TRIAL BY JURY.

Grey River Argus, 2 March 1927, Page 7

TRIAL BY JURY.

EVOLUTION OF SYSTEM. FROM SAXON TIMES. ADDRESS TO J.P.’s ASSN. The jury system and the quaint customs from which it has been evolved formed the subject of an interesting address delivered by Air F. A. Kitehingham at the annual meeting of the AVest Coast Justices of the Peace Association yesterday. In opening his address, Air Kitchingnam said that in Anglo-Saxon times one form of trial was known as trial by thq ordeal of fire, in which the accused person was made to walk over red hot plough shares, and if he was not burnt he was held to be innocent, and if he was burnt he was adjudged guilty. It was, of course, no real trial at all. Another form was convocation, which seemed absurd to-day. Under it, if the accused could get twelve neighbours to swear that they believed him innocent, he was acquitted. The communities of those times were so small that it would be difficult for a guilty person to get twelve men to swear for him. “TWELVE GOOD MEN AND TRUE.” After the Norman conquest, the Normans wished to refrain from trampling upon the peasantry, and their customs too much. Therefore when the jury system was compiled a commission was sent round the country to get twelve men in each district to testify as to the common law and customs of each part. This was the origin of the jury system. AVhen the King’s judges went on circuit, they had to rely on these jurors for the facts and the local law. The jurors in those small communities were able to give fairly satisfactory judgments from their own knowledge of the facts. This contrasted with the present, in which jurors did not act on their own knowledge of the facts. In England, a Grand Jury could still commit a suspected person for trial. JURY SERVICE. The speaker passed on to detail the qualifications of a. juryman to-day, and the many exemptions from liability for jury service. Grand Jurors were re quired to be people of “the best condition.” but they were also liable for service as common jurors. A very important matter in connection with the Grand Jury was that if it threw out a bill of indictment, the Crown could go on presenting it until a true bill was returned. In one case this had been done in New Zealand in which it had been suspected that influence had been exercised over enough of the Grand Jurors to ensure the bill being thrown | out. The accused was re-arrested, rebrought before the lower court, and! this time the Grand Jury brought in ai true bill. He was, however, acquitted by the common jury.

The common jury panel was drawn at the Sherfiff’s Office, and anyone could be present at the drawing to see that it was all square and above board. RIGHTS OF CHALLENGE. Besides the grand and common jury, there was the special jury, which was used when the case involved technicalities, in which more than ordinary intelligence was required to understand. Referring to the right of challenge, Air Kitehingham said that in certain cases when an unfair panel was suspected, ti e whole jury could be challenged. This was very rare, however. The Crown could challenge any number of the jurors, but the prisoner was limited to six challenges. If a Alaori was charged with an offence against a Alaori he was entitled to be tried by a Alaori jury. TRIAL OF NOBLES. In England certain cases were not tried by jury which in New Zealand would be. Alembers of the Peerage were not tried by jury. This dated back to the Alagna Charta, which said that a man should be tried by a jury of his peers —nobles by nobles, and commons by commons. The last case in which a Peer was tried by the House of Lords was in 1901, when Lord Russel was charged with bigamy. Referring to the fact that more civil cases were now tried before a judge alone, Air Kitehingham said in conclusion that in such cases the judge was probably the better tribunal. In crim inal cases, some of which involved an issue of life and death, the responsibility of common juries was still very

The meeting closed with a hearty vote of thanks to Air Kitehingham for his interesting and instructive address.