The Nelson Evening Mail. SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 1872.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VII, Issue 95, 20 April 1872, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 1872.

Those who are opposed to the continuance of the old fashioned Grand Jury system — and tbeir number is a large and daily increasing one—will be glad to find that they have on their side so eminent an authority as Judge Richmond, in whose charge, as delivered on Monday last, was clearly foreshadowed his opinion on a question which has of late called forth a considerable amount of discussion. Upon that occasion his Honor expressed himself as follows: —" On these occcasions a Judge has a perfect right to make such general remarks as may appear to be called for, and in doing so to take for granted the truth of notoriously public occurrences whithout legal proof. *' * * * * .* The abolition of the Grand Jury would deprive the Judicial Bench of all opportunity of entering upon this wide field. For my own part, I should by no means

regret such a change, as I quite believe that under civil institutions like ours it is on the whole better that the Judges should confine themselves to their purely judicial duties without entering ou subjects connected with administration." Now although the tenor of the above sentences is such as to lead us^o believe that in the opinion of his Honor "the delivery of such a charge as it is usual for a Judge to make to a Grand Jury is a custom that would be more honored in the breach than iv the obsfrvance, we should not be inclined to look upon them, viewed by themselves, a 9 a very powerful argument against the institution which gives rise to so much dissatisfaction, but when taken in connection wish the charge delivered by him in November last, they are not altogether without significance. In that, address we find the following words : — "A proposition has been made in the legislature for the abolition of Grand Juries. It would be out of place in me to discuss this subject ; nnd Ido not propose to do so. But the Grand Jury serves one important purpose in a social light, which I consider a very good one. When I address you assembled together on occasions like this, I address the principal inhabitants of the place on the business of the country, and such opportunities give an additional solemnity to the proceedings of the Court, met face to face to consider the ugly fact of crime with which the Court lias to deal. That crime, as showing the state of the country, comes home to all of us, and it. is a matter of the deepest public import, and one with which every person of high Bocial standing has individually to deal, and hence the use of the institution of the Grand Jury." Prom this it, will be seen that although his Honor declined to discuss the sul'ject at length, he still felt justified in advancing n single argument in favor of the system, and from the fact of his selecting this particular one, we may fairly conclude that he looked upon it as the most powerful that was to be adduced. It is, therefore, highly gratifying to those who think that Grand Juries might be done away with without inflicting any very serious injury upon the country, to find that tbe Judge now no longer thicks it important or desirable that he should be called upon to "address the principal inhabitants of the place on the business of the country" but rather advocates the abolition of the Grand Jury, on the ground that the Judicial Bench would thus be deprived of making such general remarks as under tbe present system appear to be called for. We sball be very glad to find this matter brought before the General Assembly at its next session, and feel convinced that any member who may take upon himself to introduce it will find the cause he advocates considerably strengthened by the above extracts from charges delivered by one whose opiuions carry such weight with them as do those of Judge Richmond.