TRIAL BY JURY.

Marlborough Press, Volume I, Issue 10, 9 March 1860, Page 3

TRIAL BY JURY.

There were some who laboured to depreciate trial by jury, or as it was more correctly termed trial by judge and jury. He did not mean to say that this mode of trial was perfect, or that it was appropriate in deciding all matters of fact. He was far from saying that it would not admit of some improvement; but, speaking from long experience, and from much consideration, in nothing was he more confident than in thinking that to trial by jury they were more indebted, as members of society, as citizens, in respect to their property, their character, their safety, their liberty, than to any other single institution in the country. He had been a Judge for an unusually long period, and he should ever regard with admiration the manner in which juries discharged their duties. Again and again he had reason to marvel at their patience, and again and again he had observed questions put by a jury which had been omitted by council and judge, the answer to which had thrown a light that had guided them to the truth of the whole matter. As it regarded the judge and society generally, the institution of trial by jury was most important. Take it away from the merchant, the tradesman, and the farmer, and he ventured to say that they would take away one of the most important institutions which distinguish this country from every other nation. It was one, and not the least important part, of their system of self-government. It was also a material part of a citizen’s education. He had often thought, if he had the appointment of the magistrates in the country, that he would appoint those gentlemen who had served on petty juries on the crown side for two assizes at least; for he was sure that a more practical knowledge of criminal law was learnt in that way than could be acquired by several months of careful reading. Earnestly did he hope that’ in their laudable desire to improve their institutions, they would never fancy themselves more wise than their ancestors, and dispense with trial by jury. Let them be true to its principle, if they improved it in some of its details. Let them cherish it as an inestimable treasure, and guard it as they did their Habeas Corpus, their Bill of Rights, and their Magna Charta, for sure he was that it was not less essential than any one of these to their liberties and to their well-being; civil, social, and national. One thing should always be remembered, that stupid verdicts were not arguments against the institution, for no human institution, however wise in itself, could be expected to work perfectly. Let them improve their jurymen by raising the character of their national education; let them introduce into their plans all classes who by law were liable to serve; and when they had done that, and not till then, if they found it to fail, let them condemn the institution. They lived under a law which though far from perfect, was framed in a wise and just spirit. They could not pos-

sibly overrate the blessing which they possessed, yet it was so much, a matter of course that they were apt to think as little of it as they did of the sun that shone upon them from Heaven. Such was human nature, and he should not consider that ne had spoken so long that evening in vain, and they would not have listened so patient* ly for nothing, if what had been said to them should rouse them to a grateful sense of the blessing they enjoyed, and to an earnest resolution that, as far as it was in their power, they would hand down this institution of trial by jury pure and undiminished to their latest posterity. — Coleridge.