Show THE JURY SYSTEM ANCIENT AND MODERN h the structures that save recently been pasted on atha jury system have produced a medley of opinions that are at least interesting and that may well prove to bo a preliminary to reform the system may sometimes be clumsy it may often be open to abuse but in the absence of any possible aeterna i tive it hodds the field in american es teem ant indeed in the esteem of civilization the strength and the weakness of trial by jury was once admirably epitomized by a celebrated lawyer who remarked thatis ahe were innocent ha would rather be tried by a judda without a jury but that it he were guilty he would prefer to have a jury the jury system Is favorable to the accused and that Is a it should be it probably be a mistake to suppose that trial by jury as it exists today Is identical in principle with early practice it has recently been pointed out that trial by ones peers did not mean that the jury must be selected from the same social rank as thai to which the accused belonged it was rather a stipulation that the tal esmen must be chosen from those personally known to the and therefore in a position to judge whether he was the kind of man who would commit the ottense in question so far from the jury being confined to the evidence it was precisely with a afew of avoiding euca a restriction that they were selected the idea isa and it it is well founded it was probably pro of substantial justice present practice is of course an entire reversal of this personal knowledge ot the prisoner is now a bar to the jury box and while the factor of spite or pre ludica la thereby eliminated so also is the general knowledge of character and disposition that may sometimes be more valuable than actual evidence A general knowledge of the prisoners character would for instance be an effective bar to perjured testimony aba elgh of challenge Is perhaps a point upon which some judicious reform might be introduced it roust sometimes appear to the casual ob server that in th selection of a jury for a celebrated case the object of counsel is to secure a ot congenital idiots rather than of intelligent men so determined are they to reject every who has been known to express an opinion upon the merits of the cause now all intelligent men are in the habit of discussing matters of public interest and the formation of a tentative opinion in advance of trial is no bar whatever to an honest and a just verdict it might indeed be often gid that the absence of such tenta live opinion would indicate a mental caliber too narrow tor the duties ot a juryman but it is such men who seem to be largely in demand in courts of justice when the present jury system baa been cleansed of its abuses and forced into alia grooves of practical jauco it will still more effectively prove itself to be the finest engine tor the of justice that the world haa avei known wo must not ark ot the however regard it as the covenant that may not be touched |