mode

Of Forming Such Juries Now Practised And Hereafter To Be Practised

Therein,  In So Far As Such Mode May Be Practicable By The Courts

Of The United States,  Or The Officers Thereof; And For This

Purpose,  The Said Courts Shall Have Power To Make All Necessary

Rules And Regulations For Conforming The Designation And

Chapter 6 (Juries Of The Present Day Illegal) Pg 126

Empanelling Of Jurors,  In Substance,  To The Laws And Usages Now In

Force In Such State; And,  Further,  Shall Have Power,  By Role Or

Order,  From Time To Time,  To Conform The Same To Any Change In

These Respects Which May Be Hereafter Adopted By The Legislatures

Of The Respective States For The State Courts."   St. 1840,  Ch.

47,  Statutes At Large,  Vol. 5,  P. 394.

 

In This Corrupt And Lawless Manner,  Congress,  Instead Of Taking

Care To Preserve The Trial By Jury,  So Far As They Might,  By

Providing For The Appointment Of Legal Juries   Incomparably The

Most Important Of All Our Judicial Tribunals,  And The Only Ones On

Which The Least Reliance Can Be Placed For The Preservation Of

Liberty   Have Given The Selection Of Them Over Entirely To The

Control Of An Indefinite Number Of State Legislatures,  And Thus

Authorized Each State Legislature To Adapt The Juries Of The

United States To The Maintenance Of Any And Every System Of

Tyranny That May Prevail In Such State.

 

Congress Have As Much Constitutional Right To Give Over All The

Functions Of The United States Government Into The Hand Of The

State Legislatures,  To Be Exercised Within Each State In Such

Manner As The Legislature Of Such State Shall Please To Exercise

Them,  As They Have To Thus Give Up To These Legislatures The

Selection Of Juries For The Courts Of The United States.

 

There Has,  Probably,  Never Been A Legal Jury,  Nor A Legal Trial By

Jury,  In A Single Court Of The United States,  Since The Adoption

Of The Constitution.

 

These Facts Show How Much Reliance Can Be Placed In Written

Constitutions,  To Control The Action Of The Government,  And

Preserve The Liberties Of The People.

 

If The Real Trial By Jury Had Been Preserved In The Courts Of The

United States   That Is,  If We Had Had Legal Juries,  And The

Jurors Had Known Their Rights   It Is Hardly Probable That One

Tenth Of The Past Legislation Of Congress Would Ever Have Been

Enacted,  Or,  At Least,  That,  If Enacted,  It Could Have Been

Enforced.

 

Probably The Best Mode Of Appointing Jurors Would Be This: Let The

Names Of All The Adult [Male] [9] Members Of The State,  In Each

Township,  Be Kept In A Jury Box,  By The Officers Of The Township;

And When A Court Is To Be Held For A County Or Other District,  Let

The Officers Of A Sufficient Number Of Townships Be Required

(Without Seeing The Names) To Draw Out A Name From Their Boxes

Respectively,  To Be Returned To The Court As A Juror. This Mode Of

Appointment Would Guard Against Collusion And Selection; And

Juries So Appointed Would Be Likely To Be A Fair Epitome Of "The

Country."

 

[1]On The English Constitution.

 

[2] Although All The Freemen Are Legally Eligible As Jurors,  Any

Chapter 6 (Juries Of The Present Day Illegal) Pg 127

One May Nevertheless Be Challenged And Set Aside,  At The Trial,

For Any Special Personal Disqualification; Such As Mental Or

Physical Inability To Perform The Duties; Having Been Convicted,

Or Being Under Charge,  Of Crime; Interest,  Bias,  &C;. But It Is

Clear That The Common Law Allows None Of These Points To Be

Determined By The Court,  But Only By "Triers."

 

[3] What Was The Precise Meaning Of The Saxon Word,  Which I Have

Here Called Elderly,  I Do Not Know. In The Latin Translations It

Is Rendered By Seniores,  Which May Perhaps Mean Simply Those

Who Have Attained Their Majority.

 

[4] In 1485 It Was Enacted,  By A Statute Entitled " Of What Credit

And Estate Those Jurors Must Be Which Shall Be Impaneled In The

Sheriff's Turn."

 

"That No Bailiff Nor Other Officer From Henceforth Return Or

Impanel Any Such Person In Any Shire Of England,  To Be Taken Or

Put In Or Upon Any Inquiry In Any Of The Said Turns,  But Such As

Be Of Good Name And Fame,  And Having Lands And Tenements Of

Freehold Within The Same Shires,  To The Yearly Value Of Twenty

Shillings At The Least,  Or Else Lands And Tenements Holden By

Custom Of Manor,  Commonly Called Copy-Hold,  Within The Said

Shires,  To The Yearly Value Of Twenty-Six Shillings Eight Pence

Over All Charges At The Least."   1 Richard Iii.,  Ch. 4. (1483 )

 

In 1486 It Was Enacted,  " That The Justices Of The Peace Of Every

Shire Of This Realm For The Time Being May Take,  By Their

Discretion,  An Inquest,  Whereof Every Man Shall Have Lands And

Tenements To The Yearly Value Of Forty Shillings At The Least,  To

Inquire Of The Concealments Of Others," &C;.,  &C;.   3 Henry Vii,

Ch. 1. (1486.)

 

A Statute Passed In 1494,  In Regard To Jurors In The City Of

London,  Enacts:

 

"That No Person Nor Persons Hereafter Be Impaneled,  Summoned,

Or Sworn In Any Jury Or Inquest In Courts Within The Same City,  (Of

London,) Except He Be Of Lands,  Tenements,  Or Goods And Chattels,

To The Value Of Forty Marks; [5] And That No Person Or Persons

Hereafter Be Impaneled,  Summoned,  Nor Sworn In Any Jury Or

Inquest In Any Court Within The Said City,  For Lands Or Tenements,  Or

Action Personal,  Wherein The Debt Or Damage Amounteth To The Sum

Of Forty Marks,  Or Above,  Except He Be In Lands Tenements,  Goods,

Or Chattels,  To The Value Of One Hundred Marks."   11 Henry Vii.

Ch. 21. (1494.)

 

The Statute 4 Henry Viii,  Ch. 3,  Sec. 4,  (1512) Requires Jurors In

London To Have "Goods To The Value Of One Hundred Marks."

 

In 1494 It Was Enacted That "It Shall Be Lawful To Every Sheriff

Of The Counties Of Southampton,  Surrey.,  And Sussex,  To Impanel

And Summons Twenty-Four Lawful Men Of Such,  Inhabiting Within

The Precinct Of His Or Their Turns,  As Owe Suit,  To The Same Turn,

Chapter 6 (Juries Of The Present Day Illegal) Pg 128

Whereof